I wandered lonely as a cloud
That floats on high o’er vales and hills,
When all at once I saw a crowd,
A host, of golden daffodils;
Beside the lake, beneath the trees,
Fluttering and dancing in the breeze.
Continuous as the stars that shine
And twinkle on the milky way,
They stretched in never-ending line
Along the margin of a bay:
Ten thousand saw I at a glance,
Tossing their heads in sprightly dance.
The waves beside them danced, but they
Out-did the sparkling leaves in glee;
A poet could not be but gay,
In such a jocund company!
I gazed—and gazed—but little thought
What wealth the show to me had brought:
For oft, when on my couch I lie
In vacant or in pensive mood,
They flash upon that inward eye
Which is the bliss of solitude;
And then my heart with pleasure fills,
And dances with the daffodils.
a poem by William Wordsworth ( 1770-1850 )
April 23, 2009
shalz82
The book is about the myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. And how these forgeries are being used against the Jews all over the world, from the Medieval Ages down to the twentieth century.
Here is the conclusion of the book that i would like to share to you all.
“A Case-study in Collective Psychopathology”
It is often said that wherever Jews have settled since the Dispersion, antisemitism has appeared in the local population. This belief is mistaken. It is true that traditionally the Jewish religion has encouraged a certain separateness and exclusiveness, notably by making it impossible for a strict Jew to marry a non-Jew and difficult for him even to eat together with non-Jews. Yet these circumstances have never in themselves prevented Jews from taking part in the life of wider society, or from having cordial relations with non-Jews. For some two thousand years Jewish settlements existed in India and China without attracting any particular attention; to this day the Jewish artisans and peasants of India are regarded simply as one of the innumerable religious communities of the subcontinent, with nothing in the least odd about them. But there is no need to labour the point. There are after all many minorities in the world which show trait of separateness in one way or another, and they are not always seen as enemies.
Even in those parts of the world where antisemitism is endemic it can have very diffirent meanings. There is a kind of antisemitism which is fairly closely related to the role played by Jews, or at least by some Jews, in the society in question. For instance, it has happened again ang again the Jews, because of thier peculiar history, have been pioneers in trade and money-lending in predominantly agricultural societies, while at the same time living more or less segregated from the population around them. In such cases they have attracted the same kind of hostility as, say, Indian traders in southeastern Africa or Chinese traders in Java. Again, the centuries in the ghetto inevitably fostered attitudes of inferiority and of compensatory superiority in many Jews, which did not automatically disappear the moment the ghetto walls fell; and this too helped to feed antisemitism. But in all this there is nothing that is not parallelled in many other forms of social antagonism the world over. And certainly, thought these factors might have led to occasional outbreaks of violence, they would never by themselves have led to attempts at genocide. The antisemitism that leads to such results is of diffirent and very special kind.
Exterminatory antisemitism appears where Jews are imagined as a collective embodiment of evil, a conspiratorial body dedicated to the task of ruining and then dominating the rest of mankind. This kind of antisemitism can exist almost regardless of the real situation of Jews in society. It can prosper where Jews form a large, cohesive and clearly recognizable minority, but also where the only Jews are a few scattered individuals who hardly regard themselves as Jews at all. And if it thrives on the spectacle of rich and influential Jews, it does not necessarily wilt where all Jews are poor. Most striking of all, it can be found among people who have never set eyes on a Jew and in countries where there have been no Jews for centuries.
This kind of antisemitism is a matter of fantasy, and what it fantasies is the opposite of reality. In reality Jews are just as diverse as one would expect from thier extraordinarily varied history. Even before the creation of the State of Israel introduced new complexities there was little enough to link, say, an assimilated, free-thinking Frenchman of Jewish descent with a rigorously orthodox rabbi in eastern Europe, or an artisan in Salonika with a doctor in Berlin, or any of these with the second or third generation of Jewsish immigrants in the United States. No doubt a certain awareness of common origins and a common cultural heritage, an awareness also of repeated persecurions and migrations, colours the outlook of most Jews; but this is vastly diffirent from the unity and uniformity which antisemites imagine. Again, since the Dispersion there has been no cetral Jewish authority of any kind. Though individual rabbis have at times attained great moral prestige, there has been nothing in the least like a government- not even ecclesiastical government- with authority over all Jews; even the chief rabbinate in the various countries is a modern invention which originated simply as an administrative convenience. Above all, the Jews of the world have never possessed, as a collectivity, any considerable power. In some countries and at some times individual Jews might achieve positions of influence, and individual Jewish communities might be able to defend thier interests when these were threatened; it could even happen that properous and fortunate communities were able to assist persecuted Jews in other lands. The fact remains that Jews have not been able either to protect themselves or thier fellows from wholesale massacre or to induce any great power to do so.
After the Second World War the Higher SS and Police Leader in Central Russia, Erich von dem Bach-Zelewski, made the following statement:
”I am the only living witness but I must say the truth. Contrary to the opinion of the National-Socialists that the Jews were a highly organized group, the appalling fact was that they had no organization whatsoever…It gives the lie to the old slogan that the Jews are conspiring to dominate the world and that they are so highly organized…If they had some sort of organization, these people could have been saved by the millions; but instead they were taken completely by surprise.”
The lack of congruence between the myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy and the realities of the Jewish situation has never been better expressed.
The myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy, then, has very little to do with real people and real situations and real conflicts in the modern world; and this seems natural enoughwhen one considers how it originated. The fantasy of Jews as a brotherhood of evil was first conceived between the second and fourth centuries, as a device of immunizing Christians agaisnt the attractions of the parent religion; and seven or eight centuries later, in Western Europe, it developed into a coherent and terrifying demonology. From the twelfth century onward Jews were seen as a conspiracy of sorcerers working on orders from Satan for the spiritual and physical ruination of Christendom. This was the period when Jews began to be massacred on charges of killing Christian children, of torturing the consecrated wafer, of poisoning wells. And in the same period the mystery-plays taught people that Antichrist would be a Jew and would have the Jews as his most devoted followers.
Myths do not necessarily disappear with the circumstances that first produced them. They sometimes acquire an autonomy, a vitality of their own, that carries them across the continents and down the centuries. This was very much the case with the demonological view of Jewry and Judaism. In many parts of eastern and central Europe it was still widely believed right into the twentieth century that the blood of Christian children was used for making the unleavened Passover bread. Within the last twenty or thirty years it has happened to Jewish tourists in the remoter parts of Spain to be told that you could not possibly be Jews, as they had no horns.
Such fact are no mere curiosities, for the modern myth of the Jewish world- conspiracy grew straight out of these ageold superstitions. This is so true that certain individuals have dealt in both the medieval and modern versions of the myth: the first editor of the Protocols, the pogromshchik Krushevan, also disseminated charges of ritual murder, and so did Streicher and von Leers; while Himmler himself, when once he heard the tales of ritual murder, found them immediately convincing. Even that profoundly medieval fantasy, the legend of Antichrist as the Messiah of the Jews, persisted into modern times. Des Mousseaux was obsessed by the idea; while the first influential edition of the Protocols formed part of Nilus’s prophecy of Antichrist, and in the Protocols themselves the future king of the Jews has all the traditional traits of Antichrist. And what after all are the Elders of Zion but sorcerers in the service of Satan-quite openly in Goedsche’s novel, where the devil appears in person among the assembled rabbis, and still recognizably in the current editions of the Protocols?
But not even the Nazis could have constructed an effective ideology solely from archaic superstitions, from eschatological prophecies and tales of black magic. It is characteristic of antisemitic forgeries and fabrications of the type of the Protocols that they combine the medieval with the modern. While the basic assumptions and attitudes are those of an ancient demonology, the supposed conspiracy is a thoroughly modern affair. For one thing, it operates on a bigger scale; whereas ritual murder was imagined as happening from time to time, now here, now there, the Elders of Zion are imagined as an international government whose machinations constantly affect the whole world. And again, the means by which the Elders pursue their goal belong entirely to the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Instead of muttering spells these sorcerers place articles in the press, instead of poisoning wells they plunge whole countries into slumps and wars and revolutions.
In all this the Protocols faithfully reflect the complex structure of latter-day antisemitism at its most virulent. For in the eyes of fanatical antisemites the Jew, while retaining all the mysterious, uncanny, supernatural attitudes that were wished upon him in the Middle Ages, is also the symbol of modernity, or rather of everything that is felt frightening in the modern world. The modern age brought the emancipation of the Jews, firts in France at the time of the French Revolution and then in one country after another during the nineteenth century. Everywhere Jews quickly became prominent in those fields for which they had been fitted by their previous history: banking, certain branches of commerce, journalism. And at the same time Jews became prominent in liberal, radical, and revolutionary movements- as was only to be expected in view of their own experience of oppression and their often very incomplete emancipation. There was nothing mysterious in any of this- but it did mean that those who for whatever reason suffered helplessly from the modern world, and could not adjusts themselves so as to benefit from it, could easily see in the Jew the embodiment of the civilazation they detested.
Evwn here, of course, the myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy remained grotesquely remote from reality. It is true that Jews benefited from the French Revolution, but totally untrue that they caused it. It is true that some Jews became prominent bankers, but utterly false that banking was invented by Jews as a means to securing world-domination. And while many Jews became important figures in journalism and in politics, the views they expressed and the interests they supported range over almost the entire political scpetrum.
There is in fact a great irony in the myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy - which is, that it reached its most coherent and deadly formulation at the very time when Jews were in reality more divided than ever before - between orthodox and reformed, practising and indifferent, believing and agnostic, assimilationist and Zionist, not to mention the many who utterly rejected their Jewish origin. But all this had not the slightest effect on the myth or on those who propagated it; for they were in any case convinced that though the powers of darkness might put on many forms and wear many disguises, in their ultimate purposes they were at one.
In one form or another the myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy has survived for many centuries and has spread across the world from continent to continent. And it has always shown the same astonishing capacity both to turn certain individuals into blind fanatics, beyond the reach of rational argument and impervious to evidence, and to disturb and confuse in varying degress large numbers of otherwise quite sensible people. This surely suggests that it answers to deep and enduring unconscious needs. I know that in advancing such a hypothesis one invites scepticism, and there is no denying that many attempts to apply the findings of dynamic psychology to social phenomena have been misguided. But one is dealing here with very bizarre phenomena indeed; and I do not think that one can account for these particular fantasies, nor for the fact that they are always attached to this particular group, unless one takes unconscious mechanisms into account.
Reflecting on these matters some ten years ago, I advanced the hypothesis that these notions about Jews are above all a matter of unconscious negative projections, i.e. of the mental mechanism by which human beings read into the behaviour of others the anarchic tendencies which they fear to recognize in themselves. More specifically, i argued that in this form of antisemitism the Jews,as a collectivity, are unconsciously seen as both the ‘bad’ son, i.e. the rebellious son full of murderous wishes towards the father, and the ‘bad’ father, i.e. the potential torturer, castrator, and killer of the son. Later I discovered that several professional psychoanalysts had preceded me with precisely the same hypothesis; and the present study has convinced me that it is indeed a fruitful one.
Half of the hypothesis is familiar enough. Following Sigmund Freud himself, various psychoanalysts have argued that the Jews, because they reject the Christian God, are unconsciously seen by some Christians as ‘bad’, rebellious sons - indeed as parricides. This means that, traditionally, it has been easy and tempting for a Christian to make the Jew a scapegoat for any unconscious resentment he may have against his father, or for that matter against his God. But this is only one aspect of the matter, and not, it seems to me, the most important.
Unconsciously ‘the Jew’is even more closely identifiedwith the ‘bad’ father than he is with the ‘bad’ son. This is understandable enough,for the historical relationship of the Jewish people to Christianity and to Europe makes it almost inevitable that it should be seen as a kind of collective father-figure. As an identifiable people the Jews are of course very much older than most of the European people, but that is not all: the Jewish religion is tha parent religion out of which, and in rivalry with which, Christianity developed. Most important of all, perhaps is the fact that while the God of Christianity combines the attribute of father and son, the God of the Jew is father only - and, one may add, in the eyes of Christians who learn of Him only from the Old Testament and know nothing of the later development of Judaism, a singularly tyrannical and merciless father at that.
The Jews in Christendom, then, were ideally situated to recieve the Oedipal projections associated with the ‘bad’ father. This was a terrible fate, for the fantasied ‘bad’ father is infinitely more hateful than any real father could ever be. This is inevitable, in view of the psychic processes by which this figure is produced. When a small boy both loves and hates his father with such intensity that the conflict becomes intorelable, he split the father-image into a ‘good’ father and a ‘bad’ father. This enables him, by idealizing his real father or some father-surrogate, to acquire a father whom he can love unreservedly. Unfortunately the same process also produces a father-image which is utterly hateful - and this too can be projected on to any suitable father-surrogate that offers. To realize just what this implies one has to remember what infantile haterd is like - that where a small child hates, it wishes to kill, smash, utterly destroy the hated object. At the same time it feels intensely guilty. This feeling of guilt is quickly repressed into the unconscious, but it finds an outlet nevertheless. The hated object itself turns into a monster demanding retribution, an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. The figure of the ‘bad’ father becomes a persecutor, endowed with all the merciless hatred and destructive fury which the child feels, but dare not fully recognize, in himself.
So it comes about that the small boy constructs out of his own destructive impulses and his own sense of guilt a father-figure of quite monstrous cruelty and murderousness - a castrating, torturing, cannibalistic, all-powerful being beside whom even the harshest of real parents would appear harmless. The trouble is that the many men who never cease to be small boys in their emotional lives continue to see these monsters around them, incarnated in other human beings. It was the tragedy of the Jews that from the later Middle Ages onwards they tended to be seen in just such a way. In popular art they commonly appeared as extremely old men who are also devils - creatures with enormous growths of hair and beard, but also with horns and tails and with expressions of horrible cruelty.
Viewed in these terms the worst of the traditional antisemitic accusations take on a new and still more disturbing meaning. One has only to look at any medieval picture illustrating a ritual murder story ( for instance, that reproduce as plate 19) to recognize the unconscious content of the fantasy. A small boy - it is, significantly, always a boy, never a girl - is surrounded by a group of elderly men with long beards, who are torturing and castrating him and drawing off and collecting his blood. The same unconscious content is clearly recognizable in the other constantly recurring accusation, which was of torturing the consecrated wafer. This of course was effective only where and when Christ was believed to be physically present in the host, that is to say in Roman Catholic countries; but there it was very effective indeed - in Poland it provoked massacres as late as the eighteenth century. Here too the illustrations show bearded Jews attacking the wafer with nails and pincers - and, as though to uncover the true meaning of these stories, we are sometimes told not only that the host gushed blood but that, at the height of the torture Christ appeared in the wafer as a small child, bleeding and weeping.
All this helps to throw a new light on the oldest and deadliest charge of all, the charge of deicide, which was still a subject of such passionate debate at the Vatican Council in 1965. In Freud’s eyes the idea of deicide had only one unconscious meaning, and that was parricide; but that is not its only possible meaning. For Christians the crucified Christ has the significance much more of a son than of a father. If, therefore, as is constantly asserted in Christian teaching, the Jews are collectively guilty of the death of Christ, they are not so much parricides as slayers of a son, the suppressors of a new generation, those who destroy fresh life and thwart its promise. And nobody has ever watched a passion-play can doubt for a moment that that is how medieval people really did interpret the Jewish part in the cricifixion.
If one now turns from the medieval to the modern world one makes an astonishing discovery: the Jews has retained his symbolic value as simultaneously the ‘bad’ son and the ‘bad’ father. Again the first half of the hypothesis may seem more familiar than the second. Helped by the circumstance that numerous Jews have become prominent in the modern world as innovators, radicals, and revolutionaries, traditionalists have often seen all Jews as a sort of collective ‘bad’ son, a denier and destroyer of order and authority. But again it is the second part of the hypothesis that is the more important. Modern civilization is commonly experienced, by those who suffer under it, as incomprehensible, uncontrollable, omnipotent; and in so far as Jews were thought to be the creators of that civilization and that masters of its myaterious powers, this tended to perpetuate and reinforce their symbolic significance as ‘bad’ parents. And indeed it is obvious enough that the Elders of Zion are father-figures. Their very name shows it; and what they do to nations is strictly comparable with what the ‘bad’ father is imagined as doing to the son. They draw off the life’s blood of the nations and divert it to their own sinister purposes, they drive the peoples to torment and death in wars, they deprive millions of food. Above all they have the monopoly of power. Mysterious, inscrutable, they manipulate and torment human beings who in their hands are as helpless and ignorant as children.
Now it is quite certain that this image of the Jew profoundly influenced Hitler himself. An American psychoanalyst has pointed out how mistaken it is to see Hitler as a father-figure: ‘Hitler is the adolescent who never even aspired to become a father in any connotation, nor, for that matter, a Kaiser, a president… He is the Fuhrer: the glorified older brother, who replaces the father…He is… a gang leader who keeps the boys together by demanding their admiration, by creating terror, and by shrewdly involving them in crimes from which there is no way back.’ The worst of these crimes were performed against the father, incarnated in the Jew. Another psychoanalyst, delving into Hitler’s youth and family background, has found strong grounds for thinking that he unconsciously identified his own father with a particular Jewish doctor and so with Jews as a collectivity. If this is true, one may be sure that the process was greatly facilitated by the age-old unconscious identification of ‘the Jew’ with the ‘bad’ father.
It was often noted that the Jews whom the German troops in eastern Europe treated with the greatest cruelty were the orthodox Jewish men with their long beards. The photographs of youngsters mocking, humiliating, and killing these men of truly patriarchal appearance provide a counterpart to the old woodcuts of ritual murder - but with this difference, that whereas the ritual murders were the merest fictions, the vengeance exacted was real murder, indefinitely repeated.
Yet that is not the whole story. The deepest fear of all is that Jews are, collectively, poisoners or even themselves a sort of poison. This fantasy took shape at the same time as the fantasy of ritual murder; the first occasions when the disappearance of young boys was attributed to Jewish bloodlust were in 1144 and 1168, and the first time when Jews - 86 of them were burnt for plotting to poison the Christian population was in 1161. By the fourteenth century such accusations were commonplace. In France in 1321 it was reported that the Jews were employing lepers to poison all the wells in Christendom. At the time of the Black Death in 1349 it was widely believed that the Jews had caused the plague by poisoning the wells with a mixture of Christian flesh, hearts and blood (obtained by ritual murder), and of spiders, frogs, and lizards. On that occasion some 300 Jewish communities in Germany, France, and Spain were exterminated; and similar accusations were made, with similar results, at innumerable local plagues down to the mid-sixteenth century. Not that the charges were limited to such emergencies - Martin Luther was expressing the general view when he wrote: ‘If [ the Jews ] could kill us all, they would gladly do so, aye, and often do it, especially those who profess to be physicians. They know all that is known about medecine in Germany; they can give poison to a man of which he will die in an hour, or in ten or twenty years; they thoroughly understand this art.’ As late as 1610 the medical faculty of the University of Vienna solemnly announced that Jewish physicians were obliged by their laws to poison every tenth Christian patient.
In the modern version of the myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy these accusations reappear in a pseudo-scientific form. The Protocols themselves talk not only of using drink and loose woman to undermine the physique of the Gentiles but of actually inoculating the Gentiles with diseases; and in much Protocols-type literature, particularly in the United States, schemes for mass inoculation are interpreted as a Jewish plot to inject the population with syphilis. But here again it was Hitler who found the most effective and murderous formulation for an age-old obsession. By the peculiar interpretation which he gave to German racist theories he made sexual intercourse with a Jew appear as something which literally poisoned the blood. In Nazi propaganda the idea was carried to the point where the Jews were habitually called ‘the world-poisoners’ and were even themselves equated with bacteria.
Just as much as ritual murder, fantasies of this kind are rooted in the unconscious. Every psychoanalyst has had patients who are haunted by the illusion that they have taken in something bad, which is destroying them from within, or who live in perpetual dread of improbable infections; not to mention the true paranoiacs who are convinced that they are being poisoned by particular individuals. These are deep waters indeed, and this is not the place to speculate about etiologies on which specialists are by no means agreed. This much, however, can be safely said: that to imagine that the Jews have poisoned the water-supply or are corrupting people’s blood is to ascribe to them truly uncanny powers. And it is likely that when antisemites kill not simply Jewish men but also Jewish women and children, when they see the extermination of all Jews as an indispensable cleansing or disinfection of the earth, they are moved by terrors stemming from the earliest stages of infancy.
There can be many kinds of unconscious negative projections, and it is a matter not merely of scientific interest but also of practical importance to appreciate just what projections have traditionally been attached to the Jews. It is often assumed that all ethnic prejudice is very much of a kind - that, for instance, hatred of Negroes must have must have precisely the same emotional roots as hatred of Jews; yet the assumption is certainly mistaken. It is of course true that the fanatical Negro-hater, say in the American south, is moved by unconscious as well as by conscious anxieties and that his view of Negroes is gravely distorted by projections. It is also true that much of the cruelty to which Negroes have been subjected has been dictated by these projections. Yet however whites may see Negroes, they can hardly see them as hidden, manipulating ‘elders’. The fantasy of an infinitely powerful, world-dominating conspiracy does not in fact get projected on to Negroes, and that may well be why not even the most fanatical Negro-haters dream of genocide. It is a different matter with the Jews. In the most dangerous form of antisemitism Jews are seen above all as ‘bad’ parents, and this makes them so overwhelmingly powerful that the only way to cope with them is to destroy them utterly. That, it is suggested, is why from the twelfth to the twentieth century the truly fanatical antisemites - the kind who deal in tales of ritual murder and in the Protocols - have so frequently fomented vast massacres. For the ultimate ideal of such people is not a world where they can lord it over Jews, as the white supremacist likes to lord it over Negroes, but of a world where there are no Jews left at all.
The historical importance of the myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy lies in the fact that it has served as a warrant for many massacres, culminating in attempted genocide in the middle of the present century. Again and again over a period of some eight centuries, and over a wide range of countries, it has enabled organized groups to kill Jews. And it has done this in two ways, which seemed to have remained pretty constant down the ages: by providing the organized groups with an ideology, and by bewildering the rest of the population.
Whether one considers the Black Hundreds of tsarist Russia, or those sections of the SS and SD which were directly concerned in the ‘final solution’, one finds very much the same combination of types; and so far as one can tell from the records, the same combination existed already in those earlier groups of Jew-killers which operated between the first crusade and the sixteenth century. It cannot be said that these groups consisted wholly of genuine fanatics. On the contrary, they contained plenty of purely destructive types, who wanted nothing but a chance to torture and murder, and also plenty of looters, whose main interest was in the property of the killed. To these one must add, for the modern period, the oppotunists at all levels, from whom the organizing and carrying through of massacres was simply a means to a better income, more security, and more prestige than they could otherwise have hoped for. Yet it seems certain that however narrow, materialistic, or downright criminal their own motives may be, such men cannot operate without an ideology behind them. At least when operating collectively, they need an ideology to legitimate their behaviour, for without it they would have to see themselves and one another as what they really are - common thieves and murderers. And that apparently is something which even they cannot bear.
The ideology which has proved most suitable for the purpose is the myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy, whether in the traditional form which centres on tales of ritual murder and well-poisoning or in the modern form which centres on the Protocols. And this is where the true fanatics have their place - as bearers and elaborators of that fantastic view lof the world on which the whole murderous enterprise depends for its justification. Thanks to various empirical investigations carried out by psychologists and psychoanalysts, notably in the United States, a great deal is know about the typical personality-structure of such people. What emerges when fanatical antisemites are subjected to psychological tests is a quite abnormal degree of fear and hatred of parental figures, who are seen now as menacing and now as mutilated and killed. This means that the unconscious fantasies of such people correspond with the unconscious content of the myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy. Fanatical antisemites are in fact people whose own deepest emotional needs compel them to see life as a struggle against just such a conspiracy as is portrayed in the Protocols. For them belief springs from an inner necessity; and this gives them an air of absolute conviction, which in turn gives the criminals and opportunists the reassurance and encouragement they need.
A group formed out of these elements is, sociologically speaking, a very special kind of group indeed. Reflecting in 1946 on the extreme forms of Nazi antisemitism, the psychoanalyst Ernst Simmel remarked that the process of group-formation itself, when occuring under pathological conditions, can bring about a mass delusion, in fact a mass psychosis. And he added: ‘This clinical syndrome: unrestricted aggressive destructiveness under the spell of a delusion, in complete denial of reality, is well know to us as a psychosis; it is a paranoiac form of schizophrenia. The parallel is a suggestive one. For though the individulas who make up a group of Jew-killers are well within the bounds of reality, and most of them are not even fanatics, and even the fanatics are far from mad - yet it is perfectly true that the group as a whole behaves like a paranoiac in the grip of his delusion.
There is another peculiarity of such groups that reminds one of paranoiac schizophrenics: their megalomaniac sense of mission. When it comes to describing their own role, not only the medieval Jew-killers but also the Black Hundreds and the Nazi leaders apocalyptic imagery taken straight from the Book of Revelation. All alike see themselves as the angelic hosts overthrowing the powers of darkness, or a collective St Michael killing the dragon, even as a collective Christ overthrowing Antichrist. No army engaged in a real war agaisnt a real enemy has ever indulged in such self-exaltation as Jew-killers engaged in their one-sided struggle against an imaginary conspiracy. To hear them on the subject of themselves, one would think that killing unarmed and helpless people, including small children and old women, was a very brave and risky undertaking. It is a phenomenon which only begins to make sense when one recalls that a paranoiac murderer too can feel terrified of his harmless victims. For what these people see as the enemy is in fact the destructiveness and cruelty in their own psyches, externalized. And the greater the unconscious sense of guilt, the more fearsome the imaginary enemy.
For the sense of guilt is there, and unremittingly at work. Originally engendered by the murderous impulses felt by the small child towards its parents, it is enormously intensified by the real violence which the adult deploys against his victims. Yet it is not experienced as a sense of guilt, for it is completely denied and repressed into the unconscious. Instead it is experience as a sense of danger, of threat, a blind terror lest the wronged ones, the parents killed in fantasy and the parent-surrogates killed in reality, arise and exact retribution. This alone can explain the extraordinary paradox about the Nazi massacres - that as the Jews became more and more helpless, as they were killed in ever vaster numbers, so they were felt to be more and more powerful, malignant, and dangerous. It also accounts for the fact that a man like Goebbels, for whom antisemitism was at first little more than a technique of vote-catching, ended his days raving about the omnipotent Jewish rulers of the world. It was his own guilt-ridden unconscious that made of the imaginary Elders of Zion a power more terrible than the Nazi regime itself.
It is when it has been adopted by groups of professional, organized Jew-killers that the myth of Jewish world conspiracy has revealed its true potentialities. For all the indications are that however widespread and intense antisemitism may be, it does not result in killing unless and until such groups begin to operate. Pogroms as apontaneous outbreaks of popular fury seem to be a myth, and there is in fact no established case where the inhabitants of a town or village have simply fallen upon their Jewsih neighbours and slaughtered them. This was true even in the Middle Ages - the great massacres which accompanied the people’s crusade and the Black Death were all led by organized bands coming from outside. In modern times popular initiative has been still less in evidence, for the organized group themselves have been effective only when they were carrying out the policy and enjoying the sponsorship of some kind of government - whether in tsarist Russia and under the White regime during the Russian civil war or in the Nazi Germany and Nazi-occupied Europe. Would-be pogromshchiki who lacked this kind of support and were resolutely opposed by the authorities- as in the United States- never manage to organize large-scale violence and soon lapsed, or were thrust, into obscurity.
Yet the myth of the Jewish worl-conspiracy can have its effect on the mass of the population too, and this in turn has a bearing, even if an indirect one, on the fate of the Jews. Centuries of propaganda about sorcery and ritual murder and the secret Jewish government produced a general atmosphere of superstitious dread which was largely unconnected with specific economic conflicts. A certain suspicions that Jews constitute a united collecitivity, devoted to sinister aims and endowed with mysterious powers, was still extremely widespread in the first half of the present century. No doubt fanatical believers in the conspiracy, the true adepts of the Protocols, were always a relatively small minority; but they were still numerous enough to make themselves heard, and there were vast numbers of half-and quater-believers to pick up scraps of what they had to say. There is nothing strange about this, for only exceptionally mature personalities are wholly immune to the infantile fears and hatreds to which such a myth appeals. Particulary in periods of exceptional strain, anxiety, and disorientation, multitudes of people yielded to the temptation to blame all their troubles on the machinations of those uncanny beings - reacting to social and economic crises, for instance, very much as their ancestors had reacted to the plague.
What this meant in practice, whether in tsarist Russia or in Germany after the First World War or to some extent throughout the world in the fateful years 1933-45, was that people were unwilling to bestir themaelves on behalf of the Jews. The very widespread indifference, the ease with which people dissociated themselves themselves from the Jews and their fate, was certainly in part a result of a vague feeling that, even if there were no Elders of Zion, Jews were somehow uncanny and dangerous. And ironically enough this feeling grew stronger as the persecution of the Jews grew worse. The explanation is plain, if depressing: when people know even with half their minds that a great injustice is being done, and lack the generosity and courage to protest, they automatically throw the blame on to the victims as the simplest way of easing their own consciences. Just as the organized killers needed the myth of the Jewish world-conspiracy if they were not to recognize themselves as common thieves and murderers, so very many ordinary people needed some smattering of it if they were not to see themselves as passive accomplices in the persecution and massacre of innocent people.
The story of the Protocols is the story of how in twentieth century Europe a grossly delusional view of the world, based on infantile fears and hatreds, was able to find expression in murder and torture beyond all imagining. It is a case-history in collective psychopathology, and its deepest implications reach far beyond antisemitism and the fate of the Jews. Is it utopian to suggest that the more fully and widely these implications are faced, the better the chance of recognizing and limiting, perhaps even of forestalling, similar aberrations in the future?
December 2, 2008
shalz82
Throughout history mankind has celebrated the bountiful harvest with thanksgiving ceremonies.
Before the establishment of formal religions many ancient farmers believed that their crops contained spirits which caused the crops to grow and die. Many believed that these spirits would be released when the crops were harvested and they had to be destroyed or they would take revenge on the farmers who harvested them. Some of the harvest festivals celebrated the defeat of these spirits.
Harvest festivals and thanksgiving celebrations were held by the ancient Greeks, the Romans, the Hebrews, the Chinese, and the Egyptians.
The Greeks
The ancient Greeks worshipped many gods and goddesses. Their goddess of grains was Demeter who was honored at the festival of Thesmosphoria held each autumn.
On the first day of the festival married women (possibility connecting childbearing and the raising of crops) would build leafy shelters and furnish them with couches made with plants. On the second day they fasted. On the third day a feast was held and offerings to the goddess Demeter were made - gifts of seed corn, cakes, fruit, and pigs. It was hoped that Demeter’s gratitude would grant them a good harvest.
The Romans
The Romans also celebrated a harvest festival called Cerelia, which honored Ceres their goddess of grains (from which the word cereal comes). The festival was held each year on October 4th and offerings of the first fruits of the harvest and pigs were offered to Ceres. Their celebration included music, parades, games and sports and a thanksgiving feast.
The Chinese
The ancient Chinese celebrated their harvest festival, Chung Ch’ui, with the full moon that fell on the 15th day of the 8th month. This day was considered the birthday of the moon and special “moon cakes”, round and yellow like the moon, would be baked. Each cake was stamped with the picture of a rabbit - as it was a rabbit, not a man, which the Chinese saw on the face of the moon.
The families ate a thanksgiving meal and feasted on roasted pig, harvested fruits and the “moon cakes”. It was believed that during the 3 day festival flowers would fall from the moon and those who saw them would be rewarded with good fortune.
According to legend Chung Ch’ui also gave thanks for another special occasion. China had been conquered by enemy armies who took control of the Chinese homes and food. The Chinese found themselves homeless and with no food. Many staved. In order to free themselves they decided to attack the invaders.
The women baked special moon cakes which were distributed to every family. In each cake was a secret message which contained the time for the attack. When the time came the invaders were surprised and easily defeated. Every year moon cakes are eaten in memory of this victory.
The Hebrews
Jewish families also celebrate a harvest festival called Sukkoth. Taking place each autumn, Sukkoth has been celebrated for over 3000 years.
Sukkoth is know by 2 names - Hag ha Succot - the Feast of the Tabernacles and Hag ha Asif - the Feast of Ingathering. Sukkoth begins on the 15th day of the Hebrew month of Tishri, 5 days after Yom Kippur the most solemn day of the Jewish year.
Sukkoth is named for the huts (succots) that Moses and the Israelites lived in as they wandered the desert for 40 years before they reached the Promised Land. These huts were made of branches and were easy to assemble, take apart, and carry as the Israelites wandered through the desert.
When celebrating Sukkoth, which lasts for 8 days, the Jewish people build small huts of branches which recall the tabernacles of their ancestors. These huts are constructed as temporary shelters, as the branches are not driven into the ground and the roof is covered with foliage which is spaced to let the light in. Inside the huts are hung fruits and vegetables, including apples, grapes, corn, and pomegranates. On the first 2 nights of Sukkoth the families eat their meals in the huts under the evening sky.
The Egyptians
The ancient Egyptians celebrated their harvest festival in honor of Min, their god of vegetation and fertility. The festival was held in the springtime, the Egyptian’s harvest season.
The festival of Min featured a parade in which the Pharaoh took part. After the parade a great feast was held. Music, dancing, and sports were also part of the celebration.
When the Egyptian farmers harvested their corn, they wept and pretended to be grief-stricken. This was to deceive the spirit which they believed lived in the corn. They feared the spirit would become angry when the farmers cut down the corn where it lived.
The United States
In 1621, after a hard and devastating first year in the New World the Pilgrim’s fall harvest was very successful and plentiful. There was corn, fruits, vegetables, along with fish which was packed in salt, and meat that was smoke cured over fires. They found they had enough food to put away for the winter.
The Pilgrims had beaten the odds. They built homes in the wilderness, they raised enough crops to keep them alive during the long coming winter, and they were at peace with their Indian neighbors. Their Governor, William Bradford, proclaimed a day of thanksgiving that was to be shared by all the colonists and the neighboring Native American Indians.
The custom of an annually celebrated thanksgiving, held after the harvest, continued through the years. During the American Revolution (late 1770’s) a day of national thanksgiving was suggested by the Continental Congress.
In 1817 New York State adopted Thanksgiving Day as an annual custom. By the middle of the 19th century many other states also celebrated a Thanksgiving Day. In 1863 President Abraham Lincoln appointed a national day of thanksgiving. Since then each president has issued a Thanksgiving Day proclamation, usually designating the fourth Thursday of each November as the holiday.
Canada
Thanksgiving in Canada is celebrated on the second Monday in October. Observance of the day began in 1879.
November 25, 2008
shalz82
The history of the original 13 colonies is a tangled tale indeed. There are many ways to view the events and, in hind sight, it is easy to think you understand. But no one knew where they were headed at the time and it could have ended up very different.
Charter to Sir Walter Raleigh : 1584
Everybody remembers Jamestown, Capt. John Smith, Pocahontas and all the rest. But do you remember Roanoke? In 1585, after a small scouting expedition had returned from North America with two Native Americans and many astonishing stories, Sir Walter Raleigh tried to establish a colony called Roanoke in the land which the British named “Virginia”, in honor of Elizabeth, the Virgin Queen. The site was actually an island on North America’s eastern seaboard protected by the outer banks of what is now North Carolina’s coast. Sir Richard Grenville led the fleet that brought them to the New World, the Governor of the colony was Master Ralph Lane and among the colonists was Walter Raleigh’s confidant Thomas Harriot, author of “A Briefe and True Report of the New Found Land of Virginia“, a chronicle of their adventure. Sir Francis Drake, who was seeking Spanish conquests in the New World, rescued this group just as they were losing control of their situation. Another colony was left at Roanoke in 1587 but by 1590, when a long delayed supply ship finally arrived, they had disappeared without a trace. This was the so-called “Lost Colony”. A baby was born in Roanoke at this time. Little Virginia Dare, was the granddaughter of John White, the appointed Governor of the “Lost Colony”, and was probably the first English baby born in the New World. Sir Walter Raleigh sent ships to America to search for the colonists but they were unsuccessful. By the time the next English settlers arrived in North America to colonize Jamestown it was nearly twenty years later and, although several attempts were made to find out what happened to them, the fate of the “Lost Colony” was never fully explained.
(1607) Virginia
Based on George Weymouth’s accounts of voyages to the New England area in 1606, two private companies were formed to seek a patent for colonization on the Atlantic Coast. One of these companies was called the London Company and it was given the southern Virginia territory. The other company was called the Plymouth Company and its patent was for northern Virginia. Both companies quickly sought to exercise their patents but the London Company was the first to actually place colonists on the shore. In 1607, 105 London Company sponsored settlers arrived from England to begin the story that we all remember from our school days. Since they were there representing England and its King, James I, they settled in an encampment they called Jamestown on a river they named the James River.
The first year was devastating for the colonists, with only 32 colonists surviving the winter and only then because Native Americans living in the area came to their aid with food. After a supply ship arrived the next year they had additional provisions but many more colonists to feed as well. Once again, over the winter, most of the colonists died of starvation and from hostile encounters with their neighbors. As winter came to a close, ships arrived, and most of them were ready to leave. But as they were leaving, Lord Thomas de la Warr (Delaware is named after him) arrived from England with new supplies and more settlers. He refused to let the survivors return to England. Slowly, as they reached agreements with the local Native American tribes and they learned how to grow some of their own crops, the colony began to prosper.
Most of those original Jamestown settlers were after profit, mainly riches in the form of gold and other precious metals. They had not given enough thought to the perils that they would face in this unknown land. One of the settlers, however, was familiar with hardship and was committed to Jamestown’s survival. Capt. John Smith was a soldier and adventurer. He had fought in France and Hungary, been captured and escaped. Although his personality caused him some initial problems with the other colonists (he arrived in Jamestown in chains after alienating the leaders of the expedition) he eventually made contact with the local Native American chieftain Powhatan, who provided the colonists with much of their food in that first year. Capt. Smith was eventually even appointed leader of the colony.
One of Powhatan’s children, a daughter called Pocahontas, visited the colonists in the early years and even brought food and other provisions to them. Several years later in an attempt to obtain bargaining advantage over Powhatan the colonists kidnapped Pocahontas and she stayed with them in Jamestown. A colonist, John Rolfe (who incidentally was the first of the colonists to cultivate commercial quality tobacco and start the Colony on its way towards profitability) eventually married her and took her to England. She died as they were preparing to return to Virginia.
In 1619 a group of 20 African slaves arrived in Jamestown on a Dutch ship. Grouped with the Southern Colonies, Virginia started out as a Corporate colony (granted by Royal charter to a Company of investors who have governing rights) but in 1624 became a Royal colony (subject to the governing authority of the granting Royalty).
In 1676 the village of Jamestown was nearly destroyed during “Bacon’s Rebellion.”
In 1788 Virginia was the tenth state to ratify the Constitution and recommended the Bill of Rights be added.
(1620) Massachusetts
In 1607, about the same time as the Jamestown colonization, a group of English colonists attempted to establish a colony in the Northern Virginia territory. The colony was located in present day Maine and was named Popham. It lasted for approximately a year before the discouraged settlers returned to England.
The Pilgrims were the first English colonists to permanently settle in New England in what we now know as Massachusetts. On Sept. 16, 1620 the ship “Mayflower” set off from Plymouth, England on it journey to the New World. There were 102 passengers on the Mayflower including 41 Christian Puritan Separatists known collectively as the Leiden group. After spending many years in Holland exiled from the English Church, the Puritans were seeking a new life of religious freedom in America. All 102 of the passengers were referred to as the “Pilgrims” after they arrived. The group had obtained a Patent from the London Virginia Company which indentured them into service for the Company for seven years after they arrived and settled. To prepare for their life in America, they had sought advice from people who had already visited the New World. Among their advisors was Captain John Smith who, earlier, had helped found Jamestown for the Virginia Company. It took sixty six days to reach New England and the journey was very hard for these non-seafarers. When they arrived they anchored off the tip of Cape Cod, in an area now known as Massachusetts, and before they even set foot on shore they wrote, and all the men signed, an agreement called the “Mayflower Compact” that would set the rules to guide them through the early, hard times of establishing a new community. The Compact, which was signed on November 21, 1620 (modern date, see note below.), served as the official Constitution of the Plymouth Colony for many years.
For nearly a month they explored, by foot and in boats, the area around Cape Cod using the maps they had obtained in England. During their exploration they had a few minor encounters with the local natives. Finally, on December 21, they decided on a location near Plymouth Harbor which they named Plymouth. Nearly half of the colonists and crew died from illnesses that first winter as they struggled to build their town. The following spring they were visited by a local Wampanoag native named Samoset who, surprisingly, spoke some broken English. Eventually he introduced the settlers to another native named Squanto who’s village had occupied the area before the Pilgrims arrived. Squanto had been kidnapped by English explorers and while he was in Europe the rest of his people had all been killed by diseases brought by European explorers. Squanto spoke English very well and he stayed with the Pilgrims and taught them many valuable skills that enabled them to survive in their new country. He also played a very big part in bringing the Pilgrims and the local native population together, leading, eventually to a long, but restless, peace.
Not long after the Pilgrims arrived in Plymouth (1628) the Puritans came to Massachusetts and settled Naumkeag (later called Salem). John Winthrop, carrying the Massachusetts Bay Charter, arrived in 1630 and founded Boston. Maine was annexed to Massachusetts in 1652 and later the Plymouth Colony was too.
The relationship between the Native tribes and the colonists in New England was always strained but generally didn’t result in much bloodshed. In 1637 colonists,with the cooperation of several local tribes, mounted a devastating attack on a tribe known as the Pequots and then, in 1675, the long accord that had existed between the New England colonists and the local native tribes came apart in a bloody war known as King Phillip’s War after the leader of the Wampanoag tribe, Metacomet, who was also known by his English nickname “King Phillip”. Metacomet was the son of Massasoit the Wampanoag leader who had originally greeted the Plymouth settlers.
Massachusetts was a New England colony which started out as a Corporate colony but became a Royal colony in 1691
In 1788 Massachusetts was the sixth state to ratify the Constitution.
(1623) New Hampshire
In 1623 two groups of English settlers, sent by Captain John Mason, arrived in what is now called New Hampshire (after John Masons home County of Hampshire) and established a fishing village near the mouth of the Piscataqua River. New Hampshire would remain an English colony throughout the colonial period even though, at various times, it came under Massachusetts jurisdiction.
In 1638, John Wheelwright, banished from Boston for defending his sister-in-law Anne Hutchinson, founded a settlement called Exeter in New Hampshire. In 1639 the settlers signed the “Exeter Compact” patterned after the “Mayflower Compact”.
One of the New England Colonies, New Hampshire started out as a Proprietary colony but it became a Royal colony in 1679.
In 1719 Scots-Irish settlers from Londonderry, Ireland were sent to form a “Scottish” settlement in New Hampshire named for their town of origin.
In 1788 New Hampshire was the ninth state to ratify the Constitution after which it was officially adopted.
(1623) New Jersey
Along with their holdings in New York, New Jersey was originally settled in 1623 by the Dutch as New Netherlands .
In 1664, after obtaining control of Dutch holdings lying between Virginia and New England, the Duke of York made a proprietary grant to Sir George Carteret and Lord Berkeley, of the land between the Hudson and the Delaware River. These men intended to profit from real estate sales. The new grant was named New Jersey for Carteret, who was governor of the Isle of Jersey.
One of the Middle Colonies, New Jersey started out as a Proprietary colony but in 1702 it was granted a Royal charter
New Jersey, in 1787, was the third state to ratify the Constitution.
(1624) New York(originally New Amsterdam)
Although the Dutch West India Co. explored and began to settle the New York area as early as 1614, the principal occupation of the area did not occur until 1624 when Dutch settlers arrived at Governors Island and then spread to other areas in the region. In 1626, as we all remember from our early history lessons, Peter Minuit arrived on Manhattan Island and, with other Dutch settlers, bought the island from the local Indians for 60 gilders ($24.) worth of goods. The settlement and fort on the island became known as New Amsterdam which eventually became the City of New York. The Dutch holdings in the area were collectively called New Netherlands and included areas of what is now New Jersey. New Amsterdam was granted self government and incorporated by the Dutch in 1653.
In 1664, after King Charles II decided to reclaim the territory between Virginia and New England, Peter Stuyvesant surrendered to English forces and New Amsterdam was given to the King’s brother, the Duke of York, and renamed New York. The Dutch continued to struggle with the British for control of New Netherlands off and on until 1674 when the British finally obtained full control.
One of the Middle Colonies, New York originally started out as a Proprietary colony (granted by Royalty to one or more proprietors who had full governing rights) but in 1685 became a Royal colony
In 1788 New York became the eleventh state to ratify the Constitution.
(1633) Maryland
In 1632 Charles I granted a Maryland Charter to Lord Baltimore (George Calvert, Baron of Baltimore). Lord Baltimore wanted very much to see the Colony become a reality and his son Cecil saw to it that the new Colony was settled. In 1633 the first group of settlers set sail for Maryland to establish a colony of freemen led by Leonard Calvert, Cecil Calvert’s younger brother.
One of the Southern Colonies, Maryland was a Proprietary colony
Maryland was the seventh state to ratify the Constitution in 1788.
(1636) Rhode Island
While scattered Europeans began to settle the area as early as 1620, the first permanent settlement wasn’t established until 1636. In 1635 Roger Williams was driven from Salem, Massachusetts for espousing religious and political freedom. After spending the winter with the Indians he finally bought land from the Narragansett Indians and settled in what is now called Providence. The new colony became a haven for those seeking religious freedom.
In 1638, Anne Hutchinson, having been banned from Massachusetts, helped found Portsmouth, Rhode Island.
A New England Colony, Rhode Island was established as a Corporate colony and received a Royal “Charter of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations” in 1663. Among other unique guarantees, the Charter established complete religious freedom in Rhode Island, which was unusual at the time, and later formed the basis for similar provisions in the U.S. Constitution.
Although Rhode Island was one of the first colonies to embrace autonomy from the British and espouse Revolutionary ideals, it was the last of the 13 colonies to ratify the Federal Constitution and became a State in 1790.
(1636) Connecticut
Dutch traders had established a permanent settlement near Hartford as early as 1633. Soon English settlers began to arrive in the area from Massachusetts. In 1636, after being driven from Massachusetts, Clergyman Thomas Hooker and his followers arrived in Hartford and declared freedom from all save Divine Authority. In 1639 the “Fundamental Orders” were enacted to govern the colony. In 1662 Connecticut finally obtained a Royal Charter under John Winthrop Jr.
One of the New England Colonies, Connecticut was also a Corporate colony
In 1788 Connecticut was the fifth state to ratify the Constitution.
(1638) Delaware(originally New Sweden)
In 1631, the first settlement was attempted in Delaware by Dutch traders led by Captain David Pietersen de Vries. By 1632 the party had been killed in a dispute with the local natives.
In 1638, Peter Minuet, now in the service of the Swedish, led a group of Swedish settlers to the Delaware River area under a grant from the New Sweden Company. It was these Swedish settlers that brought the log cabin design to America.
In 1655 the Dutch gained control of the land from the Swedish. In 1664 the English obtained Delaware after defeating the Dutch. The Dutch briefly recaptured Delaware in 1673 but in 1674 the English finally took control. In 1682 Delaware was awarded to William Penn but his control didn’t last and Delaware became independent in 1701 and elected its own assembly in 1704.
One of the Middle Colonies, Delaware was a Proprietary colony
Delaware was the first state to ratify the Constitution and become a State in 1787.
(1653) North Carolina
North Carolina’s outer banks were the scene of the first British colonizing efforts in North America. Both attempts, in the late 1500’s, to form a colony on Roanoke Island (see above ) did not succeed.
Virginia colonists began to settle the North Carolina region in 1653 to provide a buffer for the southern frontier. In 1691 Albermarle, the northern Carolina region, was officially recognized by the English crown. This is the first time the “North Carolina” designation was used.
One of the Southern Colonies, North Carolina started out as a Proprietary colony but obtained a Royal charter in 1729 from Charles II.
After agreeing to the first 12 amendments, in 1789, North Carolina became the 12th state to ratify the new Constitution.
(1663) South Carolina
South Carolina was the site of the first European settlement in North America. In 1526 San Miguel de Gualdape was established by settlers from Hispanolia who initially landed in South Carolina but ended up moving to an area of the Carolina region that would eventually become Georgia. The party returned to Hispanolia after suffering many deaths due to fever the first year.
In 1663 King Charles II created the colony of Carolina (named for King Charles II) by granting the territory, of what is now roughly North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia, to loyal supporters. This colonial charter was challenged by many Virginians who had settled in Albermarle Sound and resented their inclusion in the Carolina Charter. Charleston (originally Charles Town after the King) was founded in 1670 by a group of 200 colonists from English Barbados. The leader of the colonists was Sir John Yeamans, a powerful plantation owner on Barbados.
One of the Southern Colonies, South Carolina started out as a Proprietary colony but also became a Royal colony in 1719.
In 1788 South Carolina was the eighth state to ratify the Constitution.
(1682) Pennsylvania
As early as 1647, settlement occured on what is now Pennsylvania soil by Swedish, Dutch and English settlers in the Delaware River region. In 1681 however, Pennsylvania’s colonial status was sealed when approximately the present state of Pennsylvania was granted to William Penn, a member of the Society of Friends (Quakers), to offset a debt owed to Penn’s father. In 1682 the city plan for Philadelphia was laid out. In 1682 the “Frame of Government” for Pennsylvania was put into effect. In 1683 the first German settlers arrived in Pennsylvania and formed Germantown near Philadelphia.
One of the Middle Colonies, Pennsylvania was a Proprietary colony
In 1763, Charles Mason and Jeremiah Dixon, two young British astronomers commissioned to establish a borderline between Maryland and Pennsylvania, worked for more than four years to settle a century-old boundary dispute between the Calverts of Maryland and the Penns of Pennsylvania by establishing the Mason-Dixon Line.
In 1787 Pennsylvania was the second state to ratify the Constitution.
(1732) Georgia
There were a few Spanish settlements along the coast, north of Florida, in the 16th and early 17th century but what is now Georgia was originally just the southern portion of the Carolina grant. Hoping to provide a second chance for adventurous members of the English under class, King George II, in 1732, granted Georgia to James Edward Oglethorpe, an English general. In addition to its lofty social goals the new Colony was also intended to provide additional protection for its northern colonial partners. Prior to Oglethorpe and his party settling the area in 1733, Fort King George was the only English occupation in the area. The Fort, which was established in 1721, was the Southern-most post in the Colonies and was situated to provide a buffer against Spanish and French intrusion from the South.
In 1738, General Oglethorpe brought a large military contingent to Georgia and the following year his troops provided a strong showing against the Spanish in King George’s War ( the War of Austrian Succession in Europe). General Oglethorpe led his men into St. Augustine and although they were not able to obtain a victory there, when the Spanish sailed into Georgia seeking retaliation two years later, he and his soldiers were able to drive the Spanish back to Florida for, what turned out to be, the last time.
One of the Southern Colonies, Georgia started out as a Proprietary colony but eventually became a Royal colony in 1752.
In 1788 Georgia was the fourth state to ratify the Constitution.
November 25, 2008
shalz82
History is of the utmost importance in Judaism. Whereas the sacred texts of most ancient religions focus on myths and philosophical concepts, the Jewish Bible is centered around historical narrative; and most Jewish holidays are intended to connect modern Jews with their historical ancestors and traditions.
This article provides an overview of Jewish history from the biblical era to the modern day.
Historical and Religious Context
Judaism traces its history back to the creation of mankind, but the explicitly Jewish historical origins begin with Abraham and the Hebrews. According to the Torah, Abraham’s home was the northern Mesopotamian town of Harran.
Under God’s command, Abraham migrated to the region of Canaan, which is roughly equivalent to modern Israel and Lebanon. For a time the Hebrews lived in servitude in Egypt, then returned to Canaan.
The ancient Hebrew people were seminomadic herdsman and farmers, organized into tribes and living in Mesopotamia. Contributions of nearby cultures include a West Semitic concept of divine messengers, Old Babylonian and Hurro-Semite law, Mesopotamian cosmogony and primitive history, Canaanite language and mythological literature, and Egyptian hymns and wisdom literature.
All of these cultures featured belief in creator and preserver gods, a system of ethics, and developed religious rituals. The head of the Canaanite pantheon was El, a powerful god depicted as both judgmental and compassionate.
Biblical Jewish History
The period of Jewish history designated by some historians as “Biblical Judaism” is the centuries covered by the narratives of the Tanakh, from the creation and primitive history of mankind to the last of the prophets in the 4th century BCE.
The Tanakh tells the history of the Hebrew people from a religious viewpoint, beginning with the creation of mankind and ending with the words of the last of the prophets in the 4th century BCE. This period is often referred to by scholars as “Biblical Judaism.” The Tanakh follows the Hebrew nation as it experiences cycles of favor and discipline by God. {1} God establishes successive covenants with humanity (Adam, Noah and Abraham) and issues an extensive set of laws (through Moses) by which the Hebrews are to be set apart as God’s people. When they stray, God sends prophets and invading armies to bring them back to himself. “It is this particular claim-to have experienced God’s presence in human events-and its subsequent development that is the differentiating factor in Jewish thought.” {2}
Abraham and the Patriarchs
(19th or 18th century BCE)
The biblical book of Genesis begins with a single, all-powerful God creating the world out of chaos in six days, with human beings created on the sixth day. Genesis goes on to chronicle an ancient history in which mankind repeatedly turns away from God and to immorality until God destroys the earth with a flood. God then makes a covenant with Noah, the one man saved from the flood, that he will never destroy the earth again.
The specifically Hebrew element of biblical history begins with Abraham, who is considered the founder of the Jewish religion. However, he does not discover God but is rather called by the God who is already known into a covenant, in which God promises to many descendents and the land of Canaan.
Modern scholarship has identified significant differences between the religion of Abraham and the patriarchs and the later Israelite religion of Moses. Historians note that the God of Abraham is referred to using generic, not specifically Israelite terms (namely, various forms of El), the Mosaic issues of divine jealousy and idolatry are virtually absent, and God’s role is as a kind of patron deity who has bestowed his favor on Abraham.
The religion of the patriarchs was simple, and centered on the agreement between Abraham and God. Religious practice consisted of sacrifice and prayer at a sacred altar, stone pillar, or sacred tree. Circumcision was the defining mark of the religious community. Its eschatology was the promise of land and many descendents.
From Egypt to Sinai: Moses and the Covenant
According to biblical tradition, a famine caused the Hebrew tribes to migrate to Egypt, where they were enslaved. God rescued them from bondage by afflicting the Egyptians with successive plagues then drowning the Egyptian army in the Red Sea to allow the Hebrews to escape.
At Mount Sinai, God established the nation of Israel (named for Abraham’s grandson Jacob) as his own, and gave them the terms of his covenant with them. He then sustains the Israelites through 40 years of journeying in the wilderness before leading them into Canaan, the land promised to Abraham. Central to all these events is Moses, who, like Muhammad, fulfills many leadership roles, including religious, political, legislative and military.
This general sequence of events is accepted by most scholars as historically reliable. As one source explains, “To disallow these events would make their centrality as articles of faith in the later religious beliefs of Israel inexplicable.” {3}
Mosaic religion centers on the covenant between God and the people of Israel. The covenant required exclusive loyalty to Yahweh, who rescued them from bondage in Egypt. Worship of other gods, veneration of idols (even of Yahweh), and magical practices are prohibited. Rituals and festivals are established to celebrate God’s historical and continuing provision.
Conquest of Canaan and the Judges
The conquest of Canaan is narrated in the biblical book of Joshua, with miraculous events (walls fell at a shout, the sun stood still) rivaling those of the Exodus. The process of occupation has been judged by scholars as more complex than that described in Joshua, incorporating a combination of military victories and treaty agreements.
After the conquest of Canaan, Israel was led by leaders called “judges,” during which time the Israelites are described as repeatedly falling into idolatry and apostasy. Figurines discovered in the Israelite levels of archeological digs in Palestine support such a report. {4} At the same time, numerous altars to the God of Israel sprung up, and the Levites rose to the priesthood to conduct sacrifices at many of them. The ark of the covenant was housed and carefully protected at the Shiloh sanctuary, which was staffed by priests of the family of Eli.
The United Monarchy under
Saul, David and Solomon
To maintain occupation of the Promised Land, it became necessary to have centralized authority and organized armies that could hold off external enemies. Two diverging views of the prospect of a monarchy arose: a rejection of God’s kingship (1 Sam. 8-12) or a God-given way to defend Israel (1 Sam. 9:16). The former view is represented by the prophet-judge Samuel, who reluctantly crowned the first king.
Saul, of the tribe of Benjamin, was made king (in c. 1020 BCE) after defeating the Ammonites. He ruled from his hometown of Gibeah, a few miles north of Jerusalem. Saul’s reign was marred by conflicts with the prophet Samuel, who held ongoing authority over the kingship. King David, Saul’s successor, solved these problems by combining religious and political authority in one person (David and his descendents) and in one place (the city of Jerusalem).
David was succeeeded by his son Solomon, whose history is recorded in 1 Kings 1-11 and 2 Chronicles 1-9. Solomon succeeded his father on the throne in early manhood, probably about sixteen or eighteen years of age. His father chose him as his successor, passing over the claims of his elder sons. His elevation to the throne took place before his father’s death, and is hastened on mainly by Nathan and Bathsheba, in consequence of the rebellion of Adonijah.
During Solomon’s long reign of 40 years the Hebrew monarchy gained its highest splendour. This period has well been called the “Augustan age” of the Jewish annals. In a single year he collected tribute amounting to 666 talents of gold, according to 1 Kings 10:13. The first half of his reign was, however, by far the brighter and more prosperous; the latter half was clouded by the idolatries into which he fell, mainly, accordingh to the scribes, from his intermarriages. According to 1 Kings 11:3, he had 700 wives and 300 concubines. As soon as he had settled himself in his kingdom, and arranged the affairs of his extensive empire, he entered into an alliance with Egypt by a marriage with the daughter of Pharaoh.
The Divided Monarchy and Exile
After Solomon’s reign the nation split into two kingdoms, Israel (in the north) and Judah (in the south). Israel was conquered by the Assyrian ruler Shalmaneser V in the 8th century BCE. The kingdom of Judah was conquered by a Babylonian army in the early 6th century BCE. The Judahite elite was exiled to Babylon, but later at least a part of them returned to their homeland, led by prophets Ezra and Nehemiah, after the subsequent conquest of Babylonia by the Persians. Already at this point the extreme fragmentation among the Israelites was apparent, with the formation of political-religious factions, the most important of which would later be called Sadduccees and Pharisees.
The Hasmonean Kingdom
and the Destruction of the Temple
After the Persians were defeated by Alexander the Great, his demise, and the division of Alexander’s empire among his generals, the Seleucid Kingdom was formed. A deterioration of relations between hellenized Jews and religious Jews led the Seleucid king Antiochus IV Epiphanes to impose decrees banning certain Jewish religious rites and traditions.
Consequently, the orthodox Jews revolted under the leadership of the Hasmonean family, (also known as the Maccabees). This revolt eventually led to the formation of an independent Jewish kingdom, known as the Hasmonaean Dynasty, which lasted from 165 BC to 63 BC. The Hasmonean Dynasty eventually disintegrated as a result of civil war between the sons of Salome Alexandra, Hyrcanus II and Aristobulus II. The people, who did not want to be governed by a king but by theocratic clergy, made appeals in this spirit to the Roman authorities. A Roman campaign of conquest and annexation, led by Pompey, soon followed.
Judea under Roman rule was at first an independent Jewish kingdom, but gradually the rule over Judea became less and less Jewish, until it became under the direct rule of Roman administration (and renamed the province of Judaea), which was often callous and brutal in its treatment of its Judean subjects. In AD 66, Judeans began to revolt against the Roman rulers of Judea. The revolt was defeated by the Roman emperors Vesesapian and Titus Flavius. The Romans destroyed much of the Temple in Jerusalem and, according to some accounts, stole artifacts from the temple, such as the Menorah.
Judeans continued to live in their land in significant numbers, and were allowed to practice their religion, until the 2nd century when Julius Severus ravaged Judea while putting down the bar Kokhba revolt. After 135, Jews were not allowed to enter the city of Jerusalem, although this ban must have been at least partially lifted, since at the destruction of the rebuilt city by the Persians in the 7th century, Jews are said to have lived there.
Various responses developed to Roman rule, ranging from armed revolt (the Zealots) or withdrawal from the world (the Essenes) to a renewed focus on preserving tradition in a new situation (the Pharisees), to integration with Greek society (the Sadduccees) and thought (Jewish Neoplatonists).
Rabbinical Judaism
Rabbinical Judaism developed out of the Pharasiac movement and in response to the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE. The rabbis sought to reinterpret Jewish concepts and practices in the absence of the Temple and for a people in exile. Aside from some small side movements (such as the Karaites), Rabbinical Judaism was the dominant form of the Jewish religion for nearly 18 centuries. It produced the Talmud, the Midrash, and the great figures of medieval Jewish philosophy.
The Fall of Rome
The Eastern Roman Empire, under assault from barbarian invasion, passed a number of laws in the early Middle Ages, including the legislation of Justinian which culminated in the principle of taking away civil rights from heretics and unbelievers and of making their existence as difficult as possible. The restrictive laws of Constantine and Theodosius were renewed with increased rigor. The public observance of their religion was forbidden the Jews. The loss of their civil rights was followed by disregard for their personal freedom. In the wars waged by the Iconoclasts (eighth and ninth centuries) the Jews especially had to suffer, and mostly at the hands of iconoclastic emperors who were suspected of being heretics with Jewish tendencies. Many Jews fled to the neighboring states of the Slavs and Tatars, which were just coming into existence, and found refuge and protection on the lower Volga and on the northern shores of the Black Sea in the realm of the Khazars.
While the East-Roman empire was prolonging its inglorious existence by perpetual warfare with neighbors who were ever growing stronger, the Western Roman Empire fell prey to the barbarians. With the exception of the restrictive laws of the first Christian emperors, which still remained in force, the Jews were not troubled on account of their faith.
The Early Middle Ages
Not until the beginning of the ninth century did the Church succeed in drawing all humanity within her jurisdiction, and in bringing together and definitely settling the regulations in canonical law which the authority of the Church ordained for believers and their treatment of non-believers. Intercourse with Jews was almost entirely forbidden to believers, and thereby a chasm was created between the adherents of the two religions, which could not be bridged.
On the other hand, the Church found herself compelled to make the Jew a fellow citizen of the believer; for she enforced upon her own communities the Biblical prohibition against usury; and thus the only way left open to her of conducting financial operations was to seek loans at a legally determined rate of interest from the adherents of another faith. Through these peculiar conditions the Jews rapidly acquired influence. At the same time they were compelled to find their pleasures at home and in their own circles only. Their sole intellectual food came from their own literature, to which they devoted themselves with all the strength of their nature.
This was the general condition of the Jews in Western lands. Their fate in each particular country depended on the changing political conditions. In Italy they experienced dark days during the endless wars waged by the Heruli, Rugii, Ostrogoths, and Longobardi. The severe laws of the Roman emperors were in general more mildly administered than elsewhere; the Arian confession, of which the Germanic conquerors of Italy were adherents, being in contrast with the Catholic characterized by its tolerance. Among the Burgundians and Franks, who professed the Catholic faith, the ecclesiastical sentiment, fortunately for the Jews, made but slow progress, and the Merovingian rulers rendered only a listless and indifferent support to the demands of the Church, the influence of which they had no inclination to increase.
In the Pyrenean peninsula, from the most ancient times, Jews had lived peaceably in greater numbers than in the land of the Franks. The same modest good fortune remained to them when the Suevi, Alani, Vandals, and Visigoths occupied the land. It came to a sudden end when the Visigothic kings embraced Catholicism and wished to convert all their subjects to the same faith. Many Jews yielded to compulsion in the secret hope that the severe measures would be of short duration. But they soon bitterly repented this hasty step; for the Visigothic legislation insisted with inexorable severity that those who had been baptized by force should remain true to the Christian faith. Consequently the Jews eagerly welcomed the Arabs when the latter conquered the peninsula in 711.
Those Jews who still wished to remain true to the faith of their fathers were protected by the Church herself from compulsory conversion. There was no change in this policy even later, when the pope called for the support of the Carolingians in protecting his ideal kingdom with their temporal power. Charlemagne, moreover, was glad to use the Church for the purpose of welding together the loosely connected elements of his kingdom when he transformed the old Roman empire into a Christian one, and united under the imperial crown all the German races at that time firmly settled. When, a few decades after his death, his world-empire fell apart (843), the rulers of Italy, France, and Germany left the Church free scope in her dealings with the Jews, and under the influence of religious zeal hatred toward the unbelievers ripened into deeds of horror.
The Crusades
The trials which the Jews endured from time to time in the different kingdoms of the Christian West were only indications of the catastrophe which broke over them at the time of the Crusades. A wild, unrestrained throng, for which the crusade was only an excuse to indulge its rapacity, fell upon the peaceful Jews and sacrificed them to its fanaticism. In the First Crusade (1096) flourishing communities on the Rhine and the Danube were utterly destroyed. In the Second Crusade (1147) the Jews in France suffered especially. Philip Augustus treated them with exceptional severity. In his days the Third Crusade took place (1188); and the preparations for it proved to be momentous for the English Jews. After unspeakable trials Jews were banished from England in 1290; and 365 years passed before they were allowed to settle again in the British Isles. The Jews were also subjected to attacks by the Shepherds’ Crusades of 1251 and 1320.
Persecution and Blood Libel
The justification for these deeds was found in crimes laid to the charge of the Jews. They were held responsible for the crime imputed to them a thousand years before this; and the false charge was circulated that they wished to dishonor the host which was supposed to represent Jesus’ body. They were further charged with being the cause of every calamity. In 1240 the plundering raids of the Mongols were laid at their door. When, a hundred years later, the Black Death raged through Europe, the tale was invented that the Jews had poisoned the wells. The only court of appeal that regarded itself as their appointed protector, according to historical conceptions, was the “Roman emperor of the German nation.” The emperor, as legal successor to Titus, who had acquired the Jews for his special property through the destruction of the Temple, claimed the rights of possession and protection over all the Jews in the former Roman empire.
They thus became imperial “servi cameræ.” He might present them and their possessions to princes or to cities. That the Jews were not utterly destroyed was due to two circumstances: (1) the envy, distrust, and greed of princes and peoples toward one another, and (2) the moral strength which was infused into the Jews by a suffering which was undeserved but which enabled them to resist persecution. The abilities which could find no expression in the service of country or of humanity at large, were directed with all the more zeal toward the study of the Bible and Talmud, toward ordering communal affairs, toward building up a happy family life, and toward bettering the condition of the Jewish race in general.
Expulsions
Everywhere in the Christian Occident an equally gloomy picture was presented. The Jews, who were driven out of England in 1290, out of France in 1394, and out of numerous districts of Germany, Italy, and the Balkan peninsula between 1350 and 1450, were scattered in all directions, and fled preferably to the new Slavic kingdoms, where for the time being other confessions were still tolerated. Here they found a sure refuge under benevolent rulers and acquired a certain prosperity, in the enjoyment of which the study of the Talmud was followed with renewed vigor. Together with their faith, they took with them the German language and customs, which they have cultivated in a Slavic environment with unexampled faithfulness up to the present time.
As in Slavic countries, so also under Muslim rule the persecuted Jews often found a humane reception, especially from the eighth century onward in the Pyrenean peninsula. But even as early as the thirteenth century the Arabs could no longer offer a real resistance to the advancing force of Christian kings; and with the fall of political power Arabic culture declined, after having been transmitted to the Occident at about the same period, chiefly through the Jews in the north of Spain and in the south of France. At that time there was no field of learning which the Spanish Jews did not cultivate. They studied the secular sciences with the same zeal as the Bible and Talmud.
But the growing influence of the Church gradually crowded them out of this advantageous position. At first the attempt was made to win them to Christianity through writings and religious disputations; and when these attempts failed they were ever more and more restricted in the exercise of their civil rights. Soon they were obliged to live in separate quarters of the cities and to wear humiliating badges on their clothing. Thereby they were made a prey to the scorn and hatred of their fellow citizens. In 1391, when a fanatical mob killed thirty thousand Jews in Seville alone, many in their fright sought refuge in baptism. And although they often continued to observe in secret the laws of their fathers the Inquisition soon rooted out these pretended Christians or Maranos. Thousands were thrown into prison, tortured, and burned, until a project was formed to sweep all Spain clean of unbelievers. The plan matured when in 1492 the last Moorish fortress fell into the hands of the Christians. Several hundred thousand Jews were forced from the country which had been their home for 1,500 years. Many of them fled to the Balkan peninsula, where a few decades before the Crescent had won a victory over the Cross through the Osmanli Turks. These exiles have faithfully preserved the language of the country they were forced to leave; and to-day, after a lapse of more than 400 years, Spanish is still the mother tongue of their descendants.
The Enlightenment and Haskalah
During the period of the European Renaissance and Enlightenment, significant changes were happening within the Jewish community. The Haskalah movement paralelled the wider Enlightenment, as Jews began in the 1700s to campaign for emancipation from restrictive laws and integration into the wider European society. Secular and scientific education was added to the traditional religious instruction received by students, and interest in a national Jewish identity, including a revival in the study of Jewish history and Hebrew, started to grow. Haskalah gave birth to the Reform and Conservative movements and planted the seeds of Zionism while at the same time encouraging cultural assimilation into the countries in which Jews resided. At around the same time another movement was born, one preaching almost the opposite of Haskalah, Hasidic Judaism. Hasidic Judiasm began in the 1700s by Rabbi Israel Baal Shem Tov, and quickly gained a following with its more exubarent, mystical approach to religion. These two movements, and the traditional orthodox approach to Judiasm from which they spring, formed the basis for the modern divisions within Jewish observance.
At the same time, the outside world was changing. Though persecution still existed in some European countries (hundreds of thousands of Jews were killed in pogroms in the 18th and 19th centuries), Napoleon invited Jews to leave the Jewish ghettos in Europe and seek refuge in the newly created tolerant political regimes that offered equality under Napoleonic Law (see Napoleon and the Jews). At the same time, Jewish migration to the United States (see Jews in the United States) created a new community in large part freed of the restrictions of Europe.
The Holocaust
Anti-Semitism was common in Europe in the 1920s and 1930s (though its history extends far back throughout many centuries during the course of Judaism). Adolf Hitler’s fanatical anti-Semitism was 
laid out in his 1925 book Mein Kampf, largely ignored when it was first printed, but which later became popular in Germany once Hitler acquired political power.
On April 1, 1933 the recently elected Nazis, under Julius Streicher, organized a one-day boycott of all Jewish-owned businesses in Germany. This policy helped to usher-in a series of anti-Semitic acts that would eventually culminate in the Holocaust. The last remaining Jewish enterprises in Germany were closed on July 6, 1939. In many cities throughout Europe, Jews had been living in
concentrated areas. During the first years of World War II, the Nazis formalized the borders of these areas and restricted movement, creating modern ghettos to which Jews were confined. The ghettos were, in effect, prisons in which many Jews died from hunger and disease; others were executed by the Nazis and their collaborators. Concentration camps for Jews existed in Germany itself. During the invasion of the Soviet Union, over 3,000 special killing units (Einsatzgruppen) followed the Wehrmacht and conducted mass killings of Communist officials and of the Jewish population that lived on Soviet territory. Entire communities were wiped out by being rounded up, robbed of their possessions and clothing, and shot at the edges of ditches.
In December 1941, Hitler finally decided to exterminate European Jews. In January 1942, during the Wannsee conference, several Nazi leaders discussed the details of the “Final Solution of the Jewish question” (Endlösung der Judenfrage). Dr. Josef Buhler urged Reinhard Heydrich to proceed with the Final Solution in the General Government. They began to systematically deport Jewish populations from the ghettos and all occupied territories to the seven camps designated as Vernichtungslager, or extermination camps: Auschwitz, Belzec, Chelmno, Majdanek, Maly Trostenets, Sobibór and Treblinka II.
Holocaust Aftermath and the State of Israel
The Holocaust and its aftermath left millions of refugees, including many Jews who had lost most or all of their family members and posessions, and often faced persistent anti-Semitism in their home countries. The need to find a homeland for the Jewish refugees led to many of them fervently joining the Zionist movement. Many Zionists, pointing to the fact that Jewish refugees from Germany and Nazi-occupied lands had been turned away by other countries, argued that if a Jewish state had existed at the time, the Holocaust could not have occurred on the scale it did.
The sudden rapid growth of Zionism and the post-Holocaust displacement resulted in the emigration of a great many Jews to what became the modern State of Israel soon after. This immigration had a direct effect on the regional Arabs, many of whom firmly opposed a Jewish state in the Middle East. Some would say this stemmed from a lack of understanding of a need for a Jewish Homeland. While the Holocaust stands as a reminder that modern, “civilized” nations can engage in the most horrific of organized group behavior, it is also important to remember that during the Holocaust, many non-Jews risked (and often lost) their lives attempting to aid Jews and other victims of Nazi persecution, for no conceivable gain other than to satisfy their own consciences. In order to recognize these examples of the most noble of human behaviors among the most debased, the Israeli government through the Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial set up a Righteous gentiles program to honor and memorialize as many of these heroic individuals as can be found.
(An article i found in a website www.religionfacts.com)
November 20, 2008
shalz82
Holocaust, Annihilation, Extermination, Genocide all mean the same thing - a mass destruction of human life. Many people outside Europe and America are still not aware of the Holocaust. And it is incredible that there are some people out there who refuse to believe it happened. Even if an enormous amount of evidence were laid out before their very own eyes, Holocaust deniers would still exist. Well, everyone has the right to believe what he or she wishes.
But how could men commit such a heinous crime? And how could someone think that millions of lives are worth so much less than his own? Where was God? And how could He allow such an unspeakable crime to happen? So many questions are left unanswered. I think it boils down to only one answer: Good and Evil are both within us; Evil is lurking in the very depths of our being. Just like a thief hiding, waiting for a chance to steal and grab someone’s dear life.
War is a creation of men. Power is the root of all evil. With the exception of those who use their power for the good of mankind and not seek their destruction. God is hope. But for Him to exist, we have to believe.
November 19, 2008
shalz82
Life is full of wonderful things. It is filled with mysteries that are worth-knowing and worth-discovering. We only have to open our eyes and learn to appreciate the beauty that surrounds us.
Life is the most precious gift that God has given to all of the things that exist in this world. Humans, beasts, and nature alike. And we humans are very fortunate to acquire the knowledge, understanding, and intellect which distinguishes us from all of God’s creation. For we are able to tell God’s greatness and the wonders He has made.
All things bright and beautiful,
All creatures great and small,
All things wise and wonderful,
The Lord God made them all.
Each little flower that opens,
Each little bird that sings,
He made their glowing colours,
He made their tiny wings.
The rich man in his castle,
The poor man at his gate,
God made them, high or lowly,
And ordered their estate.
The purple-headed mountain,
The river running by,
The sunset, and the morning,
That brightens up the sky;
The cold wind in the winter,
The pleasant summer sun,
The ripe fruits in the garden,
He made them every one.
The tall trees in the greenwood,
The meadows where we play,
The rushes by the water,
We gather every day;–
He gave us eyes to see them,
And lips that we might tell,
How great is God Almighty,
Who has made all things well.
by: Cecil Frances Alexander
October 10, 2008
shalz82
Here is another one of my favorite poems. As we walk along the path of life, we encounter a lot of crossroads. Some roads are rough and some are smooth. It is a human instinct to struggle and fight whatever obstacles come our way. As long as we believe that God is with us through all those difficult and happy times, then we can conquer anything. Once we succeed, then we truly are the ‘master of our fate’ and the ‘captain of our souls.’
OUT of the night that covers me,
Black as the pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.
In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbow’d.
Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds and shall find me unafraid.
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate:
I am the captain of my soul.
by: William Earnest Henley; 1849-1903
September 24, 2008
shalz82
I’d like to share with you a poem that i learned from my english teacher during my high school days. This poem inspires me, motivates me and lifts my spirits when i am feeling down. Whenever certain circumstances in my life don’t go exactly the way i want, i just recite this poem to myself. It really does make me feel good and empowered. I feel like i can do anything that i want. I just have to wait for the right moment, the right time, and keep on going…
When things go wrong, as they sometimes will,
When the road you’re trudging seems all uphill,
When the funds are low and the debts are high,
And you want to smile, but you have to sigh,
When care is pressing you down a bit,
Rest, if you must, but do not quit.
Life is queer with its twists and turns,
As every one of us sometimes learns,
And many a failure turns about,
When he might have won had he stuck it out;
Don’t give up though the pace seems slow–
You may succeed with another blow.
Often the goal is nearer than,
It seems to a faint and faltering man,
Often the struggler has given up,
When he might have captured the victor’s cup,
And he learned too late when the night slipped down,
How close he was to the golden crown.
Success is failure turned inside out–
The silver tint of the clouds of doubt,
And you never can tell how close you are,
It may be near when it seems so far,
So stick to the fight when you’re hardest hit–
It’s when things seem worst that you must not quit.
by: Clinton Howell
September 23, 2008
shalz82
