Saturday, December 28, 2024

Answering Netanyahu


Φιλολoγικά/Philologica: Answering Netanyahu · Assorted retorts from yahoo boards and elsewhere: Moral Clarity: Two Wrongs Don't Make One Right · Countering Kisin

1:53 but I'd actually start with the original 1:55 Moses the Jewish people uh have lived in 1:58 the land of Israel what is now the the2:01 state of Israel uh have lived here and 2:03 have been attached to this place for 2:05 about 2:06 3,500 2:08 years three and a half Millennia now for 2:11 the first two Millennia roughly of that 2:13 time uh we were living in what is 2:16 described in a text commonly known as 2:19 the Bible so the Bible describes how the 2:21 Jewish people lived on this land were 2:24 attached to this land fought off 2:26 conquerors sometimes were conquered but 2:28 stayed on their land and that uh 2:30 continued uh for a very long time until 2:33 roughly the sixth 7th Century actually 2:36 uh after the birth of Christ okay for 2:39 for roughly for 2,000 years uh we were 2:43 conquered by the Romans we were 2:44 conquered by the Byzantines they did a 2:46 lot of bad things to us but they didn't 2:49 really Exile us contrary to what people 2:51 think okay the ones the the loss of our 2:55 land actually occurred when the Arab 2:58 Conquest took place in the 7th Cent 2:59 Century the Arabs burst out from Arabia 3:02 and they did something that no other 3:04 conqueror not the Romans not the 3:06 Byzantines not the Greeks before them 3:07 not Alexander the Great nobody did 3:10 before they actually started taking over 3:13 the land of the Jewish Farmer they 3:15 brought in military colonies that took 3:17 over the land and gradually over the 3:19 next two Century the Jews became a 3:22 minority in our land so it is under the 3:25 Arab Conquest that the Jews lost their 3:28 Homeland the Arab were the Colonials the 3:31 Jews were the natives dispossessed


Netanyahu Makes Peterson Go QUIET with PROOF that Israel Belongs To The Jewish People
Rabbi Dovid Vigler | 27 Dec. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLwtExVA7Zk


Netanyahu is here baiting and switching between Ethnic Israelites (irrespective of confession) and people of Jewish Confession (in principle irrespective of ancestry, but concretely mostly, and vastly so, Ethnic Israelites).

After AD 70, ethnic Israelites were divided between Christians and Jews and Samarians. After Constantine, there were massive conversions from Judaism to Christianity. So a farmer's ancestors in 350 AD was likely to have lived there since the return from Babylon if not more, but he was likely to be a Christian. These are the ancestors of the Ethnicity now known as Christian Palestinians.

There was a reversal under Chosroes II. When he invaded, many Christians became Jews and started persecuting those who remained Christians. When Heraclius expelled Chosroes, this reversed again. Many who had been Jewish under Chosroes preferring going to Persia over living under Heraclius. Those remaining after that can be described as Mitsrahi Jews, those of the Jewish confession.

So, when "the Arabs" came (this is somewhat of a weazel word in the context), those who got their land confiscated were people remaining Christians and Jews, and even then not all of them, meaning, a new ethnicity emerged, Muslim Palestinians. Please note, calling them Muslim Palestinians or the other groups Mitsrahi or Christian Palestinians isn't about being faithful to what they were called back then, it's a retronym. Like calling a telephone a landline, like calling music not recorded in a studio to be played later live music, even if it referred to a time when live music was all there was, like speaking of Richard Cœur de Lion as living in the Middle Ages, like speaking of Alexander the Great as dying in 323 BC. Or like calling a Romanus or Rhomaios with Constantinople as capital a Byzantine, which Netanyahu had no problem with.

The point is, while the Muslims in the Holy Land over the last centuries Netanyahu mentions got their religion from the invaders, they got their ancestry to a large part from people who had been living there since Moses. In other words, the Muslim Palestinians may have started out as 10 % Ishmaelites from the Arabian Peninsula and 90 % Israelites, both Mitsrahi and Christian Palestinian, to use the retronyms. The telltale is that Arab authorities don't classify the Muslim population of the Holy Land (vilayet Al Quds, later on), but as Mustariba, just as with the Muslim populations of Jordan or Lebanon or Syria, to use other basically retronyms. Mustariba means Arab-ised. I don't think this applies to the Arab Beduins of the Negev, by the way, but I could be wrong.

The names back then would have been Muslim, Naṣrānī or Masīḥī, Yahudi. The point is, the Muslimin back then were not simply invaders, they were also, more and more, indigenous people siding with the invader. This is why I claim, the Muslim Palestinians as an ethnicity go back to Moses. Sure, Moses was no Muslim. He was also no Druz. But Muslims of the area, as well as Druz of the area and of Lebanon just North of it, descend from people who came with Moses. Because, it is also highly probable that the Palestinian population has not been replaced since the arrival of Omar.

Zionists often like to cite the people arriving to the mandate from Jordan or Egypt or Syria. But I would venture, this whole area already became the Greater Israel prophecied in Isaiah 11 c. 2000 years ago, through Christians, mainly, but in parallel, through Jews. Why are the Jews indigenous to the Holy Land called Mitsrahi? Are you telling me they never came to the Holy Land from Egypt after a family had been away for some generations? I would say they did. And I would imagine that Muslims and Christians coming to the Mandate would have been in a similar position. They were doing a kind of Aliyah, though not that of your state.

the Jews were 3:35 dispossessed we were flung to the Far 3:38 Corners of the earth uh suffered 3:41 unimaginable suffering because we had no 3:43 Homeland but we didn't disappear


Lots of this dispersal had started way earlier. I'm very sure St. Athanasius met Jews in Trier, when he was exiled there, banishment pronounced in 335, because his Quicumque vult contains a reply to the Shema. Some would claim Jewish presence in India goes back to the time of King Solomon. Jewish presence in Persia, well, some stayed in the exile, and some more went there with Chosroes as mentioned.

Here Netanyahu is identifying "Jews" with exiles, not just to the exclusion of Christian and Muslim Palestinians, but to the exclusion or at least forgetful omission of Mitsrahi Jews.

the Arabs who had 4:06 conquered the land best basically left 4:09 it Barren they never made it their own 4:11 it was a Barren land it really had 4:13 practically it was an empty land


It was not as peopled as recently by artificial irrigation that's sapping the Jordan and the lake Kinnereth, but "barren"? Nordisk Familjebok has 4 editions, I'm going back to the first, and to 1888.

12. Nådemedlen - Pontifikat (1888)
Palestina, äfven kalladt Heliga landet l. Förlofvade landet - 605-606, 607-608, 609-610, 611-612


The article is signed H. Almkvist, e. o. Professor, shortened H.A. in the text.

Om Jordandalen se Jordan. Östjordanlandet, en ännu skogrik och fruktbar högslätt af 600 m. medelhöjd med enskilda bergstoppar till nära 1,200 m., reser sig från den djupa dalen i v. som en väldig, i några branta afsatser delad mur, hvilken blott på två ställen genombrytes af större floddalar, nämligen Jarmûk och Jabbôk (nu Wâdi-Sérka). Äfven i ö. höjer sig platån, ehuru i betydligt mindre grad, öfver den tämligen högt belägna syriska öcknen. Vestjordanlandet, som egentligen afses vid tal om P., genomskäres i hela sin längd från n. till s. af en bred landrygg på sådant sätt, att ungef. 3/4 af landets bredd falla i v. och 1/4 ö. derom. Denna ås, som i allmänhet är högst i Galiléen och lägst i Samarien. har en medelhöjd af 450 m., men äfven enstaka toppar till 1,200 m. I öfre Galiléen (n. om udden Ras-en-nakûra) gå åsens sluttningar i v. ända ned till hafvet, lemnande en strandremsa af knappt 1 km. bredd, men i nedre Galiléen vidgar sig låglandet vid kusten till 5 à 10 km. bredd. I ö. och s. ö. sammanhänger detta lågland med de stora, bördiga och historiskt ryktbara slätterna Sebulûn (nu Battôf) i n. och Megiddo- l. Jezreelslätten (nu Merdj-ibn-Amîr) i s., hvilka med en höjd af 60 till 120 m. utgöra den enda beqväma vägen från kusten till Jordandalen. Söder om Karmel utsträcker sig kustslätten, ständigt vidgande sig mot s., ända ned till P:s södra gräns med vexlande bredd af 12 till 20 km. Denna stora och bördiga slätt, som genomskäres af några små kustfloder, har numera icke något gemensamt namn, men på judarnas tid bar den norra delen, mellan floderna Nahr-Sérka i n. och Nahr-Rubîn (s. om Jafa) i s., det ryktbara namnet Sarôn (»slätt»), medan den södra delen hette Sjefelâ (»låglandet»). Mot ö. nedfaller landryggen i brantare sluttningar mot Jordandalen med smärre vattendrag (Nahr Djalûd och Wâdi el-Fâria i Samarien) och smalare, tämligen fruktbara dalgångar inom Galiléen och Samarien, medan deremot i Judéen åsen utbreder sig åt ö. till ett vildt, kalt, vattenlöst bergland, den fruktade »Juda öcken», som når ända fram till Döda hafvets strand. Söder om det egentliga Judéen, d. v. s. söder om den linie, som går från Medelhafvets sydöstra hörn öfver Beêr-Saba till Döda hafvets sydspets, öfvergå den palestinska landåsen och Juda öcken i det likaledes bergiga och öckenlika »sydlandet» (Nédjeb l. Darôma).


I'll translate ... but first, the text has 11 sentences, of a length varying between 4 and 55 words, with a medium of 35~36 words. The text is from before 1906 and 1950, so, invervocalic V sound in Swedish words is still spelled FV (Äfven), post-vocalic V sound is still spelled F (afsatser), verbs still have plural forms (3/4 = tre fjerdedelar ... falla, hvilka ... utgöra, öfvergå den palestinska landåsen och Juda öcken), and despite it being after the 1870's, the short "ä-ljud" (or open E) is still spelled E, not Ä, in at least "vexlande" and "Vestjordanlandet" ... this is the Swedish I'm being regularly heckled for, as if I were dyslexic, had a severe trauma pushing out my language capacities, were trying to sound "old" with no specific reference (indeed the opposite, you don't often find "ehuru" / "albeit" in my texts), when in fact I am simply boycotting spelling reforms, just like an American could boycott the Webster spelling and go for British "colour labelled axe" as opposed to "color labeled ax" (pronounced exactly identical, except perhaps the R). Or a Frenchman insisting on using passé simple despite a school system promoting passé composé.

About the Jordan Valley, see Jordan. The East Jordan Land, a still forested and fertile high plain of 600 m (1968.5 feet) medium height and some mountain tops to near 1200 m (3937 feet) rises from the deep vallet in the West like an enormous wall, partitioned into some steep cliffs, which only in two places is broken through by bigger river valleys, namely Jarmûk and Jabbôk (now Wâdi-Sérka). In the East too, the plateau rises, though to a clearly lesser degree, above the rather highly located Syrian desert. The West Jordan Land, which is the essential meaning when speaking of Palestine, is in all its length from North to South cut through by a broad land ridge in such a way that about 3/4 or the width fall in the West and 1/4 in the East thereof. This ridge, which generally is highest in Galilee and lowest in Samaria has a mean height of 450 m (1476 feet), but also single peaks to 1200 m (3937 feet). In Upper Galilee (North of the cape Ras-en-nakûra) the slopes of the ridge in the West reach all the way to the sea, leaving a beach strip of hardly 1 km (0.62 miles) width, but in Lower Galilee, the lowland at the coast widens to a width of 5 to 10 km (3.1 to 6.2 miles). To the East and South-East, this lowland connects to the large, fertil and historically famed plains of Sebulûn (now Battôf) in the North and that of Megiddo or Jezreel (now Merdj-ibn-Amir) in the South, which, with a height of 60 to 120 m (200 to 390 feet), constitute the only comfortable way from the Coast to the Jordan Valley. South of Carmel the coastal plain stretches, always widening to the South, all the way to the South frontier of Palestine, with a varying width of 12 to 20 km (7.45 to 12.43 miles). This large and fertile plain, which is cut through by a few small coastal rivers, now has no common name, but in the time of the Jews, the North part, between the rivers Nahr-Sérka in the North and Nahr-Rubîn (South of Jaffa) in the South, the famed name Sarôn ("plain") while the Southern part was called Shefelâ ("the lowland"). To the East the land ridge falls in steeper slopes to the Jordan valley, with smaller watercourses (Nahr Djalûd and Wâdi el-Fâria in Samaria) and narrower, fairly fertile valleys within Galileee and Samaria, while by contrast in Judaea the ridge extends to the East in a wild, bare, dry mountain land, the feared "Desert of Judah", which extends all the way to the shore of the Dead Sea. South of Judaea proper, i. e. South of the line which goes from the South East corner of the Mediterranean, over Beêr-Saba to the South tip of the Dead Sea, the Palestinian land ridge and the Desert of Judah transit into the likewise mountainous and desertlike "South Land" (Nédjeb or Darôma).


So, according to a source of 1888, it was not in fact all of the Holy Land that was left barren, it was a specific area, the Judean Desert and the South Land. Was this by any negligence of the Arabs, was this fertile in Biblical times?

Then Jesus was led by the spirit into the desert, to be tempted by the devil And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, afterwards he was hungry
Matthew 4:1-2


Desert clearly named.

And David said to Saul: Thy servant kept his father's sheep, and there came a lion, or a bear, and took a ram out of the midst of the flock And I pursued after them, and struck them, and delivered it out of their mouth: and they rose up against me, and I caught them by the throat, and I strangled and killed them For I thy servant have killed both a lion and a bear: and this uncircumcised Philistine shall be also as one of them. I will go now, and take away the reproach of the people: for who is this uncircumcised Philistine, who hath dared to curse the army of the living God
1 Kings 17:34-36*


Lions have a certain preference for dry land, don't they? So, desert implied with at least probability. Or, even the law:

And when the goat hath carried all their iniquities into an uninhabited land, and shall be let go into the desert,
Leviticus 16:22


How can an all-knowing God make a law intended for not just the desert wandering, but also the soujourn in the Holy Land over 1500 or so years after those forty, up to the Cross, name "desert" in the law if the Holy Land had no desert?**

The land was only "empty" where it had already been empty in the times that Netanyahu looks back to. The idea of a "land without people" is a lie, at best a misunderstanding. It's like saying Nevada is a land without people or Utah ... naturally dry places tend to have large empty areas. Plus confusing the "Nevada" part of Palestine with the whole of it. Netanyahu is sloppy or dishonest.

  • His religious case "Moses brought us here" is equally true of Christian and even Muslim Palestinians;
  • his "Arabs displaced us" doesn't work, as a secular claim, one doesn't reconquer land one lost 1300 years earlier;
  • his "people without a land for a land without a people" is untrue (as a secular claim, if it's not a disguise for the religious claim, where it's even more untrue), since the Judean Desert and the South Land weren't meant to be very peopled and since other parts of Palestine very much were cultivated in Turkish times.


Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Holy Innocents
28.XII.2024

In Bethlehem Judae natalis sanctorum Innocentium Martyrum, qui pro Christo ab Herode Rege interfecti sunt.

* Some would call the book "1 Samuel" and what they would call "1 Kings" is what we call "3 Kings". ** Given the fertility of Samaria, I think it's obvious that the law foresaw Jerusalem and not Mount Gerasim as the place of worship.

Friday, December 27, 2024

Je trouvai une partie de la traduction française de Narnia


Je pourrais spéculer pourquoi, et il semble assez apparent pourquoi la plupart des pages manquaient. Il s'agit de "Le Lion et la Sorcière blanche, traduit par Mme E.-R. Blanchet" et donc vous pouvez déjà deviner.

a) Il n'y a pas de Noël dedans.
b) Il n'y a pas non plus le sacrifice et la résurrection d'Aslan.

On sait qu'il y a deux religions non chrétiennes qui trouvent de l'horreur dans l'Incarnation et la Mort et Résurrection de Dieu.

Mais je dois dire que la traduction laisse parfois à souhaiter.

Pour ceux qui ont lu cette traduction, et connaissent l'original, quand Edmund décide de "let down" Lucy, la bonne traduction n'est pas qu'Edmond "abandonna" Lucie, mais qu'il la "déçut" ou "laissa tomber" ou "lui fit faux bond" ... il n'était pas juste un soutien qui se rétirait, il était un témoin qui la lâcha par un mensonge.

Ou le professeur "était veuf" quand en l'original il simplement "had no wife" ... pour ceux qui ont lu Le Neveu du Magicien c'est un peu mystérieux pourquoi Digory Kirke n'épousa jamais Polly Plumber. C'est sûr à partir de La Dernière Bataille Polly, comme lui-même, était toujours vivante jusqu'à l'accident de train. Pourtant, "he had no wife" ...

Comme vous avez peut-être pu deviner, les finesses philosophiques ne sont pas non plus au rendez-vous dans la traduction.

— Enfin, monsieur, quand une chose existe... elle existe !
— Vous croyez ?


Le Professeur semble ici mettre en doute la stabilité de la substance, position philosophique horripilante.

En anglais il y a une autre chose:

"Well, Sir, if things are real, they're there all the time."
"Are they?" said the Professor


Il y a deux traductions possibles, qui entre les deux mettent en valeur la confusion conceptuelle de Pierre :

— Enfin, monsieur, si des choses sont réelles, elles sont toujours au-rendez-vous
ou
— Enfin, monsieur, si des choses sont réelles, elles existent toujours


Sur quoi le professeur répond "vous croyez ?"

La première me paraît la plus apte.

Par les romans ou d'autres œuvres du fantastique traitant de ce que l'anglais appelle "portals" / "portails" ... des conduites surnaturelles ou quasiment entre deux mondes ou entre deux plans de la réalité, surtout hormis deux périodes historiques ... la Narniade est quasi la grande référence pour le côté philosophique. Narnia ne cesse pas d'exister juste parce que le portail entre notre monde et Narnia ne reste pas ouvert tout le temps. Tel est le concept.

Pour les niponisants, le genre de "portal fantasy" est assez proche de ce qu'en Japon on appelle Isekai ten'i. Les isekai moderne, donc à part le folklore japonais, commencent avec un Haruka Takachiho qui est né l'année après la parution de ce premier roman de la Narniade.

Émile-R. Blanchet, selon le site Amazon, s'est démarquée en tant que traductrice de Somerset Maugham, un auteur très différent de C. S. Lewis, et il y a aussi des articles ou histoires par elle, si c'est bien la même, dans L'Écho des Alpes. Espérons que les traductions par Anne-Marie Dalmais soient meilleurs.

Pour noter les différences entre les auteurs, quand une loi ou loi envisagé fit de chaque personne né sur le sol français un citoyen, donc apte à servir dans l'armée française, Robert Ormond Maugham arrangea pour que sa femme accouche dans une maternité de l'Ambassade française à Paris. Dans la Grande Guerre, William Somerset Maugham était trop vieux pour s'enroler, mais fit brancardier pour la Croix Rouge. C. S. Lewis, aussi fils d'avocat, s'enrôla dans l'OTC (Officers' Training Corps) en 1917, avant d'être enrôlé comme quasiment Cadet de la défense, et s'en aller en Somerset Light Infantry comme sous-lieutenant. Ou dans le fait que le seul roman que j'ai lu de Somerset Maugham impliquait un mélange entre sorcier et hypnotiste très abusif, sa victime féminine, et l'amoureux (ex-fiancé) de celle-ci. Un intrigue que C. S. Lewis orait écarté comme donnant occasions à l'impureté, comme trop sombre aussi. Y compris pour ses romans pour adultes.

Ou encore, parmi les 100 meilleurs romans du 20e siècle, un jury élitiste place Somerset Maugham à la place 66. Les 100 meilleurs romans de tous les temps par The Guardian place, non C. S. Lewis, mais bien son ami Tolkien, à la place 64. Les deux listes omettent celui de l'autre liste et les deux listes omettent C. S. Lewis, ce que certains anglophones prennent mal. Genre comme les suécophones ont mal aimé les décisions des Prix Nobel, jamais à notre Astrid Lindgren.

Reste que la génération qui aurait dû bâtir en France la réputation de C. S. Lewis n'ait pas eu un excellent accès. La Bibliothèque du Chat perché fait paraître quatre des sept entre 1980 et 1984. Seuls deux en avaient été traduits pour l'Idéal-Bibliothèque. En 1952 et 1953. La série complète n'est pas parue en français qu'en 2001. S'il y a des incultes qui prétendent que le Monde de Narnia soit une niaiserie pour enfants, ils devraient être sur-représentés parmi les francophones non anglisants. À titre de comparaison, en suédois les parutions sont entre 1958 (débutant avec Le neveu du magicien) et 1976. Et en allemand entre 1957 et 1981. La génération de ma mère en Suède y a eu accès, la génération d'Alain Sanders en France, non.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
St. Jean Apôtre
27.XII.2024

Apud Ephesum natalis sancti Joannis, Apostoli et Evangelistae, qui, post Evangelii scriptionem, post exsilii relegationem et Apocalypsim divinam, usque ad Trajani Principis tempora perseverans, totius Asiae fundavit rexitque Ecclesias, ac tandem, confectus senio, sexagesimo octavo post passionem Domini anno mortuus est, et juxta eamdem urbem sepultus.

Monday, December 23, 2024

Anyone Notice a First Letter Thing About Luther's Cities?


ויטנברג Wittenberg
וורמס Worms
וארטבורג Wartburg


PS, given what Luther became, it is perhaps hard to some to realise what he was. Thesis 71 among the 95. German (the original) says:

Wer gegen die Wahrheit des apostolischen Ablasses spricht, der sei verworfen und verflucht.


Who speaks against the truth of the Apostolic (= Papal) indulgence, may he be rejected and accursed.

I'm citing this from

Die 95 Thesen
https://www.luther.de/leben/anschlag/95thesen.html


Now, the people running the site are Lutherans and don't believe in Indulgences. They tend to idolise Luther for rejecting them, which at this point he did not yet do.

So, they mistranslate like this:

Let him who speaks against the truth concerning papal indulgences be anathema and accursed.


Now, "the truth concerning papal indulgences" wouldn't be "die Wahrheit des apost/päpstl. Ablasses" but "die Wahrheit über den apost./päpbstl. Ablass" ...

The site owners think he was on his own authority in 1517 anathematising those who disagreed with him about his "truth about" the indulgences. In fact he obediently, with a minimal but extant obedience, condemned the rejection of indulgences. When he came back to Wittenberg after Worms and Wartburg, that had changed, but in 1517 it was still so. He was not yet a Lutheran, he was still more like a Jansenist./HGL

PPS, hat tip to Voice of Reason who appeared with Ruslan on this video:

The Truth About Martin Luther that Protestants Never Knew ‪@VoiceOfReason_‬
Ruslan KD | 19 Dec. 2024
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsJSC-Y-Kyc


PPPS, Voice of Reason is getting the history somewhat wrong, the 45 theses that the Catholic Church eventually accepted were not immediately put into practise until the Council of Trent (and he died the year after it started). He's also overdoing the abuse of indulgences going on. Money could replace certain acts, like going on a Crusade or carrying stones to the rebuilding of St. Peter (the indulgence this was about), but were absolutely not required to get an indulgence for saying Hail Mary or to get a plenary indulgence for saying the Rosary on All Saints' Day. Not even in Germany./HGL

Saturday, December 14, 2024

"War-Torn Angola"


In an obituary about Anthony Paul Duncan, who died 30 years ago, there is a mention of this country in this state:

Anthony had been part of a Frontline Fellowship mission team that had successfully delivered desperately needed medicines and Bibles into war-torn Angola


30 years ago? That was 1994. Way after Angola was liberated ... if that's the word ... from the Portuguese. 11 November 1975, right?

Whom was someone fighting now that the Portuguese were gone?

There was a time when I used to use Lumumba as a curse word. In Sweden, there are lots of people who use euphemisms for the Devil as curse words, and I considered a name like that of Patrice Lumumba was not far off.

The "war of independence" was 1961 to 1975. 14 years, right? Or 14 and a half.*

Now, how long did the next "War in Angola" last?

The Angolan Civil War (Portuguese: Guerra Civil Angolana) was a civil war in Angola, beginning in 1975 and continuing, with interludes, until 2002.


The English wiki doesn't tell us what the exact belligerents were, but the French does:

République populaire d'Angola (1975-1992)
République d'Angola (1992-2002)
Cuba
Organisation du peuple du Sud-Ouest africain (SWAPO)

Soutenus par

Union soviétique
Allemagne de l'Est
République fédérative socialiste de Yougoslavie
Corée du Nord
Bulgarie
Brésil
Mexique
 Union nationale pour l'indépendance totale de l'Angola (UNITA)
Afrique du Sud
Zaïre
Front national de libération de l'Angola (FNLA)
Front pour la Libération de l'enclave de Cabinda (FLEC)
Mercenaires

Soutenus par

États-Unis
France
Chine


1 million dead
land mines that still kill ...

Not from the Portuguese army, in the war of independence the casualties were 25,000 on Lumumba's side, killed, and on Salazar's somewhat over 10,000, taking the killed and the disabled together.

And 30,000—50,000 civilians killed. Not 100,000 taken together, the Civil war was 10 times as lethal ... even if it wasn't even twice as long.

Maybe Salazar had a point?/HGL

* Seems that the fighting ceased in 1974 ...

See also:

ANTHONY DUNCAN DIED IN THE SERVICE OF CHRIST
https://www.frontlinemissionsa.org/news/anthony-duncan-died-in-the-service-of-christ


Guerre civile angolaise
https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerre_civile_angolaise

Monday, December 9, 2024

How Do Fascist Régimes Fall?


Why not give an overview?

  • 1920, the Italian Regency of Carnaro capitulated to Italy;
  • 1938, the Austro-Fascist régime fell, agressed by Hitler in the Anschluss;
  • 1939, the Sanacja régime (Poland) fell, agressed by Hitler in the outbreak of WW-II;
  • 1942, the Free Zone of Vichy France was put under German military administration;
  • 1943, the Mussolini era of the Kingdom of Italy ended, Mussolini being arrested by the King, in connection with the Allied Invasion;
  • 1944, the Horthy era ends by National Socialist invasion;
  • 1944, the Pétain era ends by Allied Invasion;
  • 1945, the Salò Republic (also under Mussolini, liberated by the Germans and in a sense their puppet) ended, by Allied Invasion;
  • 1974, four years after the death of Salazar, the Carnation Revolution ended the dictatorial forms of power, not the least because officers were tired of the war in Angola;
  • 1975 to 1977, Francoism fell by La transición, Juan Carlos implementing a return to regional and multiparty liberties after Franco's death.


So, the main cause is, the states were small and open to foreign invasion, from Hitler or Allies or both. In the very first case, from pre-Fascist Italy.

The two surviving Fascist régimes after 1945, the leaders die, and after that:

  • the successor is less popular, which turns to impopular due to war fatigue;
  • the successor is not interested in continuing Fascism.


That a country falls prey to invasion, is hardly a question of its régime, but more of the ambitions of the invaders.

Is Peronism a Fascism? A certain Finchelstein, cited on the wiki of Peronism, denies it in these terms:

The core differences that Finchelstein noted between Peronism and fascism were: "While fascism mobilized the middle classes, Peronism rallied the working class. While fascism gave war, imperialism, and racism to Europe and the world, Peronism never provoked war." He also argued that "In contrast to fascism, which used democracy to destroy itself and establish a dictatorship, Peronism originated in a military dictatorship, but established a populist authoritarian democracy. Fascism sustained itself in the ideal of violence and war as sublime values of nationality and the leader’s persona. In military terms, it mobilized the masses but tended to demobilize them in social terms. Peronism inverted the terms of the fascist equation."


Look what Fascisms Finchelstein just reclassified as Peronism!

"While fascism mobilized the middle classes, Peronism rallied the working class."


José Antonio. ¡Presente!

"While fascism gave war, imperialism, and racism to Europe and the world, Peronism never provoked war."


Hoch Dollfuss!

"In contrast to fascism, which used democracy to destroy itself and establish a dictatorship,"


Is Finchelstein thinking of Nazism? Some, including me, would not classify it as a Fascism.

"Peronism originated in a military dictatorship, but established a populist authoritarian democracy."


Spain 1939 to 1977.

Ireland from the War of Independence to the long rule of Éamon de Valera with others.

Poland in the early days of Pilsudski.

"Fascism sustained itself in the ideal of violence and war as sublime values of nationality and the leader’s persona. In military terms, it mobilized the masses but tended to demobilize them in social terms"


Finchelstein again is confusing it with National Socialism.

"Peronism inverted the terms of the fascist equation."


Or better, some Fascisms, including Peronism, inverted the terms of the Nazi equation. Though admittedly, Gentile and at times Mussolini did express themselves in terms lending to this confusion of Fascism with Nazism.

Éamon would be somewhat like Juan insofar as it is hard to know when the régime ended, since it was not a dictatorship. Or if it has ended. However, overdoing immigration, apparently, to judge from the news, and legalising abortion and gay marriage, in recent years, that would count as the spirit of de Valera at least taking a huge nap.

I have not included the Argentine Junta, which I classify as Stalinism with Capitalism and some sense of Catholicism, just as at present Red China (which is lots worse) is allowing Capitalism. I have also not counted Pinochet, whom I like better than the Junta, since his economic policies were Capitalist with not much even trace of Corporatism. Mussolini would have been adverse to his view of workers. So would, obviously, Perón or de Valera.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Paris
Immaculate Conception of the BVM
9.XII.2024