ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Here’s what that unsafe site says about the book.
A novel about the true history of Christianity
978-620-0-48933-3
The Yellow Cow is a tragic-comic humanist novel about a young man from Ireland (Eire) named Llywelyn O’Dweyer, whose purpose in life is to acquire wisdom. Living in the early years of Christianity, he can see that this religion is just a copy of many others, all much older. He knows that Christ never existed and that his story is mostly copied from the biography of the god Mithras. Llywelyn decides to discover the true history of Christianity, but he has to abandon his purpose of finding out who founded Christianity, and where it happened because Christians are destroying the entire Greco-Roman culture and murdering anyone who dares to denounce their evil plan. When Llywelyn was about to give up his quest, he had a series of dreams that showed him the answers to all his questions. The young man organizes these dreams into four stories, each with a female protagonist, including Hypatia of Alexandria, the smartest woman of classic times. The last story sheds light on Llywelyn O’Dweyer’s questions, and the reader will be in for a surprise at what it says about who founded Christianity, why and where this religion came into being.
Authors
Paul Costa Gavin
Book language
English
Published on
2023-06-13
Publishing house
JustFiction Edition
Number of pages
316
Price (EUR )
€66.90This book looks amusing but I doubt if anyone on benefits will be able to afford a copy:
https://www.morebooks.shop/shop-ui/shop/book-launch-offer/4866fe693aa2aaa9dddaa58d388c83e5a43d97c3
Another document for the dossier being built up against Greta Thunberg for taking sides in a war:
Zelenskyy meets Greta Thunberg in Kyiv to address the war’s effect on ecology
She is now completely discredited and has turned into a common or garden politician.
William Morris wrote somewhere that adulteration would be inconceivable in socialism as a society where production was directly for people to use, and asked why on Earth in such a society would substandard stuff be produced?
This also means that there would be no need for Trading Standards officers either.
Not content with turning against the Russian-speaking minority, the Ukrainian nationalists now want to deal with the Hungarian-speaking minority. And we’re supposed to support the Ukraine regime to uphold “democratic values”.
I have now read that article on General Caffarelli and while he is reported as saying “I contend that the laws that sanction property sanction a usurpation, a theft”. But he then went on to say that, as it would be inconvenient to abolish them, the best that could be done would be to modify them to make them less unfair. So Napoleon probably didn’t hear the case for common ownership, after all, at least not from Caffarelli.
It was, actually. Having said that, those who vote for the raving loony monsters are making a point — a protest against conventional politics and its irrelevance to the life of ordinary people, taking the piss out of its empty election promises by making absurd ones. It’s an alternative to abstention and going fishing on election day. Understandable if not particularly constructive.
There are 17 candidates including Piers Corbyn and Laurence Fox not to mention Count Binface and the Monster Raving Loony Party. It’s a farce. That’s why we stopped contesting by-elections some years ago now. But they are still occasions when people think and talk about politics more than usual.
I don’t think this analysis by this Trotsky group stands up. I don’t think that Prigozhin was attempting to seize power or appealing to some “pro-NATO faction within the Russian ruling class”. (Who are they anyway? – I can’t see any section of the Russian ruling class being “pro-NATO” any more than there being a pro-Russia section of the US ruling class. Some might have thought the invasion of Ukraine unwise or a mistake and wanted to deal with the NATO threat to their state in a different way, but that’s not the sane thing.)
It seems more like a demonstration to win some concessions for his business (after all, he runs a profit-seeking company). If they had wanted to, those in control of the Russian state could easily have stopped a few tanks at any point on their way to Moscow. I would have thought, from their point of view, they handled it quite well, dealing with it without needing to use violence.
It was dramatic stuff in the short time it lasted but this “Prigozhin affair” risks being blown up out of all proportion like the 6 January riot in Washington in 2021. I can’t see it having any effect on the course of the war.
Actually “Another Ernst Roehm . . . same fate awaits” was one of the comments on Sputnik here:
Not quite. But Minsk must be better than Siberia.
Looks as if he has been taking advice from the Grand Old Duke of York as well as from Montgomery;
In his 1962 book Bonaparte in Egypt J. Christopher Herold wrote:
“During the voyage to Egypt in 1798. When Bonaparte in his pose as intellectual was holding debates on all kinds of themes, a three-day discussion of property was inspired by Rouseau’s theories about inequality. General Caffarelli maintained that property was only ‘usurpation and theft’, and produced an elaborate blueprint for its abolition.” (p. 53).
This suggests that Napoleon was aware of the case for “communisme”.
More on Caffarelli’s views in this article in French entitled “Un socialiste inattendu: Le général Caffarelli du Falga.”
https://www.jstor.org/stable/40939686
Maximilien Caffarelli died in 1799 at the age of 43 as a result of a wound sustained in the campaign.
(Thanks to the late comrade Jack Bradley who gave me a note in this years ago.)
More on the stab-in-the-back myth as to why Germany lost WW1 which Putin has adopted to explain why Russia didn’t win it either.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stab-in-the-back_myth
A writer in the Guardian has also picked up Putin’s reference to 1917:
“Putin compared Prigozhin’s actions to the “intrigues” that he said brought down the Russian army, and then the state itself, in 1917. He’s not wrong – this is not unlike the way Russian army units left the front en masse during that military collapse.”
I don’t think that’s the parallel. I would have thought it’s more like the Kornilov attempted coup in September 1917:
In his emergency televised speech today Putin seems to be likening Prigozhin’s action to the overthrow of the pro-war Kerensky provisional government in November 1917 or to the overthrow of the tsar in March that year:
“Therefore, any actions that split our nation are essentially a betrayal of our people, of our comrades-in-arms who are now fighting at the frontline. This is a knife in the back of our country and our people.
A blow like this was dealt to Russia in 1917, when the country was fighting in World War I. But the victory was stolen from it: intrigues, squabbles and politicking behind the backs of the army and the nation turned into the greatest turmoil, the destruction of the army and the collapse of the state, and the loss of vast territories, ultimately leading to the tragedy of the civil war.”http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/71496
This was the argument of the Russia Whites (and also of the German nationalists who argued that Germany would have won had its army not been stabbed in the back).
Putin is clearly a raving Russian nationalist. What sort of other person could really believe that Russia would have won the war on the eastern front if there hadn’t have been a revolution against the Tsar in Russia in 1917?
Which makes it the more odd that so many Stalinists (such as our late scotch friend) and Trotskyists should be supporting Russia in the current war.
Stopping the war and slaughter on the eastern front was about the only good thing the Bolsheviks did. (Ok, they also smashed the power of the Russian Orthodox Church — which Putin has restored.)
