A few anti-democratic spectacles and legends seems to always be in the way, preventing people to truly understand their own power...

Yes, democracy does not have the legends on which ideals of civilised and ruthless kingdoms have been built, mostly through wars and bunfights. How kings are (were) appointed has always been a mystery to me… How StuffWorks stuffs it up big time:...

The concept of royalty is centuries ­old. It originated with the feudal systems of medieval Europe. Under feudalism, there were a few very powerful landowners who acquired large amounts of territory through military force or purchase. These landowners became high-ranking lords, and one of them was crowned king. This probably happened through a show of military force or through political machinations, or some combination of the two. Powerful as they were, these lords controlled too much territory to manage on their own. They would name vassals, lower-ranking nobles who were granted some property and whatever income it generated (usually through rents paid by commoners or profits from farming). In return, the vassal would act as administrator of that territory. More importantly, the vassal was obligated to provide military aid to his lord. He would raise a private army, and if his territory was large enough, he might create several vassals of his own below him.

https://history.howstuffworks.com/historical-figures/royalty1.htm

-------------------------

You would know, because you are erudite — and not sexist like the above article — that Kings (and Queens) did not just appear in the Middle-Ages Feudalism, from ornate pot-plants. Kings are mentioned in the bible as a fait accompli. The famous ones are many: King Saul, said to be the first king of Israel was for a time a good king but god rejected him because of his disobedience. Holly mackerels, this means fuck all. Obey?

David was chosen (by god?) to be the next king, though it would be about ten years before David would sit on the throne. It takes a long time to tell this story...

Such stories may hold muddled historical gory truth of Middle-Eastern tribes fighting each others, but intertwined with the godly illusions, they become legends of sin, righteousness, obedience, repentance, predestination, god messages and more sins — all with not a single true meaning, but the survival of whatever tribe stealing from another… The legends were presented as the motivators for people to fight for their deluded cheese, which by now has taken the shape of the big cheese, the king. 

But wasn’t there a king before Saul? Good question… Sure but he was not that of Israel per se… He was Melchizedek, the king of Salem and priest of El Elyon ("most high god"). He was so popular that Abrahams gave him 10 per cent of his own looting and ransacking of other tribes… Hey, these tribes deserved to be looted because they were pagans.

We are told by religious scholars without laughing that "Melchizedek couldn’t have been [god]-the-Father because he was the priest of the Most High God. He could only have been the eternal, preexistent Word who later became Jesus Christ, the Son of God."

———————————

So, David was a humble shepherd. We love stories of ordinary blokes rising through the ranks… Often represented as a puny kid — even by some Renaissance sculptors, including Andrea del Verrocchio, in 1476, it was only when Michelangelo did his famous sculpture  that everyone could see that he had a bit of muscle, a small dick, large hands and a big head. 

It went that Saul, the first king of Israel, failed to achieve victory against an enemy tribe, the Philistines — the eternal baddies (they are called Palestinians these days)… What was wrong with him? Was god not on his side? Were his troops full of wimps? God Himself (god is a male) sent the Prophet Samuel to Bethlehem to find David, who was a humble shepherd with sheep, but was also a talented musician with the harp. Plenty of lonely nights on them hills. Samuel brought David to Saul's court, where his music was so soothing that Saul called David whenever he was approached by “evil spirit” sent by god. Hello? God send evil spirits to Saul? Why? To annoy the shit out of him? Was Saul a bad man or just bad because god sent him evil spirits? Taken by David’s musical talents, Saul appointed him as his armour bearer. Why? Was there a helmet? Is music soothing?...

Soon, another battle with the Philistines loomed. This time, the Philistines had a brand new weapon: a giant named Goliath who carried a huge bronze spear. The Israelites "were frozen in fear" — except young David who, the silly kid, armed with a sling, picked a stone from a riverbed and slung it at Goliath’s head. The stone struck the giant and killed him. Off course, what is not mentioned in the bible is that Goliath had a previous brain aneurism that flared up when the stone hit his helmet… He had a helmet, didn’t he not? No?... The Philistines fled and the Israelites rejoiced. Saul had no choice but to place young David at the head of his army of wimps, did he not? It seems that god Himself (god is a male) had written the script. Used to guard sheep, David could be in charge of men, could he not?

David then married Saul’s daughter Michal — this is really the stuff of FAIRY TALES, including Shriek. Soon the young new general, David, and the king started to fight. Why? Saul even began to plot to kill David. David had "little choice" but to flee to enemy territory. That’s a bit wimpish, is it not?

Soon, the country was torn by war again as Philistine forces, recovered from their giant’s death, had gathered at Mount Gilboa… Saul and his sons, all serving as commanders in his army, rushed to meet them. But God had turned against Saul (why?), and the Israelite were decimated, including all of Saul’s sons. Badly wounded, Saul then fell upon his own sword. No Persifal to save him...


The Philistines conquered the Hebrew highlands. Saul’s only surviving son, Ishbaal, was anointed king by the northern tribes, in Jerusalem?... Oh, I thought all of Saul’s sons had died in battle? Obviously not. Meanwhile the southern elders went to Hebron, David’s military base, and anointed David, king "over the house of Judah".

David ignored the Philistines and captured Jerusalem. David then defeated the Philistines. All of the regions in Canaan came under his control.

See also: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/culture/people-in-the-bible/story-king-david-goliath/

——————————————

"And he had 700 wives who were princesses and 300 concubines, and his wives gradually inclined his heart.” What a prick! No wonder Saul wanted to get rid of David!

Of course, the cycle of prosperity and decrepitude followed: forgetting god and His (god is a male) laws, falling into idolatry, being taken into captivity, repentance, restoration to the land and prosperity again, only to start the cycle all over again. "It was as if Israel never learned her lesson, but many nations are falling into this same trap today." 
Read more: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/christiancrier/2015/10/10/a-list-of-kings-from-the-bible/

———————————
So here we are...
Democracy (Greek: δημοκρατία, dēmokratiā, from dēmos 'people' and kratos 'rule') is a system of government in which the people have the authority to choose their governing body. We pick representatives to sort out how authority is shared among us. 

Is present Democracy really creating a government by the people for the people? Or do we elect a bunch of psychopaths to lead us with relative bullshit into an uncertain future for a timeframe modified by the elected morons, so they can milk their parliamentary pension? Do we, the plebs, go back to sleep or do we protest? Is serenity a gift or a skill? Are we all too different to come to a political consensus? Is socialism coming to America?

We enter the kingdom of Amfortas, in the legend of Parsifal that Wagner turned into his last work… 

Wagner took Parzival, a German epic poem by Wolfram von Eschenbach, as a framework, but Wagner made the tale his own by setting up the contradictions of purity and desecration, self-control and licentiousness. Not religious, Wagner anyway introduced elements of Christian tradition, including the Grail and the spear that was believed to have wounded Jesus on the cross. Here we cannot bypass Monty Python with their masterpiece which could be a spoof on Wagner’s Parsifal or a direct bypass to the central core of Christianity silly beliefs.

In Parsifal, Amfortas, the king, suffers from a wound that does not heal. Kundry, the witch who serves the knights and also serves the evil sorcerer Klingsor — has brought herbs from Arabia, hoping they will heal him. Amfortas, brought on stage on a portable bed, is not optimistic.

 

There you are: optimism being fifty per cent of any cure (we know this, don’t we?) we can see that this story is going to need some help.

Thus a character named Gurnemanz tells us how the Grail and the spear that had pierced Jesus’ side came into their care but got lost by Amfortas, when he was wounded by Klingsor who had seized the spear. Only by regaining the spear and by finding a pure and innocent man can Amfortas be saved. Ah, the old innocent (young?) man trick… Why? Thus come Parsifal to the rescue via various tricks of purity and desecration, self-control and licentiousness. By the end, the king Amfortas is saved, to die a few years later of old age, like we all do — unless we fall under a bus or catch a coronavirus...

 

Legends are the bread and butter of populaces' beliefs. In our recent systems, the news cycle is as good as it gets... We get the skin of events, rarely do we get the complete picture and the manipulations from god CIA... As an aside, in another incarnation, back in the 1980s, Gus explored “The Need to Believe" for a major work exploring the social needs and wants. Why do we believe that Queen Elizabeth is a necessity to our pseudo-democracy, for example?

 

When do we become a non-deluded democratic people?

The rest to come, may be… Please note that our river stones are now nuclear tipped... This will give us a mighty headache...

 

 

Gus leonisky

More than a non-believer.