I get some comments on this site and a lot of mail with some very interesting questions. Hence I will periodically answer some of the more interesting questions withholding names (unless a reader is interested in having his/her or “a” name listed). One note here: Many, if not all, questions are answered in my writings. I’ve tried to anticipate possible questions regarding my thesis and address these preemptively. My writings on this important topic (REM) are complete, copious and will be published both here and in serialized book form. Apologies for any typos on this occasional “Question Time” section especially.
Thank you for your question “reader.” Let me know if you want me to list a name.
Reader: One thing you mentioned on your podcast The Apollonian Transmission when discussing the Arthurian legend was your mention of the Book of Daniel prophecy of the Statue depicting the Head of Gold, Babylon, the chest of Silver, the Medo-Persian, the Copper waist, the Greek Empire, and the legs of Iron, the Roman Empire – with the final part of the statue being the feet mixed with iron and clay.
First, why do you feel that the Babylonian and Persian Empires were Aryan – and not Semetic – being that these empires developed from cultures in the Fertile Crescent / Middle East?
M. Brahmin: My thinking derives in part from Gobineau thinking that civilizations are in their origin Aryan. The perception that these empires you mention were Semitic arises primarily from language considerations. In Sumer we find rife bilingualism, yet certainly we know that Sumer was Aryan in its origin. There an Akkadian culture encroached.
In an important sense it is true that the civilizations you mentioned are Semitic in that these civilizations were dominated by Semites from earlier on. Indeed, in the manner our society is now dominated by Semites (and I would argue since the fall of Rome). This becomes especially apparent through an analysis of myth, where, for example, the Caelus-like sky God Anu, an Aryan founding God, is displaced beneath the Saturn-like Enlil, a Semitic figure.
Yet it is incorrect to assume that these civilizations, during their health, were constituted primarily of Semites any more than we would understand Christian Europe constituted primarily of Semites despite bowing to a Jewish God and an enabled Jewish merchant class. To the extent a civilization remains an empire or important on the world scene, it requires an Aryan body, as resource producers, as an organizing element and to serve a military function.
For example, the notion that China is a “world player” is on some level wholly erroneous. China has a parasitic relationship with the West and itself represents a kind of “death” or homeostasis of civilization. In the absence of the West, it would remain a wholly uncreative society for eons. Hence we base our understanding on the ancients, to some large extent, on our understanding of moderns. This I call “The Similarity of the Ancients.”
It any case, the Book of Daniel, in particular, was set in Babylon but very likely written in Greece in the 2nd century as an allegory for the Jewish relationship to Greeks. But again, we understand Babylon as containing Aryan elements even especially kingly, ruling and warlike elements which characterize Aryans.
Jewish symbolism and world symbolism more generally identifies the lion especially with the Aryan (Jacob’s blessing Judah is an important exception to this. I refer to this as the “Jacobean Swap”). We find this with Shemesh/Utu a solar Aryan God identified with the lion. We find this with the Hebrew word Ari that means both “lion” and “Aryan.” Likewise, a strong trend in JEM identifies Jews as working through Aryans as front-men, to use the modern parlance. The myth of the Angel, for example, is a reference to a dominated Aryan. This will be explicated in my writings.
Reader: Second, what is your means of delineation between an Aryan Culture, a Semitic Culture, and which category do you place other Empires of antiquity such as Egypt, Sumerian, Chinese, and Mayan, Inca and Aztec?
M. Brahmin: Again, Gobineau has influenced my thinking on this topic. My contention is that Aryans are founders and Semites, or proto-Jews, closers. The latter is my innovation. Semites or proto-Jews vie for sexual, racial and resource dominance with Aryans primarily through the development of culture, Religion and Art. Saturn the reaper, the “Son of Man” as reaper in Revelation, these motifs point to an understanding of Jews as “closers.” Race specializes and develops from there to new conditions, especially in reaction to urbanization, adapting for sexual success. Though, of course, this describes especially a primary human settlement. But lets keep in the safer, less speculative civilizational context. Through recorded history, preformed, specialized races appear through migration from deceased civilizations and realize sexual success in these newer civilizations having already adapted to late civilization conditions.
Reader: Third: Are you familiar with the studies and research of Graham Hancock, Randall Carlson, and their theories of rapid environmental cataclysm at the end of the Younger Drias and their theories of civilization prior to the last ice age 14,000 to 10,000 BC?
M. Brahmin: I’ll look it up.