Posts tagged "adam"

The Normal State of Man: Misery & Tyranny

Professor Milton Friedman gives a fascinating conjecture on the “Golden Ages” of different societies throughout history. He also points out the fundamental flaw inherent in every welfare state.

Excerpt from “The Open Mind” – A Nobel Laureate on the American Economy (1977)
http://www.theopenmind.tv/searcharchive_episode_output.asp?id=493

Duration : 0:9:7

Read more…

“Unquenchable Russia”, or Forbidden Themes in Nabokov’s Prose

“…What I feel to be the real modern world is the world the artist creates, his own mirage, which becomes a new mir (“world” in Russian) by the very act of his shedding, as it were, the age he lives in” . Such an answer Nabokov once gave to an interviewer who was interested in his opinion regarding the modern world and contemporary politics. The book which contains this interview as well as many others, is entitled Strong Opinions, and, indeed, Nabokov is well-known not only for his brilliant fiction but for his original, independent and uncompromising views on creativity, art and the place of artist in the world. Whenever interviewed, he avoided discussion of “general ideas” such as social, political and moral issues and asserted that such global concerns lay outside the realm of art: “A work of art has no importance whatever to society. It is only important to the individual, and only the individual reader is important to me. I don’t give a damn for the group, the community, the masses, and so forth… There can be no question that what makes a work of fiction safe from larvae and rust is not its social importance but its art, only its art . A work of art, for Nabokov, is a world in itself, brought to life by one’s creative imagination. It leads its own independent existence, unrelated to its historical surroundings and realities. In the introduction to his Lectures on Literature Nabokov explains once again: “…The real writer, the fellow who sends planets spinning and models a man asleep and eagerly tampers with the sleeper’s rib, that kind of author has no given values at his disposal: he must create them himself. The art of writing is a futile business if it does not imply first of all the art of seeing the world as the potentiality of fiction” . In this statement, visions of cosmic grandeur and an obvious reference to the story of Adam and Eve reflect a parallel between creator-artist and creator-God. In one of his interviews Nabokov explicitly brings out this comparison: “A creative writer must study carefully the works of his rivals, including the Almighty. He must possess the inborn capacity not only of recombining but of re-creating the given world” .

Nabokov’s position is, to a degree, a reaction to the situation in Soviet Russia, where demands of the state dominated the needs of a human being, where the individual was suppressed by the collective and details by generalities. He asserts once again the power and independence of personal creativity, the ability of one’s imagination to build worlds of its own, and makes a sharp distinction between a work of fiction and everything outside of it, including the personality of its creator. “Literature is invention. Fiction is fiction. To call a story a true story is an insult to both truth and art” .

Nabokov insisted on a specific approach to literature from the readers as well. He renounced the usual tendencies of identifying oneself with a book’s characters, searching for clues to the social and political realities of the time the work was written, or trying to form “general ideas” about a book without absorbing all its specific details. Emotional involvement, he pointed out, could also prevent the reader from objective appreciation of the work “…A wise reader reads the book of genius not with his heart, not so much with his brain, but with his spine. It is there that occurs the telltale tingle even though we must keep a little aloof, a little detached when reading” .

Nabokov avoided formulating his ideas under the famous slogan “art for art’s sake” just as he avoided labels of all kinds, but this well-known phrase can undoubtedly be used to describe his views and attitudes towards literature. In this hierarchy of values, aesthetic concerns dominate all others, and the influence of a great work of art on its reader is limited to a “tingle in the spine”. However, it remains to be seen, to what extent Nabokov’s ideas penetrate his own fiction; whether his novels are entirely a product of his creative imagination or a result of the deep personal experience that saturates them with great intensity.

Nabokov changed countries and languages during his creative life, and it is interesting to analyze whether these changes affected his books. Comparing two of Nabokov’s novels, The Gift, written in Russian mostly in Berlin of the 1930s, and Pale Fire, written in English at a much later date, can provide an insight into these questions.

As Nabokov mentioned in the foreword to The Gift, “the main heroine” of the novel is Russian literature, and the main character is a writer, an emigre author Fyodor Godunov-Cherdyntsev, who shares many autobiographical details with Nabokov. Like Nabokov during his post-Cambridge years, Fyodor lives in Berlin of the 1920s, writes poetry and makes a living by giving lessons in English and French. He leads, for the most part, a solitary existence, devoting his time first and foremost to literature. Happy childhood in St. Petersburg, love of butterflies and chess problems, synesthesia, – all this Fyodor has in common with Nabokov. Description of certain episodes mirrors incidents from Nabokov’s own life, depicted much later in his autobiographical book Speak, Memory, – for example, the story of a childhood illness: high fever, obsession with numbers and a huge Faber pencil, given as a gift by the mother.

Perhaps, the most significant trait that Fyodor shares with Nabokov is passionate love of literary language, faith in the power of the written word: “Since there were things he (Fyodor) wanted to express just as naturally as unrestrainedly as the lungs want to expand, hence words suitable for breathing ought to exist” . Fyodor reflects on his youthful interest in rhyme and meter, analyzing the very mechanisms by which words interact and fit together like pieces of a puzzle to form the harmonious whole of a poem. Fyodor shares Nabokov’s dislike of generalities such as social issues or psychiatry. When he briefly considers the possibility of fulfilling his acquaintance, Mme. Chernyshevski’s yet unvoiced request to write about her son, he explains his aversion to the idea as follows: “I would have become enmired involuntarily in a “deep” social-interest novel with a disgusting Freudian reek” .

Most clearly, Fyodor’s (and Nabokov’s) views on literature are expressed in Fyodor’s (imaginary) conversations with Koncheyev – a fellow emigre poet, the only one whose work he admires and whose opinions he considers valuable. When Fyodor and Koncheyev leave a literary gathering and walk together down the street, a unique, brilliant dialogue, filled with allusions to various works of Russian literature, takes place between them. “…There are only two kinds of books: bedside and wastebasket. Either I love a writer fervently, or throw him away entirely” , – declares Fyodor, and the two proceed to discuss what, in their opinion, is the best and the worst in the works by famous Russian writers. Both are utterly uninterested in “general ideas” or the moral significance of the writings they talk about (aspects which always attracted Russian critics and gained new importance in the Soviet period), and all they do is lovingly point out purely artistic findings of this or that writer. They praise Leskov’s Jesus – “the ghostly Galilean, cool and gentle, in a robe the color of ripening plum” or “the gray sheen of Mme. Odintsev’s black silks” in Turgenev’s Fathers and Sons. Speaking of dismissed Dostoyevski, Fyodor notes: “In the Karamazovs, there is somewhere a circular mark left by a wet wine glass on an outdoor table”, – and that, for him, is the only thing “worth saving” . As for several writers known for their beautiful depictions of nature, Fyodor ruthlessly criticizes them for mistakes in their descriptions of natural phenomena: “My father used to find all kinds of howlers in Turgenev’s and Tolstoy’s hunting scenes and descriptions of nature, and as for the wretched Aksakov, let’s not even discuss his disgraceful blunders in this field” . All these statements obviously echo Nabokov’s own approach to literature, with his love of detail, his insistence on accurate knowledge of the natural world and dismissal of any other criteria in judging works of literature.

Nabokov’s belief in the power of deception and invention in creating fiction frequently finds expression in his attempts to mislead the reader, to establish this or that false move in the development of the plot, which, after a few pages, turns out to be an illusion, a figment of the character’s imagination. The whole exchange between Fyodor and Koncheyev proves to be such an illusion: “Whose business is it that actually we parted at the very first corner, and that I have been reciting a fictitious dialogue with myself as supplied by a self-teaching handbook of literary inspiration?” However, the significance of this non-existent conversation in the novel is not limited to expression of opinions on art and display of Nabokov’s mystification devices. It shows the extent of Fyodor’s loneliness, the absence of interlocutors with whom he could share his extensive knowledge of literature and love of language: the degree of detachment from the surrounding world. In his book Speak, Memory Nabokov describes the way native Europeans were perceived by Russian immigrants in Germany or France: “These aborigines were to the mind’s eye as flat and transparent as figures cut out of cellophane, and although we used their gadgets, applauded their clowns, picked their roadside plums and apples, no real communication, of the rich human sort so widespread in our own midst, existed between us and them” . The Gift recreates that atmosphere of cultural and human isolation in which Fyodor has to dwell. Deprived of his own cultural environment, Fyodor feels nothing but resentment towards the German-speaking world he is trapped in. “The Russian conviction that the German is in small numbers vulgar and in large numbers – unbearably vulgar was, he knew, a conviction unworthy of an artist” , – and still he cannot help it, as he directs all his irrational hatred at a German who pushes him in a bus (and who, ironically, turns out to be a Russian).

Like Nabokov, Fyodor is trilingual, but his French and English in his current situation serve a purely utilitarian purpose, whereas Russian remains the language of his soul and his art. Riding a bus to one of his tedious teaching jobs, Fyodor thinks of himself: “…there he is, a special, rare and as yet undescribed and unnamed variant of man, and he is occupied with God knows what, rushing from lesson to lesson, wasting his youth on a boring and empty task, on the mediocre teaching of foreign languages – when he has his own language, out of which he can make anything he likes – a midge, a mammoth, a thousand different clouds” . This is why there are hardly any examples of word play and language switch in The Gift.

On the way to yet another hateful lesson Fyodor becomes completely immersed in the memories of Russia and his past life there, – memories ”swift and senseless, visiting him like an attack of a fatal illness at any hour, in any place” . The warm, sunny vision of the Russian countryside after a short summer rain stands out in such a sharp contrast with the surrounding colorless reality and the upcoming encounter with a hopeless pupil, that Fyodor ends up skipping the lesson and going home to his writings. This is another theme expressed in The Gift with great emotional power – the theme of nostalgia, longing for the lost homeland. Whenever faced with the question about Russia during his interviews, Nabokov gave replies such as “all the Russia I need is always with me” or “exile means to an artist only one thing – the banning of his books” . Sometimes, however, he speaks of Russia quite differently: “In the first decade of our dwindling century, during trips with my family to Western Europe, I imagined, in bedtime reveries, what it would be like to become an exile who longed for a remote, sad and (right epithet coming) unquenchable Russia, under the eucalypti of exotic resorts. Lenin and his police nicely arranged the realization of that fantasy” .

References to Russia in Nabokov’s novels, particularly The Gift, bear a trace of an overwhelming and bitter sense of loss, coming, undoubtedly, from personal experience. Like Nabokov, Fyodor transforms his inner world into art, and his poetry, born out of childhood memories, justifies, as he says, the years spent in exile. But even creative fulfillment in literature cannot fully relieve Fyodor of his nostalgia, which sometimes becomes almost a physical sensation: “For a long time he had wanted to express somehow that it was in his feet that he had the feeling of Russia, that he could touch and recognize all of her with his soles, as a blind man feels with his palms” . Again and again, he imagines an impossible return to his familiar and changed country: “And when will we return to Russia? What idiotic sentimentality, what a rapacious groan must our innocent hope convey to people in Russia. But our nostalgia is not historical – only human- how can one explain this to them?” Immediately following these lines is one of Nabokov’s central thoughts expressed through the words of his character and given a somewhat ironic ending: “It is easier for me, of course, than for another to live outside Russia, because I know for certain that I shall return – first because I took away the keys to her, and secondly because, no matter when, in a hundred, two hundred years, I shall live there in my books – or at least in some researcher’s footnote. There; now you have a historical hope, a literary-historical one…”

In this passage, there are two distinct perspectives on Russia, two different ways of perception – that of an artist and that of a simple human being, and it is the more independent, proud and detached position of an artist that Nabokov prefers to present to the world. He always vigorously protested against being identified with his characters, and, perhaps, it was his way of concealing that part of himself, which contained his own human feelings and dreams, often painful, often helplessly irresolvable. Nevertheless, just like in one of Fyodor’s childhood memories colors leak into his vision of letters and irrevocably affect his perception of language, this private and forbidden world of Nabokov inevitably enters his fiction in various guises and through different characters. Besides the theme of nostalgia, there is another highly personal development of the plot in The Gift, and it is Fyodor’s relationship with his father. Konstantin Godunov-Cherdyntsev is an explorer who is also very absorbed in his occupation and uninterested in the major upheavals that occur in Russia. In 1917, despite the troubled situation in Russia, he departs on one of his expeditions and never returns. It is another loss that haunts Fyodor: even though there is hardly any hope of seeing his father again, he keeps dreaming of his return, imagining that one day he would meet his father on the street, or hear a phone call… In one of the most poignant episodes in the novel, the phone rings, after all, in the middle of the night, and Fyodor rushes to the house of his former landlady along the streets of Berlin which suddenly become transformed into a beautiful, mysterious world somewhat reminiscent of St. Petersburg in a white night. Fyodor enters the room and sees his father. “With a moan and a sob Fyodor stepped toward him, and in the collective sensation of woolen jacket, big hands and the tender prickle of trimmed mustaches there swelled an ecstatically happy, living, enormous, paradisal warmth in which his icy heart melted and dissolved” . And again, almost unbearably this time, the whole scene turns out to be one of Nabokov’s false twists, and Fyodor wakes up from yet another dream to a cold and empty morning.

Nabokov denied a work of art any kind of “truth” aside from artistic one, but the episode with Fyodor’s father radiates with human truth: warmth, longing, vulnerability, the void of shattered hopes… One just has to remember the tragic death of Nabokov’s own father, to understand where all this is coming from.

In The Gift, covers are often transparent, and its hero is presented from multiple angles. He is not just a writer who “treats life as a possibility of fiction”, he is a human being who sees the world through the prism of his own experience, his own joys and sorrows.

The Gift was the last novel Nabokov wrote in Russian. In 1940, he immigrated to the United States and, since then, wrote his major works only in English. The change, as he said, was not easy: “My complete switch from Russian prose to English prose was exceedingly painful – like learning anew to handle things after losing seven or eight fingers in an explosion” . Pale Fire, one of Nabokov’s English novels, was written partially at the end of his stay in America, partially in Switzerland, where Nabokov spent his later years. The novel has important structural and thematic similarities to The Gift. Like The Gift, where a whole separate chapter is devoted to Fyodor’s biography of Chernyshevsky, a book on its own, Pale Fire contains a work of literature within it – a long poem written by an American poet John Shade. The rest of the novel is a commentary, which for the most part has nothing to do with the poem itself. It is an elaborate story of remote Zembla, whose king has been swept off the throne by the revolution and fled the country. Gradually, it becomes clear that Charles Kinbote, Shade’s neighbor and the author of the commentary, is himself the fugitive king. Therefore, as in The Gift, there is a theme of exile and a theme of creativity, though in Pale Fire they take quite a different development.

As Kinbote explains, “the name Zembla is a corruption not of the Russian zemlya, but of Semblerland, a land of reflections, of “resemblers” . Zemblan language resembles several European languages at the same time. There are obvious traces of Russian in it, and some words are borrowed almost unchanged: for example, there is a picture of bogtyr (bogatyr’ in Russian) in a Zemblan history book, and there are “stone-faced, square-shouldered komizars” (Russian: commissar) maintaining order on Zemblan streets after the revolution. Besides, French and German can be vaguely discerned in other phrases. “Minnamin, Gut mag alkan, Pern dirstan (my darling, God makes hungry, the Devil thirsty)” , – a Zemblan nurse says to Kinbote, and one hears, besides the Russian “alkat’” and, possibly, the English “pernicious”, “mon amie”, “Gott”, and the first person of the German “mochten”.

Nabokov in his interviews stressed that Zembla is not Russia, and, indeed, there is another Russia in the novel, a totalitarian state that contributes to the Zemblan revolution. Kinbote talks about “the tainted gold and the robot troops that a powerful police state from its vantage ground a few sea miles away was pouring into the Zemblan Revolution” . Kinbote’s constantly talks about Zembla, but his memories of it lack that depth of human feeling, which marks Fyodor’s nostalgia. Even though Kinbote repeats again and again “my Zembla”, “dazzling Zembla” , tenderness that shines through the best pages of The Gift, is missing from his story. It is essentially a story of himself and his escape from the country. For a king, Kinbote shows a remarkable lack of interest in the revolution that struck his country and the possible causes which led to it. He is more preoccupied with aesthetic and literary pleasures and calls the whole business of politics “a tiresome subject” . As for the revolution, all he can say about it is that it was “tedious and unnecessary” . In Kinbote’s attitude, there is some of Nabokov’s own indifference towards social and political issues. On the whole, the theme of exile is treated in the novel with certain coldness and detachment, but there are passages, which by their warmth and profound lyricism can be compared to The Gift. For example, Kinbote comments on his roommate who gets up early in morning and plants flowers with a very curious name: Heliotropium turgenevi. “This is the flower whose odor evokes with timeless intensity the dusk, and the garden bench, and a house of painted wood in a distant northern land” . Even aside from the reference to Turgenev, it is clear that this land, for Nabokov, is no other than Russia, – not the monstrous police state in the vicinity of Zembla, but the real, immortal, beloved Russia of Nabokov’s memory. And this short passage retains more emotional freshness and power than colorful descriptions of Zemblan mountains that have no counterpart in the author’s childhood recollections.

It seems that, to Kinbote, being in exile means not so much the loss of the homeland as the loss of his name and title (which he now has to hide), and thus partially the loss of his identity, and in this way his isolation and detachment is more complete than that of Fyodor in The Gift. One of the critics of Pale Fire interprets his behavior as follows: “…he is trying to get the poet John Shade to confirm his identity, to validate the Zemblan reality which is his hope of salvation by turning it into a poem” . With maniacal persistence Kinbote keeps talking with Shade about Zembla: “I mesmerized him with it, I saturated him with my vision, I pressed upon him, with a drunkard’s wild generosity, all that I was helpless myself to put into verse” . Kinbote calls his relationship with the poet “friendship”, but, in fact, he cannot care less about Shade as a human being with his own hopes and sorrows. While commenting on the poem, he utterly neglects the parts about Shade’s wife and daughter. Sybil Shade, who protects her husband from his neighbor’s intrusions, for Kinbote, is just as annoying obstacle in the way, and to him, the tender lines that Shade devotes to his wife are nothing but “embarrassing intimacies” . Kinbote haughtily deals with the theme of Shade’s daughter, Hazel’s, suicide, obviously a very painful and personal subject for the poet, as if it was merely a stylistic device: “The whole thing strikes me as too labored and long, especially since the synchronization device has been already worked to death by Flaubert and Joyce” . When Kinbote feels lonely and afraid in his empty house, he wishes that Shade had a heart attack, – just to have an excuse to come over and escape loneliness and fear. At the end of the novel, when Shade has been mistakenly shot by the assassin, his “friend” is in no hurry to call for help: instead, he rushes to hide the poem, which, he thinks, contains the story of his own life.

In comparison to Kinbote, John Shade appears to be a much more appealing character, and he possesses some traits that bring more human warmth into his image: he can be lazy, he likes hearty meals, brandy and wine; he loves his wife and daughter and is generally more tolerant towards people who are not as bright and talented as he is. Nabokov gives his character some of his most cherished thoughts. For example, Shade, who is also a teacher of literature, expresses his views on teaching: “First of all, dismiss ideas, and social background, and get the freshman to shiver, to get drunk on the poetry of Hamlet or Lear, to read with his spine and not with his skull” . However, since Shade’s personality is seen in the novel only through Kinbote’s uncaring eyes, his inner world is more or less concealed from the reader. It is only through Shade’s poem that one can glimpse into the questions, which preoccupy the poet. The poem, on the whole, is a painful, difficult search for meaning, an attempt to make sense of the whole puzzle of human life and death, to find a way of transcending one’s mortality. No human thought or emotion can relieve one from being trapped in one’s own finite world. Everything fails except art: art for its own sake, art that contains a unique, perfectly harmonized inner reality, which can be perceived as a reflection of a greater pattern:

I feel I understand

Existence, or at least a minute part,

Of my existence, only through my art,

In terms of combinational delight…

“Combinational delight”, indeed, is important not only in Shade’s poem but in the whole novel. As in The Gift, artistic detail is a focus of concentration in Pale Fire, but here attention is focused on an even subtler level where language itself is analyzed. Pale Fire is an example of extremely dense prose where individual words are more than just carriers of meaning: they become, in a way, themselves a subject of the novel. One of Shade’s warmest images of his family together is a memory of the evenings when both he and Sybil helped their daughter to understand really obscure words from her English textbook. A difference of one letter in the words “mountain” and “fountain” becomes crucial in the story of Shade’s attempt to penetrate the mystery of the hereafter. The book is filled with examples of word play, often involving several languages, and references to numerous works of literature (some of which are likely to be Nabokov’s own inventions). In Shade’s poem, there are such peculiar combinations as: “Fra Karamazov, mumbling his inept all is allowed” , which is a mixture of Alyosha Karamazov, Raskol’nikov, and, perhaps, Italian painter Fra Angelico with his intensely spiritual religious art. But nobody in the novel is more involved in digging into words than Kinbote. He is constantly preoccupied with deciphering literary allusions, musing over interplay of words, meanings, rhymes and sounds. Nabokov mentioned in his lectures that a dictionary should be a necessary attribute of a good reader, and, ironically, Kinbote, who can hardly be called a good reader, dutifully follows the lines of Shade’s masterpiece with his dictionary. For the most part, he is obsessively searching references to Zembla and his own life story in the poem, but sometimes he simply takes aesthetic pleasure in certain lines of it:

“Lines 131-132: I was the shadow of the waxwing slain by feigned remoteness in the windowpane.

The exquisite melody of the two lines opening the poem is picked up here. The repetition of that long-drawn note is saved from monotony by the subtle variation in line 132 where the assonance between its second word and the rhyme gives the ear a kind of languorous pleasure as would the echo of some half-remembered sorrowful song…” Shade’s commentator genuinely enjoys the magic of words, and so does Nabokov, whose multilingualism, artistic sense and incomparable mastery of language found full expression in the creation of the truly marvelous poem, as well as other parts of the novel.

Perhaps, the refined world of literature allows Kinbote a way of escape from his troubled personal reality, and so it does for Shade, and, to a degree, for Fyodor in The Gift, and, ultimately, for Nabokov. In his commentary, Kinbote recounts an episode when someone in the presence of Shade tells a story of a mad railroad worker, who “thought he was God and began redirecting the trains”. “That (“mad”) is the wrong word”, – he (Shade) said. – “One should not apply it to a person who deliberately peels off a drab and unhappy past and replaces it with a brilliant invention” . Still, comparison of Nabokov’s novels shows that the most “brilliant invention” becomes truly alive only if the light of one’s own human experience, however “drab and unhappy”, illuminates it from within. In Pale Fire the walls sheltering Nabokov’s private world of memory and feeling are thicker than in The Gift, and the novel follows more closely Nabokov’s ideas of art as elegant deception, an entirely invented world which should be approached on aesthetic rather than emotional grounds. This is the major difference between Pale Fire and The Gift.

Time is likely to be one of the factors behind this change: Pale Fire was written almost twenty years later than The Gift, as greater and greater distance separated Nabokov from his Russian past with which he had stronger emotional bond than with the years spent abroad. Another important factor is, probably, language. Nabokov was very proud of his English works and repeatedly called himself an American writer, but sometimes he provided his readers with unexpected revelations such as: “My private tragedy, which cannot, indeed should not, be anybody’s concern, is that I had to abandon my natural language, my natural idiom, my rich, infinitely rich and docile Russian tongue, for a second-rate brand of English” . In another interview, when asked which language he considered the most beautiful, Nabokov replied: “My head says English, my heart, Russian, my ear, French” . It is possible to say that for him Russian conveyed emotional power, while English had more of an intellectual appeal, and this is one of the reasons why Pale Fire, written in English, appeals to the brain more than it does to feelings.

One of the most striking confessions that bridges Nabokov’s inner world with his public self exists in a poem. An Evening of Russian Poetry, written in English in 1945, is a rhymed presentation of a public lecture which Nabokov gives to an audience of American students, predominantly female. Russian poetry is the theme of the lecture, but Nabokov approaches it in the way typical for him: he does not talk about schools, trends and periods. Again, he speaks of letters, shapes, individual intricate details, and hidden tenderness shines through his words, staying invisible for his listeners. They ask him questions about his favorite trees and stones, echoing that insensitive critic from The Gift, whose “discussion of Koncheyev’s book boiled down to his answering for the author a kind of implied questionnaire (Your favorite flower? Favorite hero? Which virtue do you prize most?)” In Nabokov’s discussion of Pushkin and Nekrasov everything merges and melts together: the sky and the grass, the beauty of verse and human feeling, – and inevitable theme of exile. Nabokov speaks of memories, saying openly: “I must remind you in conclusion that I am followed everywhere and that space is collapsible” . His private tragedy is lost on his young listeners, whose innocent inquiry prompts what becomes the most remarkable ending of a poem:

How would you say “delightful talk” in Russian?

How would you say “good night”?

Oh, that would be:

Bessonnitza, tvoy vzor oonyl i strashen;

lubov moya, otstoopnika prostee.

(Insomnia, your stare is dull and ashen,

my love, forgive me this apostasy.)

All of Nabokov’s carefully hidden private world that, he insists, “cannot, indeed should not, be anybody’s concern”, is suddenly revealed in these poignant lines: long nights, loneliness, the feeling of guilt over abandoning one’s language and nostalgia for inaccessible, unforgettable, “unquenchable Russia”.

Bibliography

1). Kernan, Alvin B. “Reading Zemblan: The Audience Disappears in Nabokov’s Pale Fire”. Vladimir Nabokov (Modern Critical Views). Ed. Harold Bloom. Chelsea House Publishers, 1987. 101-125.

2). ???????, ????????. ???. ??????: ??????, 1990.

3). Nabokov, Vladimir. The Gift. New York: Capricorn Books, G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1970.

4). —. Lectures on Literature. Harcourt Brace & Company, 1982.

5). —. Pale Fire. New York: Quality Paperback Book Club, 1993.

6). —. Poems and Problems. McGraw-Hill International, Inc. 1970.

7). —. Speak, Memory. New York: Quality Paperback Book Club, 1993.

8). —. Strong Opinions. McGraw-Hill International, Inc. 1973.

Elena Koutcherova
http://www.articlesbase.com/fiction-articles/unquenchable-russia-or-forbidden-themes-in-nabokovs-prose-204030.html

Have you ever seen just how deep the rabbit hole really goes?

Have you ever felt like all that you see is an illusion and a something much grander is going on something they don’t want us to know about. Something that many of us fear but in truth is not scary. Have you ever wondered if reality is fantasy and fantasy is reality? Could we be living on a prison planet.

Did you ever wonder why there are so many endless contradictions in the judeo-christian bible? Do you want to know why? The reason for this- is its nothing but a book of false promises. Although, most Christians are taught to be good sheep of the pasture and not to question. One thing about sheep though is they can easily be driven off a cliff. The bible was and is nothing more than a tool to remove spiritual knowledge from the populace, and to enslave you. Here is an interesting quote made in the 16th century (1475-1521) by Pope Leo X of the roman catholic church: "It has served us well, this myth of Christ". I think that pretty much sums up everything in the Christian religion; it’s nothing more than a HOAX!

Everything in the judeo-christian bible has been stolen from the Ancient Pagan religions that predated it from a few hundred to several thousands of years. The bible is full of spiritual allegories that were stolen and corrupted into real places with real beings, this was done to deceive you and keep the truth hidden. Additionally, EVERY major story in the bible was STOLEN (derivatives or copies) from the Ancient Sumerian and Ancient Egyptian cultures. Here are some examples: The story of Adam and eve, the great flood, the story of moses, the story of Mary and Jesus, this was STOLEN from Isis and Horus in Egyptian culture. That fictitious Nazarene is about the biggest joke there is, and a slap in the face to the human race. That Nazarene isn’t real at all; in fact it was stolen from some 18+ crucified pagan gods, such as Odin who hung from a tree and was born again

This knowledge has been deliberately withheld from the populace, to keep you enslaved and living in a total lie. Those at the top (the Jews, and the catholic leadership) know the truth, and they DO NOT want you to obtain this knowledge, but to remain servile. If you are interested in learning much more than you ever thought possible as a human being, the TRUTH that has been deliberately withheld from you and STOLEN from the original religions- then go to these websites that are listed below. I must tell you though; once you know the TRUTH you can never again be deceived by the LIE of Christianity. Stop the LIE with me, pass this on;

http://www.exposingchristianity.com

http://www.joyofsatan.org

Not Gaddahn, Water Wars, Right to the Internet – New World Next Week

Welcome, ladies & gentlemen, to the latest episode of the New World Next Week – brought to you by James Corbett of Corbett Report & James Evan Pilato of Media Monarchy. This week we turn the spotlight some on the bad actors in the War of Terror, specifically Azzam the American & Jihad Jane. We also turn on the spigot to get a taste of the coming water wars + even more good news on the internet as a ‘fundamental right’.

Story#1: ‘Al-qaeda’ Agent Held in Pakistan is Not ‘Adam Gadahn’

http://ur1.ca/p6h2

HistoryCommons.org: Pakistan & the ISI Intelligence Agency

http://ur1.ca/p6h5

Neocon Bloggers Celebrate Indictment of ‘Crazy’ Patsy Jihad Jane

http://ur1.ca/p6h9

Story#2: Water Wars: The ‘Endangered’ Western States

http://ur1.ca/p6hb

Agenda 21: The UN Blueprint for the 21st Century

http://ur1.ca/p6hd

Story#3: Majority of the World Believes Internet Access Is ‘a Fundamental Right’

http://ur1.ca/p6hf

4 in 5 Regard Internet Access as a Fundamental Right

http://ur1.ca/p6hg

Flashback: Internet Overtakes Print in US News Consumption

http://ur1.ca/p6hl

As referenced at the end of this episode, the alternative media needs your support to survive & thrive: Media Monarchy & Corbett Report are accepting $10 donations for the new DVD from Divergent Films & PeaceRevolution.org: ’20/20 Hindsight: Censorship on the Frontline’. http://ur1.ca/p6hq Your donation gets you this new whistleblower documentary with numerous extras + you support the alternative media that brings you news the corporate-controlled media doesn’t. As always, stay informed by subscribing to the feeds from Corbett Report here http://ur1.ca/kbj1 & Media Monarchy here. http://ur1.ca/kuec Thank You.

Duration : 0:10:12

Read more…

Globalization: an Islamic Perspective

This paper investigates from an Islamic perspective the consequences of globalization in general. To specify my argument in accordance with my understanding of Islam, I would strive to argue that globalization might be very harmful before society reaches maturity but very useful after that. Allow me a brief prefatory note about my methodology in this essay: in the first part, I provide many specifics about how Islamic texts and sources view the human being as God’s creation and his ultimate goal in the world. In the second part, after a brief definition of globalization, I apply the analytic method employed in the conventional literature of economics to show why the market mechanism fails to satisfy equality and eradicate poverty in the globalization era. Finally, I try to explain how a free but virtuous, mature society can satisfy equality throughout the world in this era. Obviously, my argument relates, to some extent, to normative aspect of economics. However, it does not follow the ideological methodology at all.

Let me begin by elaborating briefly on the ultimate goal of man’s creation in Islam, since this is so essential to understanding my argument.

The Human Being as God’s Creation

From monotheism, the pivotal pillar of the Islamic worldview, we can conclude that the universe is the best and perfect manifestation of God’s beautiful names and that there is no better alternative system to govern the universe. Indeed, this principle refers to the conception of creation. That is, God is like a secret treasure, so He creates and expands the universe not only to give a clue to His throne but also to reveal His beauty and His brilliance. Some facets of His attributes such as His majesty may manifest themselves in a deterministic environment such as with galaxies and other physical phenomena. There are, however, other facets of His characteristics such as His wisdom and His mercifulness that are impossible to manifest themselves except in indeterministic form.

There seem to be many common elements in the explanation of the philosophy of man’s creation in all Abrahamic religions of which Islam is believed to be a sequel and culmination. By investigating the quality of Adam’s creation, which stands as the symbol of human being in the Quran, we can infer the kind of status he occupies in the sight of God in Islam, as well as in other religions.

In the beginning the Lord addresses all the angels[1]that He wants to create a viceroy[2] on earth. This position will be held by man. The angels object to Him and say that He wants to create a vengeful and vindictive creature to commit crime and bloodshed on earth again! But God responds that He knows something they do not know. And so, God became engaged in creating man. And this is the point which symbols, loaded with profound anthropological connotations, come into being.

From a faithful Muslim point of view, God is the greatest and most exalted. Thus, with this providential address the mission of man on earth is clarified. That is, man’s mission on earth is to fulfill God’s creative work in the universe. Therefore, man’s first superiority is that he represents God on earth.

Since God wants to create a viceroy for Himself on earth, He must, as a rule, choose the most valuable and sacred material. Yet He selects the basest matter. In the Quran there are three references relative to the material that man was made of: from sounding clay[3], like unto pottery[4], and from mud[5]. Finally, the Lord blew His spirit into the dry mud and man came into being.

In the human tongue, God is the most sacred and exalted being so the spirit of God refers to the most exalted, and the noblest manifestation of His being, while mud stands as a symbol of the meanest and the basest thing. Accordingly, He blew His own Soul, not something else like His breath, blood, or flesh, into man in its creating process. God is the most sublime being and His spirit is the finest entity for which man can possibly have an epithet in his language.

Thus, man who was formed from mud and God’s spirit is a two- dimensional being. For unlike all other beings which are one dimensional, man is two-dimensional; one dimension tends towards mud, lowliness, sedimentation, and stagnation while the other aspires to the loftiest imaginable point possible. Thus man’s significance and grandeur lie in the fact that he possesses two poles: mud and the spirit of the Lord. It is up to man to choose where to go, towards mud or providence. And as long as he has not selected either of the poles as his fate, struggle will perpetually rage within him.

Another surprising point in man’s creation in the Quran is that God calls upon the whole universe that He has a trust to offer it, but everything refuses to accept this offer except man[6]. This is indicative of the fact that man possesses another virtue; that is, his acceptance of a trust that everyone else refused. This means that man is a representative of God in the universe as well as His trustee. As to what the trust is, Islamic scholars mention many things. Some of them such as Mawlavi and Shariati[7], believe that it is will and choice. I agree with that, however, it means much more than that. It means that man has adopted a great responsibility to personify all His beautiful names; individually and collectively. Of course, such responsibility requires the ability of will and choice.

Shariati (1981) says that the only superiority that man has over all other beings in the universe is his will. He is the only being that can act contrary to his nature, while no animal or plant is capable of doing so. It is impossible to find an animal which can fast for two days. And no plant has ever committed suicide due to grief or has done a great service. Man is the only one who rebels against his physical, spiritual, and material needs, and turns his back against goodness and virtue. Further, he is free to behave irrationally, to be bad or good, and to be mud-like or divine. The point is that possession of will is the greatest characteristic of man and it throws light upon the relationship between man and God.

Man is a viceroy of God on earth as well as His trustee among the universe, and the spirit of both quenches their thirst from the same fountain of virtue: possession of will. God, the only being in the universe, who possesses an absolute will and can do whatever He wishes, blew His spirit in man. Hence, man is capable of working like God (not on par with Him, only as an image of God), or acting against the physiological laws of his own nature. Therefore, as in the Old Testament[8], He has created mankind as a potentially perfect image of Himself. Obviously, this perfect image goes beyond the interpretation that some distinguished scholars have given it[9]. It shows that all God’s beautiful names may manifest themselves with man and human society. Consequently, it requires the ability to mastery and rule over the universe.

Two kinds of rationality

As mentioned above, according to my Islamic understanding, man is a two-dimensional being. During his spiritual evolution, he should pass from being mud-like to approaching God-like. In other words, God has invited him to pass through an important reference point, maturity[10]. Thus, we can imagine that he has two distinct parts of his life: an individualistic, selfish period (before maturity of society, when the real love is not the dominant flow in the society); and a God-like, selfless period (after maturity of society). Clearly, each specific period requires a certain and separate corresponding rationality. The rationality[11] discussed in the conventional literature of economics, which is based on a low-level self-interest, only corresponds with the period of childhood. Mainstream economics, based on Adam Smith’s invisible hand and the market mechanism, quenches its thirst from this fountain of rationality. In the next part, I will explain how the market mechanism increases the gap between poor and rich countries as well as the gap between poor and rich classes. That is, the more international trade and the more integration of financial markets, the more market failure and more divergent economies! However, when society evolves from selfishness and being mud-like to altruism and being God-like, this rationality will not be effective at all and will collapse instantaneously. The alternative and mature rationality creates a special dynamism for the economy which is very powerful and without any failures. The driving force of this rationality is still self-interest, but a high-level one rooted in being God-like.

I would like to refer to one verse of the Quran, which clearly argues that the individual desires derived from a low-level self-interest lead to harm and corruption[12]: “Corruption doth appear on land and sea because of which men’s hands have done, that He may make them taste a part of that which they have done, in order that they may return.” We may deduce this corruption is only a part of the consequences of what man has done as a result of his selfishness, and that there might many other bad consequences washed clean by God’s forgiveness. In other words, the invisible hand in an immature society not only is not able to optimize social benefits, but also it creates a great deal of harm and corruption that surpasses our imaginations. However, most of this corruption will be removed by the mechanism provided in the universe by God. The remaining corruption serves to warn the people and deter them from being selfish.

Due to self-interest maximization in immature society, we may also observe clearly many, many problems such as global warming and environmental destruction which will definitely jeopardize future life, while the market mechanism and its price signals fail to reduce these consequences, much less to motivate sustainable development.

Globalization and the issue of equality

In this part of my essay, I would like to show why globalization in the context of low-level self-interest motivation and based on the market mechanism may not lead to equality. Instead, it is biased to developed countries where there is located a complex of various industries and the benefit of economies of agglomeration can be utilized. To do this, it is necessary to have a brief definition of globalization first.

The definition of globalization

As globalization is a multi-layer concept and it has become a buzzword in recent years, globalization has already been defined in many ways. I, in some extend, agree with what Thomas L. Friedman defines globalization. He says: “it is the inexorable integration of market, nation-states and technologies to a degree never witnessed before- in a way that it is enabling individuals, corporations, and nation states to reach around the world farther, faster, deeper and cheaper than ever before, and in a way that it is enabling the world to reach into individuals, corporations, and nation states farther, faster, deeper and cheaper than ever before” (Friedman 2000, 9). He says: globalization “also has one overarching feature- integration. The world has become an increasingly interwoven place, and today, whether you are a company or a country, your threats and opportunities increasingly derive from who you are connected to. This globalization system is also characterized by a single word: the Web”(ibid, 8). This system is a dynamic ongoing process, with a driving idea of free-market capitalism, and “its own dominant culture” involving “the spread of Americanization” (ibid, 9). It has its own defining technologies, and is measured by its speed, “speed of commerce, travel, communication and innovation” (ibid, 10). He suggests that “globalization is not simply a trend or a fad but is, rather, an international system. It is the system that has now replaced the old Cold War system, and, like that Cold War system, globalization has its own rules and logic that today directly or indirectly influence the politics, environment, geopolitics and economics of virtually every country in the world” (ibid, IX).

What I want to focus on is strictly the economic layer of globalization. In my view, economic globalization refers to a completely different process of internationalization. Although in internationalization the cross-border relations between countries will increase, the nation-state institution will play the main role in the economies, they can still make economic policies and decisions. Economic globalization, however, refers to the process of removing government-imposed restrictions on movements between countries in order to create an “open”, “borderless” world economy’ (Scholte 2000: 16) so that the nation-state institution will be eradicated and no longer play no role in economy. Instead, the Transnational Companies (TNCs) will be the main players in the economy. More technically speaking, the nation’s Production Possibility Frontier (PPF) makes nonsense in the literature and there is only the worlds PPF and TNCs follow fragmentization policy in their production and distribution which is definitely alien from conventional international trade and international finance.

The Inevitability of Asymmetry in Globalization

According to mainstream economics, policies of openness through liberalization of trade and investment regimes, and capital movements have been advocated worldwide for their growth and welfare enhancing effects on the basis of the propositions embedded in the well-known economic theories of international trade and investment (i.e. the Ricardian comparative advantage theory, the Heckscher-Ohlin-Samuelson (HOS) model, the new trade theories of Krugman, or the model of intertemporal international borrowing/lending or portfolio allocation models). In these models, the main goal of openness is assumed to increase social welfare through: (i) static efficiency gains associated with improved resource allocation for national economies as well as for the world economy due to increased specialization; (ii) dynamic efficiency gains from such factors as economies of scale, diffusion of information, technology transfers, knowledge spillover effects as well as intertemporal trade gains from cross-border borrowing/lending for increased investment and consumption smoothing and portfolio risk diversification.

Convergence in accordance with international trade theories is still a serious dilemma. That is, there is no doubt that the level of social surplus will increase totally after free trade or integration of financial markets. However, there is a lasting concern regarding how these gains are distributed between trade partners; are they biased toward developed countries or at least unbiased. Mainstream economics’ theories including static and dynamic insist that international trade will reduce the per capita income gap amongst the open countries. For instance, one of the main theorems that derived from the static model of HOS Theory, implies that when the prices of the output goods are equalized between countries as they move to free trade, then the rewards of the factors (capital and labor for instance) will also be equalized between countries. Therefore we should expect that the increase of free trade due to globalization will reduce the North-South per capita income gap. The dynamic version of this model also suggests a convergent per-capita income trend between north and south countries.

To explain cross-country differences in economic performance, Matsuyama (1996) employs symmetry-breaking methodology. Symmetry-breaking creates asymmetric outcomes in the symmetric environment. It is the key concept for understanding self-organized (a.k.a. endogenous) pattern formations[13].

As a key answer to the increasing gap between North and South countries in the level of cross-country differences as well as the increasing gap between poor and rich classes inside the countries, Matsuyama (2005), rejects coordination failures as the key notion to understand these questions. Instead, he argues that such emphasis is misplaced; the key to understanding the diversity is symmetry-breaking. The notion of coordination failures is not only irrelevant but also misleading when thinking about diversity.

Quoting Matsuyama’s (1996) explanation briefly, it will be shown how globalization can be considered as an endogenous (or a self-organized) factor to create the inequalities.

He offers a model of the world economy, where many (inherently) identical countries trade with one another. It is shown that cross-country differences in the standard of living and in income appear as a stable outcome of international trade. According to his model, the coexistence of rich and poor countries is not just a possibility. It is an inevitable aspect of the world trading system. Although his model adopts many assumptions for the sake of simplification and concreteness, the logic behind the result is fairly general and can be understood intuitively.

Imagine that there is a list of goods that need to be consumed. Furthermore, there are some agglomeration economies in the production of each of these goods. In the absence of international trade, these goods must all be produced in each country. Without any innate difference across countries, each country produces these goods in the same amount, and there is no cross-country difference.

Now introduce the possibility of international trade in these goods. As different countries start acquiring comparative advantage in different goods, the production of each good concentrates into some countries, which leads to an emergence of a system of international division of labor. The stable cross-country difference appears as a result of ‘‘symmetry-breaking’’ in the world economy, caused by international trade. Some countries become rich if they are lucky enough to acquire comparative advantage in goods associated with large agglomeration economies, while other countries, those which happen to acquire comparative advantage in goods with small agglomeration economies, become poor. They fail to achieve a necessary coordination to reach a Pareto-superior equilibrium and find themselves in a Pareto-inferior equilibrium. The problems thus seem just a matter of coordination failures. The global perspective, however, offers a different view. The international division of labor requires different countries to take charge of producing different tradable goods with differing degrees of agglomeration economies. International trade thus creates a kind of ‘‘pecking order’’ among nations. Not all countries can be rich: some countries must be excluded from being rich, just as in a game of musical chairs[14]. At the same time, the model does not rule out the possibility that some (but not all) countries might succeed in overcoming the coordination failures, and becoming rich. This feature of the model makes it possible to talk about the effects of such an ‘‘economic miracle’’ in the world economy.

Since the economies of agglomeration requires the diversity of industries which produce intermediates available in the marketplace, we can conclude that only those countries which have already bypassed the threshold of diversity have a chance to be industrialized and reach to a Pareto-superior equilibrium. Hence, this shows how the phenomena of economies of agglomeration cause a symmetry-breaking to separate the otherwise identical regions into the manufacturing belt and the agricultural hinterland.

Globalization in Mature Society

To explain how globalization in mature society accomplishes beneficial goals, first we have to take into account the two following challenges:

1. The problem of static market failure: This problem arises mainly because of externalities (including public goods, pollution and common pool resources), transaction cost, asymmetric information (such as incomplete markets[15], moral hazards and adverse selection), as well as organization failures. The most common response to a market failure in the literature of the public sector is to use the government to produce certain goods and services. However, government intervention may cause non-market failure. Besides, as mentioned above, globalization causes nation-state eradication so there will be no effective government in such an era. Furthermore, I can hardly believe that international institutions are able to fulfill this responsibility, even if they were independent from the USA.

2. The problem of dynamic market failure: As Matsuyama showed accurately, international trade creates a specific chaos in the symmetric environment so that the operations of markets normally lead to increasing inequality across the countries over time. Likewise, inequality across inherently identical households is caused endogenously by symmetry-breaking. Matsuyama (2004) explains how the class structure is an inevitable feature of capitalism. Even if every household starts with the same amount of wealth, the society will experience “symmetry-breaking,” and will be polarized into the two classes in steady state, where the rich maintain a high level of wealth partly due to the presence of the poor, who have no choice but to work for the rich at a wage rate strictly lower than the “fair” value of labor. Hence, in the capitalistic context we may consider these increasing gaps –whether between countries or inside countries – as an indication of market failure in a dynamic version.

It is now necessary to show how mature society, using a different rationality, may bypass these challenges. This rationality formally is very similar to the conventional one. It is, however, very different in content. I would like to refer to a few verses of Quran related to this subject. God says: “Man has been created restless, so he panics whenever any evil touches him, and withdraws when some good touches him; except for the prayerful who are constant at their prayers and whose wealth comprises an acknowledged responsibility towards the beggar and the destitute; and the ones who accept the Day for Repayment.” These verses show sufficiently that the rationality that guides immature people is definitely different than that which guides mature people, although they benefit from the same potential characteristics. The main distinction between mature and immature is that the mature direct these potentials toward a transcendental personality which is beyond selfishness. They are concerned with all human beings’ needs in all generations rather than their own selves individually or at most their families.

It is very appropriate to ask about the driving motivation in this society. Of course, conventional self-interest cannot motivate people efficiently to be concerned about others. It is extremely in need of a stronger motivation based on an exalted worldview. This worldview should consist of specific beliefs that grant the greatest reward to the doer when he considers all people of all generations altruistically. As I understand, the mature society may not be blind and aimless. Society can achieve this reference point of maturity only when the true beliefs such as the belief in oneness of God, the Day of Judgment, Justice drive it entirely. Passing this reference point is a necessary condition, but divine love, which requires perfection in selflessness, is the sufficient condition for the maturity. In general speaking, love when it appears, has no room but for itself and the lover thinks of no one except the beloved. In other words, selfishness destroys love and it can never be considered as co-existent of love. Nonetheless, worldly love is too weak and ineffective to last and motivate society toward its transcendental goals. In contrast, divine love is quite sustainable and powerful. Since nature is the realms where God’s beautiful names are exhibited, divine love implies, in turn, love of the entire world and the whole creation particularly human beings, the most comprehensive fruit of existence. Therefore, love is at the core of the concept of mature rationality and creates a specific invisible hand to satisfy social benefits including prosperity and equality for all regions and all generations.

Now, allow me to explain how globalization might be useful in a mature world society. As mentioned above, a mature society is a society where all God’s beautiful names have flourished. Therefore, as God provides mercifully all necessary requirements for all creatures, in such a society, each person possesses a certain portion of natural resources consistent with his area of interest. All initial endowments are redistributed by lump sum among the people so technically speaking, all individuals move to the central points of Edgeworth’s box. All members subject to all generations’ benefits do their best to produce more and more creatively because they are His representatives. According to symmetry-breaking methodology, there is still some potential of asymmetry. However, people will share their incomes voluntarily to produce public goods and to reduce the existent gap.

The communist system is as far away as the capitalistic system from the system based on love. The lack of motivation in people’s activities as well as the inefficiency of government –especially when the size of society grows enough- are the essential issues in communism while there is no concern about them in mature society. It is because the people are mature enough to understand that more being active means being closer to God. Besides, there is no need for the presence of strong and big government because this society is governed by many small components of authority connected together in a world wide network. There is hardly conflict of interest between these components because selfishness is the main source of confliction while here the people are selfless. Moreover, they are tolerant and educated enough to avoid violence and to discuss their problems peacefully.

It should be noticed that the economy in mature society serves only as a means by which we can improve the level of virtue so that we are not allowed to sacrifice humanity and its dignity and virtue because of economic benefits.

Endnotes

——————————————————————————–

[1] Quran, 2:30: And when thy Lord said unto the angels: Lo! I am about to place a viceroy in the earth, they said: wilt Thou place therein one who will do harm therein and will shed blood, while we, we hymn Thy praise and sanctify Thee? He said: Surely I know that which ye know not.

[2] It shows very clearly the worth of man in Islam. Even the Post-Renaissance European humanism has not been able to bestow such an exalting sanctity upon man.

[3] Quran, 15:26, 15:28, and 15:33

[4] Quran, 55:14

[5] Quran, 6:2, 7:12, 23:12, 32:7, 37:11, 38:71, 38:76

[6] Quran, 33:72 Lo! We offered the trust unto the heavens and the earth and the mountains, but they shrank from bearing it and were afraid of it. And man assumed it.

[7] See: Sahriati (1981)

[8] Old Testament, 1:27-28 Elohim said, “Let us make humanity as our image, according to our likeness. And let them rule over the fish of the sea, the bird of the heavens, the beast, the whole earth, and all the swarmers which swarm on the earth. And God created humanity as his image: as the image of God he created him, male and female he created them.

[9] Thomas Aquinas (1976) located the image in the human ability to think and reason, to use language and art, far surpassing the abilities of any animals. Leonard Verduin (1976) says that the image consists in our dominion over animals and plants, which continues despite our sinfulness. Emil Brunner (1976) says that it is our ability to have a relationship with God, reflected in the tendency of all societies to have forms of worship.

[10] Quran, 90:10-17 And [Did We not] guide him to the parting of the mountain ways? But he hath not attempted the Ascent. Ah, what will convey unto thee what the Ascent is! (It is) to free a slave, And to feed in the day of hunger, an orphan near of kin, or some poor wretch in misery, and to be of those who believe and exhort one another to perseverance and exhort one another to pity.

[11] I will discuss the other kind of rationality which corresponds with mature period later on.

[12] Quran, 30:41

[13] For example, cosmologists wonder why the matter in the universe is distributed in clusters, leaving much of the universe empty. Earth scientists study the formation of wave patterns, such as jet streams, ocean currents, and continental drifts. Material scientists study phase transitions, how molecules aligned themselves when they reach the critical temperature. Molecular biologists ask how life began in the primordial soup of amino acids, and developmental biologists attempt to explain how living organisms acquire forms through cell division and morphogenesis (Weyl 1969, Prigogine 1980). Similar questions of pattern formations also exist in economics. Why are there rich and poor countries? Why are industries clustered? Why are there booms and recessions? Why are some ethnic groups underrepresented in certain jobs or neighborhoods?

[14] Musical chairs is a game played by a group of people (usually children), often in an informal setting purely for entertainment such as a birthday party. The game starts with any number of players and a number of chairs one fewer than the number of players; the chairs are arranged in a circle (or other closed figure) facing outward, with the people standing in a circle just outside of that. A non-playing individual plays recorded music or a musical instrument. While the music is playing, the players in the circle walk in unison around the chairs. When the music controller suddenly shuts off the music, everyone must race to sit down in one of the chairs. The player who is left without a chair is eliminated from the game, and one chair is also removed to ensure that there will always be one fewer chair than there are players. The music resumes and the cycle repeats until there is only one player left in the game, who is the winner.

[15] The theory of incomplete markets is an extension of the general equilibrium approach to intertemporal economies with uncertainty, where the set of available contracts which can be used to transfer wealth across time is limited relative to the possible probabilistic states that an economy might find itself in. Unlike in the standard Arrow-Debreu model where all trade takes place at beginning of time, in an economy with incomplete markets, agents trade in sequential spot markets.

References

The Noble Quran.

Aquinas, T. (1976), Man to the Image of God, in Millard Erickson (ed.), Man’s Need and God’s Gift: Readings in Christian Theology, Grand Rapids: Baker, pp. 37-43.

Emil, B. (1976), Man and Creation,” in Millard Erickson (ed.), Man’s Need and God’s Gift: Readings in Christian Theology, Grand Rapids: Baker, pp. 45-54.

Friedman, T. L. (2000), The Lexus and the Olive Tree, New York: Anchor Books.

Krugman, P. (1992),Geography and Trade (Gaston Eyskens Lectures), The MIT Press

Matsuyama, K. (1996), Why Are There Rich and Poor Countries?: Symmetry-Breaking in the World Economy, NBER Working Paper Series

Matsuyama, K. (2005), Structural Change, forthcoming in L. Blume and S. Durlauf, eds., the New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition, Macmillan (available at: http://www.faculty.econ.northwestern.edu/faculty/matsuyama/Structural%20Change.pdf )

Prigogine, I. (1980), From Being to Becoming: Time and Complexity in the Physical Sciences, Freeman, 1980.

Scholte, J. A. (2000) Globalization. A critical introduction, London: Palgrave.

Shariati, A. (1981), Man and Islam, Translator: Fatollah Marjani, Houston: Free Islamic Literature-Filinc.

Verduin, L. (1976), A Dominion-Haver, in Millard Erickson (ed.), Man’s Need and God’s Gift: Readings in Christian Theology, Grand Rapids: Baker, pp. 55-74.

Weyl, H. (1969), Symmetry, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Nasser Elahi
http://www.articlesbase.com/ethics-articles/globalization-an-islamic-perspective-293758.html

Trailer for “The New World Order”

Movie trailer for “The New World Order Conspiracy”, an upcoming political documentary from Resistance Video (aenfroy87). This hard hitting documentary will be one of the most powerful attacks on the new world order and reveal the globalists’ plans for world government. This is a great movie to show to friends and family who are still beginners on the subject. It will be released on youtube on 9/11/2009.

Please feel free to repost this video anywhere.

Please subscribe to aenfroy87 for more videos.

Duration : 0:3:0

Read more…

A Surprising New World Order is About to Start

A Surprising New World Order is about to start.

Our world will soon (as in years rather than decades), be facing a global crisis which will herald its end.

The Bible as a Guide

1
The people behind this article:
We take the Bible as our only rule. After having devoted considerable time to its study, especially chapters referring to our future, we have realized that we must share with you what we have learned. This knowledge is of utmost importance.

2
Why do you take the Bible so seriously?
Because we discovered how accurate it is – so accurate, that even predictions made thousands of years earlier occurred in the very day foretold, to the very letter. This
has compelled us to conclude that there is an all-knowing God behind the Bible, who is not bound by time and knows the end from the beginning.
We would not have taken the Bible so seriously if God had not demonstrated such complete control and knowledge of the future. This mastery is revealed
most clearly in two books:Daniel in the Old Testament and The Revelation in the New
Testament.

Fulfilled Bible Prophecies

3
An example of a fulfilled prediction

In the book of Daniel, chapter 2, God outlined in a dream to the Babylonian king that from his time until the end of time, the world would witness only four world empires. History has proved what God pre-ordained. The four world empires were:
Babylon (605 BC-538 BC),
Medo-Persia (538 BC-331 BC),
Greece (331 BC-168 BC), and
Rome (168 BC-476 AD).
He further revealed that Rome would be split into ten territories and that in the time of these territories the end will come. History is proving the accuracy of God’s word: Rome was divided into ten nations from which present-day Europe has emerged.
See Daniel 7 & 8.

4
The purpose of the Bible prophecies
It is to warn us about future crises in order to save us:
e.g. God warned Noah of the coming flood. People had to obey the warning in faith.

A Most Fearful and Solemn Warning

5
The most solemn prophetic warning is yet to be fulfilled. Today, there is nothing more
important for us to understand than this prophecy because events are taking place in rapid
succession indicating its imminent fulfillment.

6
Please read Revelation 14:9-12.
The fearful warning in the above passage describes two groups of people.
The first group is heading to receive the mark of the beast; while the second group is viewed positively as keeping the commandments of God. Furthermore, the description of
the second coming of Christ directly follows this warning. Therefore, we know that this is
the last warning given before the second coming of Christ.

7
How to avoid worshipping the beast and his image and receiving his mark
To know this, we need to identify the beast, the image of the beast, and the mark of the beast. It is only reasonable to assume that God would not warn us about such dangerous entities without helping us to identify them in a conclusive way.

Identifying the Beast

8
Bible Description of This Beast
Please read Revelation 13: 1-8, 16-18.

9
The above passage is full of symbols. How to understand it?
We need to allow the Bible to interpret its own symbols. We should expect that God, for our benefit, would reveal within the Bible the meaning of these symbols. The Bible defines its own symbols;
e.g. the book of Revelation contains 404 verses of which 278 are found almost
word for word in other books in the Bible, where their meaning is expounded.

10
Which symbols do we need to unlock to identify the beast and his mark?
The necessary ones are: ‘beast’, ‘dragon’, ‘sea’, ‘forty-two months’, and ‘blasphemy’.
Beast: In Bible prophecy, a beast is a symbol of a king or kingdom: See Daniel 7:17, 23.
With this beast, we are studying a unique kingdom, for it is not only a political power but a religious one as well, because people ‘worshipped the beast’.
Rev.13:4.
Dragon: According to the Bible, the dragon is another name for Satan, the father of lies and deceptions. When Satan gives “his power, and his seat, and great authority” to the beast, we can expect the beast to behave in the same deceptive ways of Satan. Thus, a great deal of deception will be found in the affairs of the beast. Rev. 12:9; 13:2.
Sea: In Bible prophecy, sea is symbol of a multitude of many different people. Rev.17:15. Accordingly, this unique kingdom or power rose out of the sea, signifying that it came out of a location that was densely populated with different nationalities of people.
Forty-two months: This period is equivalent to three and a half years (42 divided by 12 months). And the Bible was written based on the Jewish calendar where every Jewish ear is of 360 days (30 days for each month). So, three and a half years and forty-two
months are both equal to 1260 days. The reason why we are changing the months to their
equivalent in days is that when God gave time prophecies, He often equated a day for a year: “I have appointed thee each day for a year.” Ezekiel 4:6.
Therefore, the forty-two prophetic months imply a period of 1260 years during which the beast was given, a “mouth speaking great things and blasphemies” and would “make war with the saints…and power was given him …” Rev. 13:5, 7, meaning that during this period the beast would blaspheme, persecute Christians, and have great
authority.
Blasphemy: In the Bible, blasphemy is defined in two ways. The first is when a person claims to be God or His representative: See John 10:33. The beast, this religio-political
power and kingdom, has blasphemed God by pretending to be in the place of God on earth. The second way of committing blasphemy is by granting absolutions (claiming the power to forgive the sins of others): See Mark 2:7.
The beast, this religio-political power and kingdom, has blasphemed God by claiming the right of absolution. No wonder the beast has the “name of blasphemy” and speaks “blasphemy against God”; this is because the beast claims powers that are
the sole prerogative of God. Rev. 13:1, 6.

Nine Key Marks
Having allowed the Bible to unlock the meaning of its own symbols, we can now highlight the nine major identifying marks of the beast to determine which power in history fulfills these features.
1. The beast combines religious and political powers simultaneously: “They worshipped the beast.” Rev. 13:4.
2. The beast came to power in a densely populated area of the world: “I…saw a beast rise up out of the sea.” Rev. 13:1.
3. The beast obtained its power and authority from Satan: “The dragon gave him [the beast] his power, and his seat, and great authority.” Rev. 13:2.
4. The beast ruled ruthlessly, possessing absolute dominating power for 1260 years.
See Rev. 13:5, 3, 7.
5. The beast persecuted Christians during the 1260 years. Rev. 13:7.
6. The beast will fully recover from its ‘deadly wound’ and the world will marvel after it: Rev. 13:3.
7. The beast has a mysterious 666 number that identifies his office and name. Rev. 13:18.
8. The beast blasphemes by claiming to be God and granting absolutions (the power to forgive sins of others).
9. The beast made other blasphemous claims too, undertaking actions that are God’s exclusive prerogative. Rev. 13:5.
There is but one power in history which fulfills all the identifying marks: The Roman Catholic Church. This Church is the beast which God, out of love, is warning us of.
It is not the purpose of this article to attack Roman Catholics, but to reveal the truth about the Catholic system. Rev. 13:2.

11
Historical evidence and facts for this conclusion
1. The Roman Catholic Church combines religious and political powers simultaneously:
Apostle John saw this union in a prophetic vision concerning the fourth and final kingdom of the world and described it as, “a woman sit[ting] upon a scarlet coloured beast.” Rev. 17:3.
In the Bible, a woman is a symbol of a church. See Jeremiah 3:20; 2Corinthians 11:2. In addition, it is unanimously understood in prophecy that a beast is a nation. Even in today’s world, nations are symbolized as beasts. The USA is seen as an eagle, Russia is
likened unto a bear, etc. Many years ago, God unveiled to Daniel all the world empires until the end of time. In a vision, Daniel saw the last beast to be “diverse from all the others.” Daniel 7:19. But how would it be diverse? According to Revelation 17:3, as seen
above, this beast (nation) will have a woman (church) ruling it. Today, is there a church
and state working together as one globally recognized power? The only entity in the world that has accomplished this is the Roman Catholic Church. The Roman Catholic
pope is absolute religious leader of over one billion followers world-wide.
“The Roman Pontiff, as the successor of Peter, is the perpetual and visible source and foundation of the unity both of the bishops and of the whole company of the faithful.” Vatican Council II (1962-65).
“Every cleric must obey the Pope, even if he commands what is evil; for no one may judge the Pope.” Pope Innocent III (1198-1216).
Simultaneously, the pope is king over an independent nation: “Vatican City”. The Vatican is a distinct sovereign miniature nation, although within Italy. Thus, the papacy is a unique power combining religious and civil power.
2. The Roman Catholic Church came to power in a densely populated area of the world, amidst the various powers and nations of Europe.
3. The history of the Roman Catholic Church is full of deception:
Informed Catholics readily confirm forgeries as a way of life for the popes. Hans Kung, a
Catholic priest and theologian who was a consultant to the Second Vatican Council 1962-1965), stated that as early as the fifth century, the popes “decisively extended their power with explicit forgeries.” The Catholic Church: A Short History (translated by John owden), p. 61. One of the best examples is the document Donation of Constantine, dated March 30, 315 AD, which the Roman Catholic Church forged to extend her power and authority. For details of this information see www.worldslastchance.com. In 1440, this document was proved forged by a papal aide called Lorenzo Valla.
Pope calls for a new world order:
“VATICAN CITY (AP) – Pope John Paul II rang in the New Year on Thursday with a renewed call for… the creation of a new world order based on respect for the dignity of man and equality among nations.” Thursday, January 1, 2004.
Posted: 9:21 AM EST (1421GMT). “The great over-riding feature of the entire system of the Anti-Christ – the New World Order – is blatant deceit. In fact, New World Order writers boast of their planned deceptions, because they arrogantly believe … that only the New World Order Planners know what is best for the world, and they have determined that they can achieve their goals only by deliberate deception of the poor masses.” Bill Cooper, “Behold A Pale Horse,” p.49.
4. The Roman Catholic Church ruled ruthlessly for 1260 years, having absolute dominion over other nations. This period has a clear starting point, and a ‘deadly wound’ at its end:
The Roman Catholic Church received its deadly wound in 1798 when Pope Pius VI was taken prisoner in France at the behest of Napoleon. “In 1798 General Berthier made his entrance into Rome, abolished the papal government, and established a secular one.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 1941 edition. Having established the end of the prophecy to be 1798, going back 1260 years, we arrive at 538 AD. For the papacy to fulfill this identifying mark, an important event must have occurred in 538 AD to mark the start of the 1260-year period. Historical evidence reveals that in 533 AD the Roman Emperor Justinian recognized the pope’s ecclesiastical supremacy as ‘head’ of all the churches in both east and west of the Roman Empire. However, it was not until 538 AD when the papacy was effectively freed from its last Arian opponent, the Ostrogoths (who were at that time ruling Italy), did the pope emerge as the leading figure in the West. Thus, in 538 AD the stage was set for the gradual but steady ascendancy of the papacy.
“Vigilius…ascended the papal chair (538 A.D.) under the military protection of
Belisarius.” History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3, p. 327. As the papacy increased
in power, she subjugated not only her followers but also the rulers and kings of Europe. To that end, the popes issued several papal bulls to bolster their authority over the kings of Europe: “It is the office of the papacy to tread under foot kings and emperors.” J.H.
Ignaz Dollinger, The Pope and the Council, (London), p. 35. In the papal bull of Pope Gregory XI, dated 1372 AD, and entitled In Coena Domini, the pope pronounced papal dominion over the entire Christian world, secular and religious, and excommunicated all who failed to obey the popes and to pay them taxes. This papal bull was confirmed by subsequent popes and, in 1568 AD, Pope Pius V vowed that it was to remain an eternal law. A practical demonstration of the above assertion was the treatment of Pope Gregory VII in 1077 AD to King Henry IV, Emperor of Germany. When the king appeared to disregard the pope’s authority, the pope ex-communicated and dethroned him. Henry decided to make peace with the pope and crossed the Alps in mid-winter to humble himself. When he reached the pope’s castle, Henry was made to wait for permission to see the pope in the outer court, bare-footed, with his head uncovered,
and dressed in a miserable dress. It took the king three days of fasting and confession before the pope pardoned him. Today, this claim of supremacy over leaders of the world continues to be upheld by the papacy: “The First See [papacy of Rome] is judged by no one. It is the right of the Roman Pontiff himself alone to judge…those who hold the highest civil office in a state…There is neither appeal nor recourse against a decision or decree of the Roman Pontiff.” The Code of Canon Law.
5. The Roman Catholic Church persecuted Christians during the 1260-year period: During this period of history (also known as the Middle Ages), the Roman Catholic Church held a strong sway over Europe, and every citizen was required to be a Roman Catholic. Anything short of total submission to the pope was punishable by torture or death. This led the Roman Catholic system to become one of the most persecuting religions the world has ever known, according to Vicars of Christ: the Dark Side of the
papacy, by Peter de Rosa, p. 180.
“For professing faith contrary to the Church of Rome, history records the martyrdom of more than one hundred million people.” Brief Bible Readings, p. 16.
“We must rank the Inquisition… as among the darkest blots on record of mankind.” Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, vol. 4, p. 78.
6. The Roman Catholic Church will fully recover from its ‘deadly wound’ and the whole world will wonder after it:
When Pope Pius VI died in captivity in France in 1799, the world expected an end to the Roman Catholic Church. However, God told us, about 2000 years ago, that the beast would recover from its deadly wound. Here is how the New York Times reported the healing of the beast, the papacy:
“MORTAL WOUND HEALED:
Rome, June 7.— From 11 o’clock this morning there was another sovereign independent State in the world. At that time Premier Mussolini …exchanged with Cardinal Gasparri, Papal Secretary of State, representing Pope Pius XI, ratifications of the treaties signed at the Lateran Palace on Feb. 11. By that simple act the sovereign independent State of Vatican City came into existence.” New York Times, July 7, 1929. Does the world today ‘wonder’ after the papacy, as the Bible predicted? “The best way to honor Pope John Paul II, truly one of the great men, is to take his teaching seriously; is to listen to his words and put his words and teachings into action here
in America. This is a challenge we must accept.” President George W. Bush, March 21, 2001. “Pope John Paul II is one of the greatest moral and spiritual leaders of this century.” Billy Graham in the Saturday Evening Post, Jan-Feb. 1980. “Pope John Paul II celebrates outdoor mass in Spanish for over million people in Mexico City.” The newYork Times, Jan 25, 1999. “There is no doubt that Paul VI, together with John XXIII and John Paul II, will be remembered as the three great Popes of Peace, pioneer of a momentous transcendence of the Catholic Church into the New Age.” Robert Muller, former U.N. Assistant Secretary General.
7. The Roman Catholic Church has the mysterious number 666:

The official title of the pope is “Vicarius Filii Dei”, which translated is, “Representative of the Son of God”. To confirm, the Catholic newspaper Our Sunday Visitor of April 18, 1915 wrote: “The engraved letter on the pope’s Mitre is as follows: ‘Vicarius Filii Dei’”. Since in Latin certain letters have numerical values, we only need to add them up to come to 666.
8. The Roman Catholic Church blasphemes by claiming to be God and granting absolutions:
“We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty.” Pope Leo XIII, in an Encyclical letter, dated June 20, 1894. “The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, but he is Jesus Christ, hidden under a veil of flesh.” The Catholic National, July 1895. “But the supreme teacher in the Church is the Roman Pontiff… [who] requires …complete submission and obedience of will… as to God Himself.” Pope Leo XIII, the Great Encyclical Letters, p. 193. The Roman Catholic Church created a vast ‘market’ on
earth for a unique kind of merchandise, for which she had no competitors and unquenchable demand. She claimed that she had the right to sell God’s grace, His free act of forgiveness, to the sinners. To this day, this blasphemous power, maintains the power to forgive sins. “This judicial authority will even include the power to forgive sin.” The Catholic Encyclopaedia Vol. 12, Article “Pope”, p. 265.
9. The Roman Catholic Church made other blasphemous claims too by undertaking actions belonging only to God:

Some samples: “The priest has the power of the keys, or the power of delivering sinners from hell, of making them worthy of paradise, and of changing them from the slaves of Satan into the children of God. And God himself is obliged to abide by the judgment of his priests…The Sovereign Master of the universe only follows the servant by confirming in heaven all that the latter decides upon earth.” Liguori, “Dignity and Duties of the Priest”, pp. 27, 28. “Thus the priest may, in a certain manner, be called the creator of his Creator, since by saying the words of the consecration, he creates, as it were, Jesus in the sacrament, by giving him a sacramental existence, and produces him as a victim to be offered to the eternal Father…The power of the priest, is the power of the divine person; for the trans-substantiation of the bread requires as much power as the creation of the world.” Saint Bernadine of Sienna. “Priests are the saviors of the world.” Saint Jerome. As for her blasphemous actions, the Roman Catholic Church has committed the most blasphemous act of all. She altered the very law of God – the Ten Commandments. She dared to cancel the second commandment altogether, for it condemned her practices and rituals. And worse, she changed the day of worship in the fourth commandment from Saturday to Sunday. This was done although God gave Adam this perpetual command at creation and has confirmed it to us: “My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips.” Psalm 89:34. The Ten Commandments are the only portion of the Bible that was uttered by God’s voice in the presence of a congregation.
And God wrote them with His own finger and handed them to Moses: “These words [The Ten Commandments] the Lord spake unto all your assembly…and he added no more. And he wrote them in two tables of stone…” Deuteronomy 5:22. Christ further stressed the immutability of the Ten Commandments when He said: “It is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail.” Luke 16:17. Christ further confirmed: “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.” Matthew 5:17, 18. T h e Catholic Church is not ashamed that she changed the day of worship. In fact, she takes pride in this action, and regards it as her ‘mark’ of authority and superiority over other churches and religions. “The Sabbath, the best known day of the law, was changed into the Lord’s day. These and others have not ceased because of instructions received from Christ, (because he himself says, I have not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it), but because due to the authority of the church they ave been changed.” Archbishop of Rheggio, Sermon on 1-18-1562, Mansi XXIII, p. 526. “The Sunday is a Catholic institution, and its claim for sacredness can be defended only on Catholic authority… In Holy Scripture from the beginning to the end we find not one single text which justifies the transfer of the weekly public worship service from the last to the first day of the week.” Catholic Press, Sidney, 8-25-1900. According to the Roman Catholic Church, ‘Sunday’ is their distinct and distinguished mark of authority.
“Sunday is our mark of authority. The church is above the Bible, and this transference of Sabbath observance is proof of that fact.” The Catholic Record, London, Ontario, September 1, 1923. “The observance of Sunday by Protestants is an homage hey pay, inspite of themselves, to the authority of the (Catholic) Church.” Plain Talk About the Protestantism of Today, by Monsignor Segur, p. 213. “Of course the Catholic Church claims that the change was her act… a mark of her ecclesiastical power and authority in religious matters.” Office of Cardinal Gibbons, through Chancellor C. F. Thomas, Nov. 11, 1895. From the overwhelming weight of evidence, we can decisively
conclude that the beast of Revelation 13 & 14 is the Roman Catholic Church, and that its mark (the mark of the beast) is Sunday observance.
Why is this mark so important? Only by signing is a document authenticated. Government declarations must always bear an official mark or seal. An official seal
or signature must include three features:
1. The name of the official
2. The title of the official
3. The territory or domain of his authority
Looking to the Almighty Creator, we realize that He has a Heavenly Kingdom. and the document containing the law of His Kingdom is The Ten Commandments. Looking directly in the midst of them you will find the seal of the living God! “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea…” Exodus 20:11.
Notice the three distinct features:
1. Name: THE LORD ( “I am the Lord: that is my name.” Isaiah 42:8.) 2. Title: REATOR (“the LORD made”) 3. Territory: HEAVEN AND EARTH (“Heaven and earth”) Clearly, the seal of the Creator is found in the Sabbath commandment of His law.

Identifying the Image of the Beast

12
To be able to identify the image of the beast, we need first to identify the two-horned beast that helps in the formation of the image. Please read Rev 13:11-12, 14-17.
This two-horned beast has the following identification marks:
1. It came into existence around the time the papacy received its deadly wound in1798: “another beast coming up.”Rev. 13:11.
2. It came up out of the earth, as opposed to the first beast that came up out of the sea. If ‘sea’ represents many people and nations, then ‘earth’ represents a sparsely settled region.
3. It has two lamb-like horns. According to the Bible, a horn represents power. “He had
horns…and there was the hiding of his power.” Habakkuk 3:4. Therefore, this nation has two separate powers, distinct from each other. Also, a lamb is a symbol of Christ; hence, we can deduce that this nation was founded on pure and noble Christian principles.
4. However, it speaks like a dragon; a nation ‘speaks’ through legislative and judicial
authorities. The “lamb-like horns” and “dragon’s voice” point a striking contrast between the peaceful professions and the practices of this nation.
Which nation fulfils these identifying marks? There is but one: The United States of America.
1. USA came into existence around 1798. Only one nation was rising into existence at the time of the papacy’s loss of power in 1798. This prophecy points directly to the nited
States. The USA was organized under the Constitution as a federal republic in 1787.
2. USA arose in a sparsely populated land: The USA grew not in the Old World which was crowded with its teeming multitudes, but in the New World, with its relatively few inhabitants.
3. USA has two separate powers founded on Christian principles: The USA has a unique form of government, where church and state enjoy liberties guaranteed by the Constitution. Because of this system of government, the USA is indeed a Republic (a kingdom without king) and Protestant (church without pope), with both powers completely separated. Also, her lamb-like qualities made the USA a refuge for the persecuted and oppressed of many nations.
4. USA speaks like a dragon: The fundamental law of the USA written in its constitution guarantees individual liberty of conscience. Nothing is dearer or
more fundamental. However, the USA has already begun to and will soon fully repudiate every principle of its Constitution. And that which gives greater significance to this movement is the fact that the principal object is the enforcement of Sunday observance.
Such action will be directly contrary to the principles of this government. The
Constitution provides that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The inconsistency of such action is no greater than is represented in the symbol. It is the beast with lamblike horns – in profession pure and harmless – that speaks as a dragon. Just observing what is occurring in the news and in the recent past will confirm this biblical description. “Our priority is our faith.” George W. Bush, Greensboro, North Carolina, October. 10, 2000, quoted from Jacob Weinberg, “The Complete Bushisms.” “The plain message conveyed by the new administration is that George W. Bush’s America is a Christian nation and that non-Christians are welcome into the tent so long as they agree to accept their status as a tolerated minority rather than as fully equal citizens.” Alan M. Dershowitz, in “Bush Starts Off by Defying the Constitution,”
Los Angeles Times, January 24, 2001.

Prophecy soon to be Fulfilled

13
It is clear the two-horned beast is the USA. But what is the relationship between the USA and the image of the beast?

Although the USA was founded on principles opposed to the papacy, today we observe how the USA and the Vatican are working more closely together to make their influence more prominent. The Bible tells us that one day, in the not too distant future, the USA will legislate a law requiring its citizens, and then the world, to worship the first beast, the papacy. “And he [USA] exerciseth all the power of the first beast [papacy] before him, and causeth the earth [first USA, then globally] and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast [honoring papacy's Sunday], whose deadly wound [1798] was healed [1929]…saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast [duplicating the papacy when she used civil power to enforce religious dogma], which had the wound by a sword, and did live.” Rev. 13:12, 14. Soon the USA will renounce its religious freedom to enforce Sunday observance (the mark of the beast). his means that the Protestant Churches will control the government to accomplish their agenda. When this happens, the USA will have made an image to the Roman Catholic Church, uniting church with state. Then USA will speak “as a dragon” and exercise “all
the power of the first beast.” Rev. 13:11, 12. She will have the same spirit of intolerance and persecution that was manifested by the first beast, the papacy.
Therefore, as religious freedom is lost, persecution of the dissenting minorities will be inevitable, and there will be a repetition of the religious intolerance of the Middle Ages: “And he [USA] had power to give life unto the image of the beast [Sunday laws enacted]…and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast [by honoring Saturday, not Sunday] should be killed. And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark [those who honor the true Sabbath will be forbidden to buy and sell], or the name of the beast…”
Rev. 13:15-17

14
For this to be true, there should be evidence that the papacy is currently pursuing
Sunday exaltation in the USA, and that the Protestants of the USA (historic enemies of Rome), have changed their attitude, and are expressing readiness to collaborate in enacting Sunday laws. Is there such evidence?
Today most Protestants are favorable towards the papacy, and this has emboldened the
papacy to seek aggressively the legislation of Sunday observance: “All Americans would do well to petition the President and the Congress to make a Federal law – an amendment to the Constitution if need be – to re-establish the [false] Sabbath as
a national Day of Rest.” CATHOLIC TWIN CIRCLE, August 25, 1985, Article
“Sacking Sunday”. “In this matter, my predecessor, Pope Leo XIII…spoke of Sunday rest as a worker’s right which the State must guarantee.” Pope John Paul II – DIES
DOMINI, May 31, 1998. “…Christians [everywhere] should seek recognition of Sundays and the Church’s holy days as legal holidays.” Catechism of the Catholic
Church, popular and definitive edition, 2000, par 2188.
Most of the Protestant leaders in the USA are ready to bury the hatchet with the
Catholics: “Heads of American Protestant and Eastern Orthodox churches who were
meeting with Pope John Paul II on Friday hailed their first broadly representative discussion as a landmark on the road to greater unity…” The Montgomery Advertiser,
Sept. 12, 1987.
Billy Graham:

“I’ve found that my beliefs are essentially the same as those of orthodox Roman Catholics.” McCall’s, January 1978.
Paul Crouch: “I’m eradicating the word Protestant even out of my vocabulary…I’m not protesting anything… “Praise the Lord” program, Trinity Broadcasting Network, Oct 17, 1989.
David Wells: “If Catholicism is to become more Catholic in the future, which is what I expect under the present pope, then theological differences will become sharper, but our alliances with Catholics against the secular culture can become deeper. I, for one, am ready for the trade-off.” Eternity Magazine, Sept. 1987.

Avoiding the Mark of the Beast

15
How then can we avoid receiving the mark of the beast?
This is the most important question. God, in His infinite love, has warned us not to worship the beast and thereby receive his mark. Those receiving the mark of the beast “shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture
[without mercy] into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone… who worship the beast [honor papacy through Sunday observance] and his image [USA enforcing Sunday observance], and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name.” Rev. 14:10, 11.
These are very solemn words from God. His wrath is in proportion to the offense. By honoring Sunday, originated by Satan through the papacy, one prepares to receive the mark of the beast.

16
What about the billions of Christians in the past who honored Sunday instead of Saturday – did they unknowingly receive the mark of the beast? And what about the Christians today who sincerely think Sunday is the Bible Sabbath?
None are accountable for their errors since the light has not been brought to them; for the Lord “winks” at our times of ignorance. See Acts 17:30. We are only judged by the
light we had the opportunity to receive. But, when the universal Sunday law is enforced, the issue will be clear before all, and then whoever shall transgress the command of God to obey a precept which has no higher authority than that of Rome, will receive the mark of the beast. Soon each person will face this test with eternal stakes, to keep the mmandments of God or of the papacy. Where will you be found standing?

No Room for Neutrality

17
Why care?
God’s solemn warning in Revelation 14 leaves no room for indifference. Jesus said, “He that is not with me is against me.” Luke 11:23. God counts all men as decidedly for the truth or against it. This warning is no respecter of person, class, condition, or religion. It is addressed to all humanity. It is not necessary for us deliberately to choose the kingdom
of darkness in order to come under its dominion. We have only to neglect to ally urselves
with the kingdom of light.

What must we do?

18
God is most eager to enter into a serious relationship with you individually. In fact, He wants you to be His son/daughter. Just think what a privilege it would be to be a child
of the King of the universe. This genuine opportunity is granted to you. He is eagerly waiting to bestow this highest of honors upon you. Yet, His word to you is: “Be ye
not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what communion hath light with darkness? … for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in
them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore
come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and I will receive you,
and will be a Father unto you,
and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty. 2Corinthians 6:14- 18. This important Bible passage contains the following principles:
1. God does not permit any mixture of truth with error (even if it’s 99% truth). For “God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.” 1 John 1:5. Only Satan mixes truth with error to maximize his deception.
2. The duty of a person aspiring to be in harmony with God is to not be a member of any church or religious system that is built on Satan’s foundation: the mixture of truth with error.
3. Knowing that when you leave Satan’s systems of religion, you will lose friends, family, influence, work, etc…God assures you: “I AM the Almighty.” It means that He will more than compensate you for all that you have lost. Believe Jesus’ precious promise in Mark 10:29, 30.

Seoster
http://www.articlesbase.com/religion-articles/a-surprising-new-world-order-is-about-to-start-55756.html