Friday, September 11, 2009

It was the effect of yoga of Sri Aurobindo that fascism and communism got destroyed mutually

Though it is a personal view of Yechury qua “The capitalist world is destroying the past to stop the possible return of a socialistic order”, HT dtd. 10.09.09, p.10, but still I am sending a rejoinder as thousands of persons having perversity of mind subscribe to these views of Yechury.
Bijan Ghosh 11.09.09

The world openly criticises fascism, particularly the German fascism headed by Hitler but that was just the other side of the coin which is called Bolshevik socialism, but ironically, that was admired. These two were considered as diagonally opposite or rather apparently not matching with each other – but the World-Soul was trapped in cross-roads of these two diabolic forces. And humanity is saved since both were mutually destroyed through the purging out of World War. It is true that there was a chance to defer the World War or to protect Stalin’s USSR, the home for Bolshavic socialism, and to destroy fascism alone, but it was the true grace of the heaven that both fought and got destroyed by each other, one instantaneously with the concluded notes of the second world war and the other, a few decades thereafter while the process was initiated through second world war.

Truth of the century is, Hitler and Stalin fought each other, and humanity was saved.

In reality, there was a divine diplomacy to order Hitler to launch attack on USSR, it took the formation of that Being, known as “Lord of Falsehood” / “Lord of Nations” which was the guiding-guru for Hitler and used to gave him all commands at the “bunk” at Berchtesgaden, and that formation asked Hitler to attack USSR. Hitler immediately accepted because it was his cherished dream also to destroy communism.

‘The greatest military march in world history’ advanced 600 KM into USSR within a fortnight. Churchill wrote in his memoirs: “Almost all responsible military opinion held that the Russian army will soon be defeated and largely destroyed”. In nine weeks of war, USSR lost 4500 planes, 5000 tanks and 7500 guns. But the 182-day-battle in Stalingrad was the decisive event of human history, which kept the World-Soul alive.

We have witnessed that how nature helped the cause of Hitler attacking USSR, i.e. how Hitler was made to embrace defeat on the soviet ground by the hands of nature. Hitler took the weather-chart of last 100 years, but was of vain - there was an unforeseen-unpredicted-unusual fall in temperature, breaking the record of last 100 years, it went down about minus 40 decree Celsius, German soldiers were not accustomed at that temperature and collapsed. Being forced to retreat – wrote in the walls in Istra near Moscow : “Farewell Moscow we are going off to Berlin” while Soviet soldiers wrote below, “We will get to Berlin too” and they did – Nazi flag atop German Reichstag was lowered , putting an end of fascism from the world.

Nature does most in him, God the high rest. Savitri, p. 542

It was the effect of yoga of Sri Aurobindo by which the fascism and communism got destroyed mutually. He wrote specifically (Letters on Yoga/SABCL/22/pp207-8) that “… if Russia and her dialectical materialism are to lead the world , well, fate must be obeyed and life divine must remain contained to wait perhaps for another millennium.”

The fate of the world was destined to wait for another millennium for the life divine to be established on earth, through the process of sufferings and ultimate defect of Bolshevik communism which was premised on the principles of the dialectic materialism but fate of the earth was changed by an unchanging will of Sri Aurobindo, i.e. His sadhana, which He predicted in Savitri:

Fate shall be changed by an unchanging will Savitri, p. 346

It is true that Henry Truman made the statement in the Parliament, (New York Times June 24, 1941) just on the next day after Hitler attacked Stalin’s Soviet Russia on 22.06.41 that “If we see that Germany is winning we should help the Russians and if Russia is winning we should help the German and that way let them kill as many as possible.” – though the original intention of Truman was something different since he was promoted by the unseen hands of Rothschilds who supported both the camps of the world war to made the world more unstable – which house had neither the aim to destroy fascism nor to destroy Bolshevik communism either.

Be that as it may, but the world was saved since Hitler attacked Soviet Russia, else on the contrary, the world would have been governed at the conclusion of the world war on the victory of Axis Power by the secret-mutual-agreement which was a part of Germany-USSR non-aggression treaty, known as Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, August, 1939, thus dividing the world into different shares in terms of the hidden agreement and perhaps this part of the continent would have been under the grab of the Stalin. Yechuri today is dreaming of to restore the socialistic order in the world but none of the Yechuris could even mention that why to establish a Socialistic order, those countries did establish a huge secret archives and why they are still maintained.

It must be noted that it would be unjust and inappropriate if the Humanity Today does not acknowledge with respect the sacrifice of the Soviet soldiers but for whom there would not have been any success for the life and freedom. Though they were under the guidance of Stalin but that could never devaluate their sacrifice. For every allied soldier who laid their lives for liquidating fascism, there were 40 soviet soldiers who laid their lives. More than 24 million Soviet soldier and population died (USSR 24 millions; China 15 millions; Poland 6 million; Germany 8 million; Japan 3 million) – in 1418 days of was, USSR about 14000 every day, i.e. about nine lives every minute. Bijan Ghosh 11.09.09 [Farewell to history The capitalist world is distorting the past to stop the possible return of a socialist order, writes Sitaram Yechury.] from bijan ghosh to "Tusar N. Mohapatra" date 11 Sep 2009 17:39 subject WW II & Sri Aurobindo: you may put in blog-- bijan ghosh

The counterpart of the desire to move forward that is becoming, is the dread of having become, of finality or death

Mediation and memory in the theory of money
via The Memory Bank by keith on 9/10/09
Money as mediation

Anthropologists and sociologists have long rejected the impersonal model of money and markets offered by mainstream economics. Viviana Zelizer, for example, shows in The Social Meaning of Money that people refuse to treat the cash in their possession as an undifferentiated thing, choosing rather to ‘earmark’ it — reserving some for food bills, some as holiday savings and so on. Her examples generally come from areas that remain invisible to the economists’ gaze, especially domestic life. People everywhere personalize money, bending it to their own purposes through a variety of social instruments. This was the message too of Parry and Bloch’s Money and the morality of exchange. When money and markets are understood exclusively through impersonal models, awareness of this neglected dimension is surely significant. But the economy exists at more inclusive levels than the person, the family or local groups. This is made possible by the impersonality of money and markets, where economists remain largely unchallenged. Money, much as Durkheim argued for religion, is the principal means for us all to bridge the gap between everyday personal experience and a society whose wider reaches are impersonal.

Money is often portrayed as a lifeless object separated from persons, whereas it is a creation of human beings, imbued with the collective spirit of the living and the dead. Money, as a token of society, must be impersonal in order to connect individuals to the universe of relations to which they belong. But people make everything personal, including their relations with society. This two-sided relationship is universal, but its incidence is highly variable. Money in capitalist societies stands for alienation, detachment, impersonal society, the outside; its origins lie beyond our control (the market). Relations marked by the absence of money are the model of personal integration and free association, of what we take to be familiar, the inside (home). This institutional dualism, forcing individuals to divide themselves every day, asks too much of us. People want to integrate division, to make some meaningful connection between their own subjectivity and society as an object. It helps that money, as well as being the means of separating public and domestic life, was always the main bridge between the two. That is why money must be central to any attempt to humanize society. It is both the principal source of our vulnerability in society and the main practical symbol allowing each of us to make an impersonal world meaningful.

The two great means of communication are language and money. Anthropologists have paid much attention to the first, which divides us more than it brings us together, but not to money whose potential for universal communication is more reliable, in addition to its well-advertised ability to symbolize differences between us. As a symbolic medium of communication, money informs our subjectivity and gives concrete expression to our desires, releasing and fixing our imagination in many ways. It is a store of individual and collective memory, the stuff linking persons to their communities.

‘Just as my thoughts must take the form of a universally understood language so that I can attain my practical ends in this roundabout way, so must my activities and possessions take the form of money value in order to serve my more remote purposes. Money is the purest form of the tool (…); it is an institution through which the individual concentrates his activity and possessions in order to attain goals that he could not attain directly.’ Simmel The Philosophy of Money

Indeed, as Marx argued, money is a means of communication so powerful that we often ascribe human or quasi-divine agency to it and what it buys. In some ways, Money is the God of capitalism and most of the inmates are believers. [...]

Oswald Spengler on money and number
In The Decline of the West, Oswald Spengler emphasized the part played by money and number in the history of Western European civilization and its North American offshoot. The first idea I draw from him is that money is just one of several abstract universals of which number, time and space may be more relevant than language. The second is that, for all their apparent universality, these should be approached as cultural particulars with their own historical patterns of growth and decline. Third, world history in our period has been dominated by the West owing to its adoption of a specific form of economic life, based on money and machines, that normally goes by the name of ‘capitalism’. Fourth, rather than adopt a timeless form of words for what interests us today, we should embrace the dialectic of ‘becoming and become’, in order to understand both the immanent direction of our present circumstances (history) and their finitude as the residue of what has already happened, the past (nature). So, finally, the question of money’s power is historically and geographically relative: we need to attend to the relationship between measurement of money as something perceptible to the senses (magnitude) and money as a category of thought expressed intangibly as abstract relations (function).

According to Spengler, the West had exhausted the historical impulse given by its modern version of economic life (featuring money and machines) and a new phase, based on politics, national religion and war, was about to take over. This was not a bad prediction, but Spengler’s interest for us lies in how he conceived of the relationship between money and other universals. Following Goethe, Spengler made a contrast between history (becoming) and nature (what has become). The counterpart of longing, of the desire to move forward that is becoming, is the dread of having become, of finality or death; and this pair together drive cultural creativity.

‘Life, perpetually fulfilling itself as an element of becoming, is what we call ‘the present’, and it possesses that mysterious property of ‘direction’, which men have tried to rationalize by means of the enigmatic word ‘time’.’ [...]

The Apollonian idea of money as magnitude (which is classical) and the Faustian conception of money as function are opposites. ‘Classical man saw the world surrounding him as a sum of bodies; money is also a body’ (talents, coins). [...]

Spengler concludes with a prophecy that the world of money and machine-industry will be overthrown by ‘blood’ as the dominant life-principle; and at this point we leave him. But his framework contains much of value for an analysis of the conscious and unconscious influence of money on our actions today. [...]

Money is the ocean we swim in these days. Despite or because of this, its role in human affairs continues to be demonized and the attempt to return it to the marginal role it was confined to in agrarian civilizations always finds a ready audience. Money surely generates value and significance in human interactions as much as it erodes it. It is a symbol of our relationship as an individual person to society (hitherto more often singular than plural). This relationship may be conceived of as a durable ground on which to stand, anchoring identity in a collective memory whose concrete symbol is money. Or it may be viewed as the outcome of a more creative process in which we each generate the personal credit linking us to society. The potential for shifting meanings, identities and memories lies in the reflexivity of money and language. This latter outlook, however, requires us to abandon the notion that society rests on abstract grounds that are more solid than the transient exchanges we participate in. Few people at present are prepared to take that step, preferring to receive the money they live by, rather than make it. When the meaning of money is seen to be what each of us makes of it, we may be less inclined to think of Money as the somewhat archaic God of capitalism that it has become. Paper presented at the workshop ‘On either side of the economic science of money’, Universit√© de Paris X, Nanterre, 18-19th September 2009