J.K. Rowling said: "I wanted Harry to leave our world and find exactly the same problems in the wizarding world. So you have the intent to impose a hierarchy, you have bigotry, and this notion of purity, which is this great fallacy, but it crops up all over the world. People like to think themselves superior and that if they can pride themselves in nothing else they can pride themselves on perceived purity. So yeah that follows a parallel [to Nazism]".

Here are some remarks about J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter saga (the first seven books):

• a parallel can be made between the fictitious events imagined by J.K. Rowling, and the actual events that took place in Europe in the nineteenth century.
  
• the representation made of the Jewish community is unflattering, and even pejorative. In 1933, there were 9.5 million Jews in Europe, which represents 1.7% of the total population. In the saga, Harry Potter is the only representative of the Jewish community. He is the only person supposed to be a threat to the dark wizard. The consequence is that Harry Potter seems an isolated madman, with no family, who totally ignores against who he is fighting. Harry Potter looks like a savage, who starts a fight where he is alone against all. It seems to me that this is not the attitude of the Ashkenazim. It seems to me that the Ashkenazim were not engaging themselves in a losing battle: the Ashkenazim were trying to move to Israel (since 1881), helped by the World Jewish Congress.
  
• a concept that often comes up in the saga is that by choosing to attack Harry Potter, Voldemort has made Harry Potter his equal. According to wikipedia, "the history of Judaism spans more than 3,000 years [...] Judaism has its roots as a structured religion in the Middle East during the Bronze Age". The Jewish community was organized long before there was a meeting between the Jews and those who would become the Catholics. I find it annoying (vexant) that J.K Rowling arranges things this way.
  
• a magic formula used by the Weasley twins is "Mischief managed". I find this formula intriguing. J.K Rowling knows how to be subtle and delicate (fait preuve de finesse), so I suppose it's an allusion to the conjugation used in the Arabic and Old Hebrew languages, but maybe I'm wrong.

This post was edited by Chevaucheur on Jan 28 2018 05:17pm

How to make my work something useful?

For my work to be really interesting, it seems to me preferable that they have practical, real, imminent utility. For that, the best thing to do is to create small groups. Small groups of a few tens or hundreds of people should be created. And in these groups, the eight intelligences would have to be present. Imagine a group of 50 Chinese, 30 Israeli, 40 French, 20 American, 120 Indian, 80 Black and 70 Russian. Imagine that this group is united, and that everyone respects and values ​​the intelligence of others. It seems to me that this group would be able to do a lot of things.
If we want to convince our leaders, and if we want to succeed in convincing ourselves, that arming at a national level is a bad thing, then there is no choice but to succeed in reconciling each other. Albert Einstein forgets to say that. The best way to prove that arms over-bidding between countries is a bad thing is to prove that different cultural communities are able to reconcile, to accord with each other.

If we can prove that a conciliation is possible between the different communities, then groups can be formed, which will have various intelligences. These groups would be provided with a powerful synergy. These groups would really be able to fight even state organizations. I am not Albert Einstein, I'm smarter than him (je suis plus malin que lui). I do not content myself with saying that "we must fight the armament of the states": I also give means to achieve this goal.

I am not Ashkenazi: I am Sephardi. I'm getting on, and I insist until something good is accomplished.

This post was edited by Chevaucheur on Jan 29 2018 04:12pm

I would like active pacifists who read my blog to send me a private message on the forum, to tell me that they are active pacifists. And to tell me what intelligence they cultivate best:

#1 - understanding
#2 - love
#3 - over-interpretation
#4 - knowledge

#5 - harmony
#6 - flavor
#7 - softness
#8 - curiosity


If you are an active pacifist, please send me a private message, to tell me that you are an active pacifist, and to tell me the number of your culture: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7 or #8.
I think that each of the eight cultures is important, so do not hesitate to contact me.
When I have enough data, I'll share the results, and we'll know if a powerful multicultural group can be created.

Thank you !

This post was edited by Chevaucheur on Jan 29 2018 04:22pm

One scene that I find particularly interesting in Avatar is when Neytiri rides the "thanator", a sort of huge jaguar.
I think this scene has marked the mind of many people:

http://james-camerons-avatar.wikia.com/wiki/File:Neytiri_Palulukan_Makto.gif



In this scene, it's a bit like Neytiri was blind. Her assiduity and understanding of things are put to the test. At the slightest mistake of inattention, Neytiri may crash into a tree. The mere fact of riding this huge creature in a hostile forest is something extremely dangerous. Historically, the Romans preferred to build roads, rather than being dependent on their agility and constant vigilance, and they were right. It's a good thing they did.

This scene is the marker of Neytiri's lack of assiduity. When she rides the thanator, she has little time to think of other members of her clan. It is an indirect betrayal that Neytiri commits here. It is a betrayal by negligence, it is a betrayal by lack of thoughtfulness. This is the type of mistake that Jews often make, sadly. These are mistakes that accumulate and become serious.

It is no coincidence that Jews and Catholics are soul mates. Assiduity is something very important in the Jewish community. Without assiduity, the community is quickly destroyed.

This post was edited by Chevaucheur on Jan 30 2018 10:59am

One important thing is not to get bogged down in complexity.
It is for me a fundamental right that the right to be understood, and that implies that I do not get bogged down in complexity. I have the right to betray others a little bit. I have the right, sometimes, not to intervene, while they make mistakes. I have this right. I have the right sometimes to let confusion reign. I have this right. I have these rights because there is a fundamental right which is the right to be understood. My security depends on the intelligence of others. And so there is a need for others to understand my way of thinking, and understand how I act. I have a fundamental right which is the right to be understood. That's what makes decency a real strength. Decency is a force, because decency is a sum of rights. And it is by seizing these rights that I will succeed in ensuring my safety, even when I take certain liberties that may seem strange to others.

There are two rights that are fundamental for a Jew:

• the right not to get bogged down in complexity
  
• the right not to be buried under an excessive amount of knowledge

There are two rights that are fundamental for a Jew:

• the right to understand things
  
• the right to be understood

This post was edited by Chevaucheur on Jan 30 2018 04:27pm

Here are some examples of the complexity that can be found with people of a rather Catholic culture:

• unexpected, and unpredictable situations:

Astérix gladiateur: https://image.ibb.co/kXfu66/non.png

Astérix gladiateur: https://image.ibb.co/meKhtm/gladiateur.png

Astérix chez Rahàzade: https://image.ibb.co/hLckDm/rahazade2.png

• situations of intense stress:

Astérix aux Jeux Olympiques: https://image.ibb.co/cpmsR6/taire.png

Astérix aux Jeux Olympiques: https://image.ibb.co/egGsR6/taire2.png

• funny and / or repetitive situations:

La Zizanie: https://image.ibb.co/gQKwm6/ouaiiie.png

Astérix chez Rahàzade: https://preview.ibb.co/gD4keR/rahazade.png

Obélix et Compagnie: https://image.ibb.co/gJJdzR/Ob_lix_Cie.png










On the internet, we can find this:


The saga of Asterix is a rich and voluminous saga, which corresponds to complexity.
Complexity is present in Catholic culture, and it's important to be aware of it.

Do you know Frantz Fanon?



Frantz Fanon was born in Martinique, and he has Afro-Caribbean origins. He studied in Fort-de-France, a city in the Antilles. Thus, he becomes a psychiatrist and essayist. In 1943, he joined the French army, and he went to Algeria. He becomes an essayist strongly involved in the fight for the independence of Algeria.
He sees colonial society as a pyramid in five parts:

• rich settlers
  
• petit-blancs
  
• jews
  
• evolved natives
  
• populace (the rest of the natives)

When the Algerian war broke out in 1954, he joined the Algerian nationalists. In France, he has been obscured for his radical condemnation of French colonialism for many years. Today, there are some tributes that are made to him in France, and there is even a high school that bears his name. I'm not sure I appreciate this Frantz Fanon, but anyway, he said some interesting things in his works. Here are some quotes from him that I like:





The Wretched of the Earth, Frantz Fanon, 1961





Black Skin, White Masks, Frantz Fanon, 1952

In general, people in the world do not like others to be guided by their emotions.
I have a rather atypical vision in the sense that I find it good that a person lets talk his/her emotions. It is essential that some people are guided by their emotions if we want them to be able to cultivate certain intelligences such as knowledge or assiduity. Society needs some people to be guided by their emotions, so that society can have each of the eight different intelligences. I think that each of the eight intelligences that I succeeded to identify is important. Each of the eight intelligences is worth being cultivated.

It seems to me that some English people do not like Donald Trump too much, precisely because they reproach him for being too guided by his emotions.
Personally, I like Donald Trump. I think he's smart, but he exaggerates a bit sometimes.
We all saw some tense exchanges between Donald Trump and Theresa May. I think it's a mistake to blame a person for being guided by his/her emotions. I think Donald Trump's somewhat aggressive attitude is his way of protecting himself from people who do not tolerate those who let themselves be guided by their emotions. It seems to me that Donald Trump's aggressiveness is his way of protecting himself, and that is not a sign that he is an unstable person. Maybe I'm wrong.

Also, I think we should not demand that our leaders have always been irreproachable.
A person who has always been irreproachable is likely to make a very serious mistake, suddenly. Such a person have probably less experience. I have more confidence in someone like Donald Trump (despite his attitude sometimes a little macho, and despite his attitude sometimes a bit aggressive) than in someone who is still very young.

A question that deserves to be asked is what is expected of our leaders. Do we want experienced men, or do we want irreproachable men?
I think this question is worth asking. I think it would be wrong to want to avoid mistakes at all costs. American intelligence has three characteristics: decency, emotion, and... approximation. In this sense, it is not essential that an American leader has always been irreproachable.

For Albert Einstein, it is not the leader who has the biggest role to play.
For Albert Einstein, it is the people who must work actively to achieve peace.
This is only my personal interpretation of what Albert Einstein wrote in his book.


Albert Einstein, The world as I see it, chapter "Active Pacifism"

(We find this notion in the movie Warcraft, when Medivh says that the only true guardian of peoples is the people themselves.)


I think it would not be nice to have only empirical reasoning. Sometimes it's better to trust your instinct.
The social sciences are complex. There is a whole bunch of elements that we can not yet define precisely, but that we can see, sometimes only unconsciously.
That's what today's society is like: today's society is a fragile society, where science has difficulties to make progress, particularly because of numerous criminals.

So, I think that being guided by your emotions is not necessarily a bad thing.
So, I sometimes allow myself to be guided by my emotions. And I find it very pleasant. And you know what ? I have a favorite prayer. It is strange to say, but there is a prayer I prefer over others in Judaism.

Generally, in Judaism, reciting prayers is something that I find challenging, tiring, grueling.
But there is a prayer that is a little less trying than others.
This prayer is the prayer that is recited for Hanukkah.
You can pick it up on the internet, if you want, but I do not recommend it.

The Hebrew language is a particular language, and it is endowed with a particular richness. But I think prayer is not a good approach to this language.
Historically, Jews have been dispossessed of their country. They could no longer speak their language quietly, and prayer played a role in safeguarding their identity.
But today, I think it's not good to be burdened with tons and tons of prayers.
Today, we managed to reclaim some of what was once our country, and it's something positive.
This allows us to lighten the prayers we recite without risking losing what makes our identity.

If you are interested in the Hebrew language and want to learn a few words, I advise you to learn some neutral songs about animals in the forest and clouds in the sky.
Personally, I do not know of any such song, and in fact, I know very few words in Hebrew.
I think the Hebrew language is still evolving. The Hebrew language will evolve slowly, gradually, at the same time that world society will learn to bear despair.
There are still very important gaps in the world society in terms of understanding.
One of these gaps, particularly evident, is the lack of social intelligence in today's society.
Right now, I'm trying to fill that gap.

Here is a summary of things that I find important:

• in biology, a human brain is a sculpture on which are arranged garlands
  
• there are two different ways to sculpt a brain: performance, or adequacy
  
• there are eight different types of garlands: understanding, assiduity, over-interpretation, knowledge, harmony, flavor, sweetness, curiosity

In the world, there are eight main cultures, each of which corresponds to a type of garland:

• Jewish culture for understanding
  
• Catholic culture for assiduity
  
• Muslim culture for over-interpretation
  
• Protestant culture for knowledge
  
• the culture of south east asia for harmony
  
• Indian culture for flavor
  
• the culture of eastern europe and north asia for sweetness
  
• sub-Saharan culture for curiosity

I also think that there are some hybrid cultures:

• Corsican, a a hybrid culture that cultivates both understanding and assiduity
  
• the falasha, a hybrid that cultivates both understanding and curiosity
  
• the Spaniards and a good part of of the inhabitants of latin america (and to a lesser extent Moroccans), a hybrid that cultivates both assiduity and over-interpretation
  
• the Japaneses, a hybrid that cultivates harmony and a set of other intelligences
  
• the german and dutch, a hybrid that cultivates both assiduity and knowledge
  
• the Iranians, a hybrid that cultivates over-interpretation and a set of other intelligences
  
• the Pakistani, a hybrid that cultivates both over-interpretation and flavor
  
• and more

I think it's quite positive that there are hybrid cultures, but I also think there must be some vigilance with them.

This post was edited by Chevaucheur on Feb 1 2018 08:17am