6. Second Commentary

It should be noted that the Byzantine super-ethnos lived as long as possible - more than 1400 years.

        From the scientific point of view this phenomenon can be explained by a number of favorable conditions - the richest cultural heritage received by Byzantium from Rome (especially political and legal one), convenient geographical position, optimal geopolitical situation and many other things. But if we rise to a higher methodological level, metaphysical, we will see that the reason for such longevity was the Christian faith and the Orthodox Church, which was a powerful spiritual pillar of the Byzantine civilization. A religious law worked: "Spirit creates form". Its essence is simple: what is the spiritual state of the people, so is reality - political, economic, cultural, everything. It has been known for a long time - what's in people's heads is in their deeds. That is why as long as there were righteous people in the Roman Empire and there were prayers - the system lasted. Until the last ... righteous man. The famous Marcus of Ephesus, the only (!) bishop of Constantinople who didn't sign the shameful union with Catholics at the Council of Florence, can serve as a collective image of such righteous man. Ten years after this Constantinople fell.

         This approach to history can be accepted or not, it again depends on the spiritual state of the individual. But it is worth pondering over the question: how did it happen that the Second Rome fell just when the Third Rome - the Kingdom of Moscow, which took over from Byzantium and became the repository of the true faith - Orthodox Christianity - rose from the ruins? It happened not earlier, not later, but clearly - when it was necessary - in the middle of the fifteenth century. 

        This raises the question: so where do these same passionate impulses come from?  And why do they occur at this particular time and not at any other? In this case, the Byzantine push is in the first century, the Russian push in the 13th century. (There is just one round of ethnogenesis in between.)

         Gumilyov, as we recall, left this question open. But to the question: where do the passionaries come from? - he answered in an unscientific way: "God's will!"

         So, the phase of obscuration in Byzantium significantly exceeded the average duration of 150 - 200 years. It happened due to the reserve passionarity, which launched the mechanism of regeneration. But it does not happen often. Gumilyov emphasized: "The phase of obscuration is terrible because it is a series of abrupt changes in the level of passionarity, although insignificant to the absolute value. Adaptation under such rapid and qualitative changes of the environment inevitably lags behind, and the ethnos dies as a systemic integrity. Something similar, let us add, occurs in the phase of fracture, but there the passionarity drops sharply from maximum to average value, so in that phase there is always light at the end of the tunnel.

         Thus, we can state that the weakening of the ethnos and, as a consequence, its displacement from its living space, a phenomenon by no means socio-economic or political, but natural. There are no territories permanently assigned to any people, just as there are no eternal ethnic groups. Therefore, the question "Who is to blame?" can be answered in the words of Gumilyov: No one is to blame. It just is.      

         And now let us turn to Western Europe and its continuation - the United States. What phase are they in today? In his treatise "Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere of the Earth", written in the 60s of the twentieth century, Gumilyov noted that "the peoples of Europe ... are not so old as to fall into a state of folly", that is, in other words, the phase of obscuration has not yet set in. However, in one of his last interviews, the scientist looks at modern Europe in a different way: "After 1200 years, even obscuration ends. And what? - is not Western Europe now in a state of obscuration? It lives on accumulated wealth, of which it has a lot. It will be a hundred years before it is spent. And during this time? ...But I will refrain from making predictions.    

         Gumilyov did not say or write anything more about the phase of obscuration in Europe. But we have his method and we will use it.

        Today, at the beginning of the twenty-first century, it is already obvious that the Western super-ethnos has entered the last phase of obscuration. (With the exception of some white Americans, East Germans, Southern Italians, Irish, Spanish Highlanders and a few others.) This happened around the 1970s and 1990s. There is no need to list again all the manifestations of this unpleasant phase in modern Western Europe and the United States. Let us concentrate on the most striking points. These are the progressing demographic decline, national identity disorder, the invasion of migrants and the spiritual and moral crisis of Western society.

         In considering these processes, of course, it is necessary to make serious adjustments to globalization (accelerating the naturally occurring processes of decay), urbanization, and a number of techno genic factors, which are a consequence of the rapid development of modern megalopolis civilization.

          At the beginning of the 21st century, population growth in most Western European countries and the United States (among whites) has had a steady negative trend. The birth rate there is on average 1.5 children per family, while the reproduction rate is 2.5. Western women no longer want to give birth. Why? Russia, too, is experiencing a prolonged demographic decline (which has diminished somewhat in recent years). But we have clear reasons - social instability, material insecurity of the majority of the population, especially young people, and most importantly - fear of the future - from one system left, and the other will not come. (In the infernal 1990s, our people suffered from "shock therapy" - as if they were hit over the head with a club. Then there were other troubles. As a result, the majority of our population has been living in a state of flaccid stress for almost thirty years (!). What about children!

         But in the West, everything is relatively well. At least financially. What do they lack? What they lack is passion. You could say that in the West they do not give birth because they are old, and in Russia because they are sick.

        In "backward," but highly passionate ethnic groups, families have many children and are strong. The systemic ties (ethnos-system) are strong, both between family members and between members of the ethnos.  As mentioned above, strong family ties are an indicator of the health and strength of any ethnos. It is the opposite in weak-passionate ones. Compare Western Europe and the United States with China, India and Muslim countries (adjusted for urbanization). In Europe and in the U.S. (among whites) friendly families with many children are very rare, the number of divorces and single-parent families is enormous. In the U.S., along with single mothers, single fathers are increasingly common.  And it has long been customary there to put elderly parents in nursing homes. 

        An example of American parenting: a 15-year-old teenager stole five thousand dollars from his (not poor) mother and spent it all on his girlfriend. The mother, upon learning of this, sued the boy. Most Americans approved of her actions - she did what was legal.  This is at the family level. At the ethnic level, the alienation between people is even greater. The classic Western individualism is being replaced by something more terrifying: the "atomization of individuals".

        A favorite pastime of ordinary Americans is to "snitch" on their neighbors. If, for example, someone parked his car in a wrong place, or "abused a pet," or "violated a child's rights," wait for it, there will always be kind people who will call the police. In Ancient Rome, during the age of obscurantism, they also loved to denounce their neighbors. At first they wrote a huge number of denunciations about Christians, then, when Christianity was allowed, they wrote about non-Christians.

        The underlying reason for all these phenomena is that in the phase of obscuration, the intra-ethnic ties are severed and the members of the ethnos cease to feel their kinship. Ethnic systemic integrity collapses. Instead of the principle: "one for all - all for one!", the principle "each for himself!" begins to prevail, which at the end of the obscuration phase is replaced by the principle: "all against all! Well, it all starts with the fact that in the bourgeois phase of civilization, people say to each other, "That's your problem! "

         With the loss of passionarity, the maternal instinct is lost. The nature of people changes: women become more masculine and men more feminine. Hence the flowering of same-sex love. Gumilyov does not write about this characteristic symptom of decadence in detail, only casually mentioning the popularity of same-sex love in the late Roman era. However, it is clear that this phenomenon is directly related to the process of ethnogenesis - during the period of obscuration, the number of mutant individuals in the population increases sharply. (This is probably due to the accumulation of "gene contradictions").

         In harsh high-passionary epochs the law, the church, public opinion, are always and everywhere set against perverts. They are persecuted and punished. In "human-loving," "liberal" times perverts, or rather the less radical part of them, multiply without restraint, producing their own kind. (It is quite typical that the first thing a liberal revolution does is to exempt homosexuals from criminal punishment. This was the case after the revolution in France, after the February revolution in 1917, and after the coup d'état in Russia in 1991. But this is where the globalization factor came in.) When homosexuals and lesbians (including latent ones) within an ethnic group become much more than the normal norm, they begin to fight for their rights. After gaining "freedom," sexual minorities begin to impose their non-traditional values on all other people. After all, homosexuals cannot live quietly, without epatage, (a behavior of shocking persuasion, which is contrary to social, moral, or other norms accepted in society), and demonstration of their charms. It is a characteristic of the psyche. (In general, homosexuality is a consequence of damage to a person's personality and his spiritual foundation.)

        Today we are witnessing a real sodomite offensive in the West! There is even a new term, "Eurosodom. In many countries, under pressure from the globalizers and the "blue lobby" in the government, laws on same-sex marriages with the right to adopt children have already been passed. Against this background pedophilia is spreading, and voices are already being heard to permit marriages with underage children and to legalize incest(!). At the same time a movement to "protect children from their parents" is gaining strength, and laws are passed which, under the pretext of "children's rights", make it easy to remove a child from any normal family.

         Parallel to this there is a growing "feminization" - a movement of masculine women. The most radical part of them sincerely hate men, and fight for the right to cause them the most trouble. (There is no cure for this.) A less radical and more numerous part simply take over men's functions. Women of this type do not want to give birth; they want a career. Moreover, technological progress helps them in this today - physical strength is no longer the main thing. In the old days, it was necessary to plow the land, but today it is possible to make a living by sitting at a computer. Women are becoming managers, lawyers, and are joining the army and the police. (On a mass scale.) Eventually, they start displacing men from the holy of holies - politics - by becoming ministers and even presidents. Well, why would such, so to speak, women need men? It would seem that everything started with nothing - the struggle of women for equal political rights with men, i.e. the emancipation movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

         If we look at the problem from the point of view of ethnogenesis (let's leave mutagenesis to the experts), we will find that in the phase of obfuscation there is a deficit for men. At this time, there are almost no real male passionaries left, and there are not enough strong middle-aged, harmonious men for everyone. Therefore, even normal, non-feminized women, as creatures of nature more enduring, are forced to take on purely male duties to support the weakening system. All they have to do is to pine for a "real man" and imperceptibly turn into workhorses. Thus, the ethnic instinct of self-preservation works, or rather what is left of it. This, by the way, leads to the question of the legendary times of matriarchy.

          And here it should be stressed that all these phenomena are quite natural for this destructive phase of ethnogenesis. However, let us note in parenthesis, it is abnormal that today these "non-traditional" values and stereotypes are forcibly imposed on "uncivilized" peoples as universal norms to be followed. And first of all, this homo-pressure is exerted on the "public" and government representatives in "backward" countries. For example, once two homosexual mayors (from Paris and Berlin) criticized the mayor of Moscow for not allowing a parade of sexual minorities in Moscow, because he was a retrograde. It doesn't even occur to them that it's too early for us. Even in advanced Moscow.  We have to wait about two hundred years.

         However, none of this is new. In Russia, for example, on the wave of liberal-bourgeois reforms of the 1860s-70s the "women's issue" imported from Europe suddenly appears. As a result, the "liberation of women" on our soil translates, on the one hand, into a justification of fornication (for example, the suffering of Anna Karenina) and, on the other, into the negation of all traditional social foundations. As I. Shcherbina wrote: "The Teroins de Mericura / Opened schools for women, / So that from there our fools / went out as nihilists". First of all, it is always the weakest link that suffers.

         In this regard, let us note that the processes in the phase of obscuration and the processes in the phase of breakdown have quite a lot in common. This is one of the reasons why, on the one hand, we have similar problems to Western society and, on the other hand, why we have so easily adopted from the West what is harmful to the West itself. As one European cultural historian said, "You have not tapped into Western civilization, but into the Western sewer..."    

         The next sign of the phase of obscuration is intense migration. In the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, Western Europe was literally overwhelmed by a wave of migrants from Asia and Africa. Europe is rapidly (on the scale of historical time) darkening, browning and turning yellow. The iron law of conservation of energy kicks in.

        We observed the same processes in the ancient world, especially in the Roman Empire and Byzantium. But in our time the migration flows, natural to obscuration, are accelerated by the purposeful policy of globalization and the unprecedented development of means of transport and communication. But still the main reason is demographic: migrations to the West today are stimulated by sharp population growth in "backward" countries (the Asian passionate push of the 18th century).

         The French were the first to open their doors wide to migrants in the 1950s and 60s. They hoped that Arabs and blacks would eventually change into real Europeans and harmoniously integrate into the body of the French nation (since the 19th century they consider the nation to be a sociopolitical phenomenon). The enlightened French did not know the laws of ethnogenesis. As a result, the liberal policy of multiculturalism failed. It became clear that people from Asia and Africa would never dissolve among Europeans. Rather, they themselves would dissolve the natives of Europe. The pogroms carried out by Arabs and blacks in Paris in the fall of 2005 and in London in the summer of 2011 are just the beginning. One tenth of France's population is now Muslim. And by 2030, 30% of the French population will be of Arab origin! And that is not counting other migrants. The situation is no better in Great Britain and Germany. In the old European capitals of London and Paris the natives of the Negro-Arab countries amount to almost one third (!) of the population.

         In the United States, since 1965, after the new immigration law was passed, the share of European immigrants (who had always prevailed) has fallen sharply in favor of immigrants from "developing countries. In the last two decades of the twentieth century, more immigrants entered the United States than in all of American history! Most of them came from Latin America and Asia. The U.S. Immigration Service estimates that nearly a million legal immigrants and nearly half a million illegal immigrants, mostly Latinos, come to the United States each year.

         We know from Gumilyov's theory that close contact between representatives of incompatible super-ethnoses threatens the emergence of chimeras. Today it is obvious that the U.S. is rapidly becoming a conglomerate of mutually repulsive, uncomplimentary ethnic groups. That is, in the end, one big ethnic chimera. And chimeras, as we remember, give rise to anti-systems that produce life-negative worldview. Examples of such anti-systems in the U.S. are already numerous, and there will be more. These are numerous destructive (including satanic) sects, Masonic and other closed organizations, criminal groups, LGBT societies, aggressive subcultures, "leftists", "antifa", etc. Sometimes it's all mixed up in "one bottle". For example, the type she is - a Trotskyist, a feminist, a lesbian, a radical environmentalist who uses drugs and fights against fascism. Or another type - satanist, anarchist, criminal, pedophile, drug user and listener of heavy rock. In general, the forms of anti-systems can be very different, but the essence is the same - the hatred of the world around. According to Gumilyov - "metaphysical nihilism"!

         But the clearest indicator of the growth of anti-systemicism in American society is the growth of street crime and so-called unmotivated violence (shootings in schools, shopping malls, etc.). "Unmotivated" from a medical-legal point of view, but very much so motivated from an ethnological point of view. Anti-systems, as we remember, are fatally determined to destroy the world around them, that is - people, culture, religion, state and, ultimately - all of nature. Therefore, we can predict that the shooting and other acts of violence in the U.S. will continue to escalate. Until the day that the system collapses.

         Today, there is no doubt that migrants and anti-systemicists will undermine the decrepit body of the Western super-ethnos from within and tear it into many pieces. And they will be helped in this by homegrown sub-passionaries, of which there are a huge accumulation in Western metropolitan areas. And who, let's note, have already had their first rehearsal during the so-called youth revolutions of the late 1960s. After all, most of the "hippies" were typical sub-passionarians, led by anti-systemists. They were not protesting against the "unjust bourgeois order," but against the order as such. That is, against elementary order.

         Let us add to this the problems of the Negro population in America, which, it must be stressed, has not formed into a separate ethnos for several centuries. And among whom we see a large percentage of sub-passionarians today. Again, from the point of view of ethnology, the so-called "African Americans" are in fact neither Africans, nor Americans (indigenous). These descendants of migrants of different tribes are willy-nilly a kind of ethnic zigzag, a social group rather than an ethnic system. (I don't need to prove anything about the sub-passionality of a large proportion of American blacks, just look at the statistics on crime, loitering and rioting.)

         Hence the conclusion: the super-ethnic system of the old West is beginning to come apart at the seams. And the weakest link in this chain is the United States.

         As for Europe, it is already obvious that its "integration" and "multiculturalism" is not a sign of strength, but rather a sign of weakness. The modern Europe, united according to the globalizers' scenario, is a weak nation-state and an amorphous superstructure over it - the European Parliament and other structures. The complex (and therefore stable) super-ethnic system of the old Christian Europe gives way to a simplified system of the New International - the European Union. In which there is one political field controlled by globalists, one financial system (the euro), one language (English), one ideology (neoliberalism), one mass culture ("Americanized"), etc.

         From this objectively increasing monotony, the more passionate Germany is one phase behind, it used to fall out. However, after the two terrible blows inflicted on it in the 20th century (World Wars I and II), the passionate tension in the German ethnos has noticeably decreased. (In this connection, note that the deep contradiction between Germany and other Western European countries in the twentieth century was not in any historical grievances or mental dissimilarity, but in the different levels of passionate tension. Germany simply did not fit in, and therefore "behaved inadequately".)

         Thus, today we see in the West a typical simplification of the system. And simple systems, as we know, have no future. Of course, it is too early to bury Europeans and Americans: the beginning of obscuration is old, but not yet decrepit. Some countries may even resist. Reaction will surely follow in Germany (the people) and Great Britain (the elites), and there are still tough guys in the United States (the Home States, WASP).

However, in the strategic perspective, the aborigines of Europe and the United States are doomed.

        And we must emphasize that it is this ethnic weakness that has long been exploited by globalist supranational structures. The processes taking place today in Western Europe and North America are the completion of the first stage of globalization under the control of the ruling financial circles of the United States and Britain. This is the beginning of the construction of the New Babylon, which may be frozen for a while, but will definitely continue in some new form. (And the old global elites are likely to play a subordinate role in this "concert.)

         But the important question for us is: how can all these processes threaten the neighboring, non-European nations (the Balkans, Ukraine) or even semi-European nations (Eastern Europe - Poland, etc.)? The answer is unambiguous: in such conditions any "European integration" into the Western super-ethnos means ethnic suicide.

         As for Russia, the latest crisis (obscuration) of the West is unambiguously beneficial to it. This crisis, of course, will hit our country, but strategically it is beneficial. 

        Associated with all the above signs of ethnic decomposition in the phase of obscuration is another characteristic feature - increasing cosmopolitanism. In other words it’s a loss of national identity, when people lose their sense of homeland and cease to feel a sense of belonging to their own people (or feel it very weakly). Cosmopolitans can live in any country, "as long as the money is paid". They are people of the world. Gumilyov does not directly touch on cosmopolitanism, but it is obvious that in old ethnoses - especially in the presence of negative (anti-systemic) passionarity - there are much more people of this type than in young ones. Therefore, there is always a deficit for patriotism in the obscuration phase. For example, in medieval France, it was customary to die for the motherland. (The last great outburst of French patriotism was the Napoleonic Wars.) Today, few people want to die for "beautiful France”. After all, there is the Foreign Legion - let the mercenaries from "undeveloped countries" fight and die.

        This disorder of national identity occurs because, firstly, sub-passionarity is growing rapidly (parasite-sub-passionarians do not think about the homeland); secondly, the original basic genotype is being eroded, especially intensively - with frequent contacts at the super-ethnic level (Gumilyov almost does not touch on this issue). These processes are probably going on in parallel. Although we should immediately stipulate that the genotype is a delicate thing and has not been fully explored. (For example, genetic research showed that the genotype of Poles and Russians are identical, but there is no peace between our peoples for a thousand years - the complementarity is negative.  So genotype is genotype and mentality is mentality: the question needs to be studied. It can be assumed that there is not one but several gene levels, among which the mental (top one) is decisive from the ethnological point of view).

        To date, there is evidence that there are very few people with the original genotype in old ethnic groups, including relic ethnic groups. Most are of the mixed (heterogeneous) type. For example, a DNA analysis of white Americans of the descendants of old European immigrants, showed that 30 percent of them had Negro genes (not counting other admixtures). Of course, one has to adjust for the racial specificity of the United States, but in France, for example, the original genotype is very rare. Several thousand anthropological photographic portraits of the native French, superimposed on each other, gave a generalized portrait, where instead of a face were only muddy spots. But in Central Russia generalized portraits turned out quite clear - three related genotypes: the Ilmeno-Belozersky, Valday, Vologda-Vyatsky. But this is in the historical homeland of Velikorosses. If such studies were carried out in the Urals, Siberia, or in the south of Russia, the generalized portraits would probably be less clear - the ethnic mixing on the periphery was more intense, especially in Siberia. All these issues directly related to ethnogenesis are yet to be studied by specialists.

         The last sign of the phase of obscuration in the West, which we are considering, is a spiritual and moral crisis. First, it concerns attitudes toward religion. By the beginning of the twenty-first century. Western Europe and white America had become virtually irreligious. Protestantism and its moderate sectarian offshoots are no longer Christianity, but a pathetic imitation of it. Something still survives in Southern Europe, among Catholics, but even there many Catholic churches (still in operation) look more and more like museums.

         In recent decades, following the pro-Globalist Vatican II of 1962-1965, the Catholic Church has been actively "reforming", i.e. adapting to a sinful reality, and at the same time drawing closer to Judaism.

At the same time it is increasingly shaken by internal scandals, and clerics are attacked for their lack of tolerance of various "minorities. And this has its "liberal" results. And at the head of the church "liberalization" and ecumenism movement (a globalist project to unite all religions) is none other than the Vatican itself!

         Freedom of conscience in the West has already been taken to extremes. For example, the "Church of Satan" (!) has been officially allowed in the U.S. since 1966. Destructive sects ("Scientologists", "Jehovists", "Moonies", etc.) are not only NOT prosecuted, but are even protected by the government from the attacks of "obscurantists", i.e. the healthy part of society; and not only in the USA, but also in other "developed" countries.

         Magic and the occult, i.e. Satanism in disguise, is becoming an increasingly popular topic on television and in movies (wizards helping people, magicians saving the world, etc.). And many Western popular shows look more and more like satanic sabbaths. They do not forget about children - young viewers and readers are offered a role model of "good" witch Harry Potter, who, obviously, is the prototype of the coming anti-Christian "occult government," for the adoption of which it is time to prepare the younger generations.

         In movies and in the media we are seeing more and more blatantly anti-Christian stories and productions. Christianity is already being banished from schools, government institutions and private companies. A person can be reprimanded or even fired for wearing a cross. This is not just a growing lack of faith, but a militant rebellion against God! In the language of Orthodoxy - an attack on the world of the kingdom of the Antichrist. And this attack occurs with the tacit consent of most of the population. From a spiritual point of view, it is precisely connivance with world evil that is the root cause of the present crisis, all the rest is just consequences. Ideologists of globalization are well aware of all these things, and that is why they methodically hit the last islands of religion. With all their tools.

        One of the consequences of the spiritual crisis in the phase of obscuration is the unprecedented spread of low-quality mass culture, which in some places is already turning into anti-culture. Apart from natural ethnological reasons, its flowering today is connected to the politics of globalization, urbanization (i.e., the loss of traditional village culture), and the rapid development of the mass media, primarily television and the Internet. More should be said about this.

        Ancient Rome also had a primitive mass culture during the period of decline, but there was no way to replicate and disseminate it with the speed that the global media and the Internet do today. Nowadays, Americanized pop culture is more than just lowbrow culture. It is a kind of information weapon that strikes across the world, striking first and foremost the sick and weak ethnic groups.

         Mass culture is healthy and unhealthy. Healthy culture is when there are no more Shakespeares and Mozarts, but there is no running around the theater stage in the nude, no flying on a broomstick and no foul language. And they don't make cartoons that make children hysterical. For example, the cartoon "Well, wait a minute!" - is relatively harmless mass culture, but "Pokemon" is not harmless. Pakhmutova and "Blue Fires" are healthy mass culture, while "Comedy Club" and "Dom-2" are unhealthy.

         However, it can be even worse. When an ethnos becomes dominated by "negativists," sub-passionarians, and various other "minorities," mass culture becomes anti-culture. This is what is gaining momentum before our eyes: militant anti-Christianity, the cult of violence, sex, destruction. Bloody spectacles are becoming not just fashionable, but popular. Today there are no gladiatorial circuses in the West, but it is possible to see any kind of bloody violence on the screen. Psychiatrists established long ago - the need for bloody spectacles arises mainly in weak, gutless, unsure of themselves - that is sub-passionate. This is a kind of doping, a visual drug for this type of person. The Roman Seneca wrote that after such circus performances people go home devastated and even more depraved than they were.

        Vulgarity on the modern screen and stage is becoming almost the norm. If there is humor, it is "below the belt. Love is replaced by "free love," that is, by rough sex. Pornography is coming out of the shadows and becoming a whole branch of the entertainment industry, even if it is formally forbidden, but still quite accessible.

        A new aesthetic is emerging: the "aesthetic of the ugly. This is when deviations from the norm, when ugliness is presented as normal, or as cute ugliness, nothing more. We see this in cartoons, where instead of bunnies and bears, disgusting mutant monsters and "heroes" with ugly faces and bodies appear.

And also in horror movies, computer games, books, magazines, etc. The roots of such "aesthetics" go back to the modernist art movements of the avant-garde and abstractionism of the early 20th century. (It is known that among the avant-garde artists and other "experimentalists" there were many patients in psychiatric hospitals.)

         A characteristic feature of the degradation of mass culture is the qualitative revolution in Western cinema. It began in the late 1970s (Hollywood. "Star Wars."), and ended in the late 1980s and 1990s. Compare American or French films made before and after that time. Well, for example, a French film about good people, "The Toy," or an American film about bad people, "The Godfather," with films like "Lord of the Rings" or "The Matrix." The positive has diminished sharply and the negative has increased. And it is not even in the content ("good guys" still defeating "bad guys"), but in the occult-gnostic spirit of these works. There is a strong satanic overtone to modern Western cinema. Even the color of the film has become something dead blue.

         Moreover, in recent years Hollywood has had the standard of the "right movie". It includes the following ideas. The white character in the story is bad; the black character is good (the white character is a Nazi, a psychopath). The woman is strong, intelligent; the man is weak, stupid. Children - little adults, can boss around their parents, have all the rights. Homosexuals - talented, creative, gentle; "straight" people - primitive, rude. Christians - retarded, bigots, obscurantists; magicians and sorcerers – good, and for the good. Ethnic minorities and migrants in these films are good; the ethnic majority is bad, evil. The anti-patriotic, globalist idea is popular: any borders are bad. Good people tear down borders and unite, and bad people build barriers and isolate themselves.

        If the film expresses two or three of these ideas, it could win an Oscar, but if all of them, then it will win an Oscar. As the saying goes, "here we go!" Next stop is New Babylon”.

        In literature, we are seeing the same thing, but on a somewhat smaller scale. First, there is a decline in the quality of literary works and a rejection of the traditions of the "Modern", which is reflected in the dominance of "pop-literature" and the growth of nihilism. Secondly, and this is the main thing, at the end of XX century there is a sign transition from a normal science fiction to mystic and occult genre - "fantasy". And this already means the advent of the world infernal to the world of rational.

         Anticulture strikes in all directions. The Anti-West comes inexorably against the West. Even more broadly, the world is attacked by the anti-World!

         And it is not only the intrigues of the globalizers, controlling the world's media. Today it is no longer a secret that a large-scale information and cultural war is waged against humanity, in the course of which Hollywood and the global media affect the minds and souls of people quite deliberately and purposefully. But the fact is that the minds and souls of a huge number of Westerners have already been prepared for defeat and decay by the entire course of thousands of years of European ethnogenesis.

          At the same time, it is quite indicative that the phase of obscuration itself has already been given a "cultural" name in the West: "postmodern. (We should note, by the way, that today many Russian intellectuals, like their "educated" predecessors in the 19th century, have adopted the Western fairy tale of the transition of all mankind to a new postmodern culture, which is not degradation at all, but simply a new quality, characterized by absolute pluralism, "complete freedom of expression" and the perception of the world as "normal chaos".)

         Let us highlight the main point. Among the so-called artists and creators in the phase of obscuration, more and more people with an unhealthy, malevolent view of the world appear. They call themselves "artists not for everyone," while Gumilyov called it "negative worldview". The scientist wrote: "To express a worldview (both negative and positive) does not require logical proof". For example, some people believe that dogs can and should be beaten, while others believe that defenseless animals should not be beaten. Neither of them will give you any proof: everyone knows he is right, he feels it. So one says, "Well, what a pig - took and hit a dog!" And the other says: "What are you, stupid or what? Why don't you hit it, it's a dog!"

         The attitude to the dog seems a trifle, but it is from such behavioral trifles that the global sympathies and antipathies of ethnic and super-ethnic significance are formed. And so it is impossible to reconcile with logical arguments people whose views on the origin and essence of the world are polar. For they come from fundamentally different worldviews, some feel the material world and its diversity as a good, others - as an absolute evil.

        Thanks to Gumilyov, we know where people with a warped, evil worldview come from. They come from ethnic chimeras and their offspring - anti-systems, which in the phase of obscuration grow like poisonous mushrooms after the rain.   

       Once again, the iron law of "Spirit creates form”.

                                 After the End. The memorial phase

        As has already been said, ethnogenesis is a process that naturally undergoes several phases. But if the ethnos does not disintegrate during all the trials of the obscuration phase, it continues to exist without developing. This is homeostasis. People in this phase are like most harmonious people of the inertial phase. They are honest, benevolent, disciplined conservatives. "They are not tormented by passions or seduced by vices." They are old timers. "They throw out of their system both geniuses and adventurers and criminals," because there is too much trouble with them, while one wants to live quietly and peacefully. Such an ethnic system, Gumilyov wrote, successfully resists unorganized passionate invaders and can deal blows to sub-passionary communities, for zero passionarity is higher than negative passionarity. However, this homeostatic system can easily be destroyed by high-passionary and organized neighbors or aliens. This is exactly what happened to most Native American tribes in North America, many aborigines in Africa, Australia, and Oceania. (Only the good Russians, when confronted with the relict (remnant) ethnic groups of Siberia - the Evenks, Nenets, Chukchi and many others - not only did not kill them, but incorporated them into their own super-ethnos.)

        A man of this phase, Gumilyov wrote, "is able to appreciate exploits and creative takeoffs of which he himself is incapable. He especially likes the heroes and geniuses of times past, as the dead cannot bring any anxiety. And he remembers them with sincere reverence, which gives him the right to call the described phase "memorial"... But even this is not the limit of the simplification of the ethnic system.  If the ethno-isolate lives to a deep old age, its members want nothing to remember, love and pity. Along with the loss of memory of the past, people of the last phase lose their sense of time. For example, the Chukchi, before the appearance of passports, knew neither the year of their birth, nor the calendar as such. They were limited to the change of seasons.

        If an ethnos is in complete isolation and there are no passionate jolts near its habitat, sooner or later comes the inevitable end. Gumilyov gives such an example. On a subtropical island in a wonderful climate lives a small Negro tribe of Ongxi. "No one has ever harmed them. There's a reserve set up there, and they don't even let tourists in. They feed themselves on gathering and fishing. It would seem to be paradise, but the population is dwindling. They are simply too lazy to live. Sometimes they prefer to starve than to look for food, women don't want to give birth, children are taught only one thing - to swim. The vitality of the Ongkhi is low. One-fourth of young women are infertile.

         At this level of passionarity, ethnogenesis ends. However, this applies only to those peoples (societies) that managed to live to a ripe old age. The majority of ethnoses, as already mentioned, disappear before reaching their "relic" end.

        Interestingly, the local anthropologists believe that the Onghis live as all of mankind lived 20,000 years ago. To which Gumilyov objects: "Here is the power of hypnosis of uncritically perceived evolutionary theory of ethnogenesis. And how did the ancestors of the Onghi get to the Andaman Islands? After all, they must have known more than just coasting; and it is unlikely that they sailed the Indian, a very rough ocean at random. Bows and arrows, too, must have been invented or borrowed from neighbors."

         Let us add another example from ourselves. Scientists around the world are still arguing why the small civilization of Easter Island died. Someone sees the reasons in the artificial change of the feeding landscape and the exhaustion of natural resources. Someone puts it down to brutal tribal wars that led to the self-destruction of the population. Others believe that some kind of natural disaster was to blame. But no one, as far as we know, sees the reason that everything ended because it had to end sooner or later. It's just that the ethnos-isolate has lived all the time given to it by nature, and the natural end has come. And if even some unfavorable changes in the natural environment occurred shortly before that, this could only hasten the inevitable death of these deep old men.

         In general, it should be noted, all these disputes on the subject: "why did it all end?" have been conducted by Western and non-Western scientists for a long time and concern almost all disappeared civilizations, from the Sumerians to the Maya. Most of the explanations usually boil down to rather superficial things. Well, for example - "the government was bad", "enemies attacked", or simply - "not enough food". One is left to wonder: are the venerable scientists still not familiar with Lev Gumilev's passionary theory of ethnogenesis?   

                       In lieu of a conclusion. Evaluation of the Theory

        Before giving our modest assessment of the amazing theory with which we have become acquainted, we will allow ourselves a few critical remarks. Let us immediately stipulate that these remarks are not fundamental and relate mainly to private issues.

        First, Gumilyov's works do not clearly define the concept of sub-passionaries. In a number of examples, they seem to be quite energetic people, albeit with a negative sign. It seems that sometimes Gumilyov included ordinary scoundrels (anti-systemicists), taking not only "energy intensity", but also moral and ethical characteristics as a criterion.

        Not everything is clear with the definition of sub-ethnos. For example, in a number of works Gumilyov singles out Russian servile nobility as a special subethnos, which, in our opinion, is an exaggeration of the ethnic factor to the detriment of the social one.

        In addition, it is difficult to agree with Gumilyov's assertion, made in his treatise Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere of the Earth, that "national character is a myth. (Since the stereotype of behavior changes as the phases of ethnogenesis change, so does the character). In our opinion, national character, i.e. mentality, is a deeper and more stable phenomenon than ethnic stereotype of behavior. As already mentioned, mentality, unlike behavioral stereotype transmitted from parents to children by signal heredity, is preserved and transmitted at the genetic level. This is already the sphere of the unconscious. It should be reminded that these issues, practically bypassed by Gumilyov in his published works, were developed by V.A. Michurin, the pupil and follower of the scientist, who unfortunately passed away early. 

         Note in parenthesis that the ethnic archetype(s), associated with mentality, also change (they dissipate), only very slowly. It is difficult to say how slowly, and to what extent this natural process is influenced by man-made factors, e.g. a massive informational-psychological impact. At the same time, practice shows that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to uncover these deep layers of the unconscious with purposeful influence on consciousness and even subconsciousness. 

         In our opinion, there is no complete clarity on the question: how do new ethnic groups emerge in the territories unaffected by the passionate push or long after another push? Gumilyov explains the emergence of such ethnoses by the drift of passionarity, subject to the positive complementarity of the parties. And gives a convincing example of the formation of Latin American ethnoses as a result of the merger of Indians with passionate Spaniards. But what about, for example, most of the Eastern European and Balkan ethnoses, whose ancestors were Slavs? If everything is clear with the Poles (Lithuanian passionarity), then not so much with the Serbs. Who transmitted the passionarity to the Serbs? If the Turks, then how does this fit in with the Turkish-Serbian complementarity, not at all positive?

        In addition, Gumilyov's statement that modern Belarusians are already in the memorial phase, that is, they live in homeostatic equilibrium with the environment, raises doubts. Of course, zero passionarity is higher than negative, but this, according to Gumilyov himself, is not enough to be able to resist organized invaders. But how, in that case, to explain the fact that during the Great Patriotic War the most powerful guerrilla movement was in Belarus? Even taking into account the suitable landscape and the help of Moscow.  And, besides, what about the Russian-Lithuanian push of the 13th century, which went "through Minsk and Kiev"? (Gumilyov explains this by the fact that at the beginning of the upswing phase, the passionarians rush away from the center of the push toward the borders of the ethnic areas.) The Belarusians, of course, are a quiet and peaceful people, but, in our opinion, they do not look like an ethnic relic at all.

         But, perhaps, the biggest question is the assessment of the personality and activities of Ivan the Terrible. And first of all, the question: why does Gumilyov attributes the oprichniks of Ivan the Terrible, and the tzar himself, to the anti-system?  However, if with regard to some part of the oprichniks-executors it can still be assumed, then the "denial of life" of Tzar Ivan Vasilievich raises great doubt. The question arises: if Tzar Ivan IV justifiably strengthening state power is a representative of the anti-system, then who were the victims of the oprichnina - boyar-saboteurs? And how to combine the zealous efforts of Ivan the Terrible to protect Orthodoxy from "Latinism" and other heresies with his "anti-systemism"? (Once again, we note that according to this emotional logic, Gumilyov and Stalin, who fought against the anti-system for thirty years, also belonged to the "negativists. However, humanly it is quite understandable.) Of course, we should not idealize Tzar Ivan IV - there were excesses.

But there was a logic to these repressions: in an extreme situation, extreme methods of struggle are always used. And also - bad rulers are not usually poisoned in our country.

        These and some other ambiguities in the theory of ethnogenesis are today one of the reasons for a too free and even erroneous interpretation of both historical and contemporary events and phenomena. (This is in addition to deliberate perversions of Gumilyov's theory.) For example, some journalistic journalists, referring to Gumilyov's theory, classify most of the Soviet nomenklatura as sub-passionarians, and some write modern oligarchs and corrupt officials into sub-passionarians, confusing sub-passionarians with antisystemists (Gumilyov almost never used this term).

Other "experts," relying on Gumilyov, stigmatize "traditionally anti-systemic" Russian despotism and, especially, Stalinism. Others call the entire complex Ukrainian (Little Russian) ethnos a chimera, and the Belarusians a Russian sub-ethnos. There are those who believe that our inertia phase began with Stalin and would have lasted till now, if not for the coup of 1991. But these are obvious absurdities; the consequence of a superficial reading of Gumilyov's books.

         If we talk about the evaluations of scientists, it should be noted that there are few real experts on Gumilyov in modern science. His teachings are no longer poured with mud, as before (although attempts to slander were made), but often interpretation in the scientific environment is not quite right. And sometimes completely wrong. For example, at the scientific round-table devoted to the 100th anniversary of L.N. Gumilyov (TV channel "Culture", program "What is to be done?") the idea that we "need to increase passionarity" (?) sounded. And then it was said, and not by just anyone, but by the well-known neo-Eurasianist A. Dugin, that Gumilyov promised us a "Golden Autumn" (phase of inertia) in the late 1980s, but it still hasn't come. This doesn't add up. Indeed, Gumilyov in one of his interviews in 1989 said that perhaps Russia is already on the threshold of the inertia phase, and even compared Gorbachev with Augustus, but then changed his mind.

        In addition, until now in the scientific community can be heard a popular judgment in the 90's that "Russia has already entered a phase of obscuration," and that there is no hope. And at one of the conferences timed to the 100th anniversary of L.N. Gumilyov it was said that in order to revive Russia "it is necessary to return from the beginning of the phase of obscuration to the phase of ascent" (?!). Sometimes even those people who were personally acquainted with Gumilyov and listened to his lectures fall into error. For example, professor A. Burovsky, speaking on St. Petersburg TV in the program dedicated to Lev. The most often questioned is the existence of "Slavic super-ethnos," which, according to Gumilyov, disintegrated a long time ago.

        But most often questioned is the "Solar factor", under the influence of which passionaries allegedly appear (A. Dugin, A. Fursov, etc.). Indeed, the hypothesis of a possible connection between the passionary shocks and the long-term variation of solar activity, discovered by D. Eddy, was considered by Gumilyov. However, eventually, Gumilyov stopped on another hypothesis: it is not the sun that affects the launch of ethnogenesis, which illuminates the entire surface of the hemisphere (while the shock passes on a line 200 - 300 km wide), but the radiation from the distant cosmos. Perhaps, said Gumilev, the passionate shocks are associated with "supernovae" outbreaks, perhaps with something else. The answer is up to astrophysicists.

         In connection with such, to put it mildly, superficial assessments of Gumilyov, it should be noted that it is not only about some ambiguities in the theory of ethnogenesis - there are not many of them. The fact is that Gumilyov's scientific heritage is so huge, versatile and original that it is simply impossible to assimilate it at once, and put it into a brainstorm.

        (Lenin said that everyone has read Marx, but fifty people in the world have understood Marxism.)  Well, of course, Gumilyov, in contrast to the "scientific Talmudist" Marx, is much easier to read). Therefore, Gumilyov should not just be "looked through”. He must be read, then reread, then put aside, and read again. And first of all, let us remind - his theoretical books: "Ethnogenesis and the Biosphere of the Earth", "The End and the Beginning Again", "The String of History" and "The Millennium Around the Caspian Sea". In addition, also of interest are many articles and comments of the scientist, especially of the last period, as well as preserved video materials: lectures, speeches, separate interviews.

        It should be noted that the scientific heritage of Gumilyov should be treated very carefully. A superficial reading of Gumilyov can lead not only to wrong conclusions on some individual issues, but, even worse, to attempts to tear Gumilyov from Gumilyov - that is, to the desire to build his concept into someone else's methodology.

        This is exactly what the highly respected sociologist and philosopher A. Dugin, who has developed the new discipline of "Ethnosociology," and who stated at one of Gumilyov's anniversary conferences that "ethnos is a sociological concept" is trying to do (?). In our opinion, ethnology should not be confused with sociology. It turns out "neither two nor one and a half". From the very beginning, Gumilyov clearly separated society and ethnos - they are two completely different systems: open and closed. They exist in parallel, interacting with each other. And in this interaction, the ethnic is always greater than the social. The hierarchy here is simple: Biosphere - Ethnosphere - Sociosphere. As in a pyramid. So mixing ethnos and society is like mixing the base and the superstructure, the road and the cart, all the more so because the current post-modernist cart has long lost its way and is going "in the wrong direction".

         One gets the impression that the problem of many not even "liberal" (everything has been clear with them for a long time), but nationally oriented scientists (real, talented scientists!) is that they have "re-read" their Western colleagues. And they have not finished reading their own - Russian ones. Obviously - it is already such a national tradition.

        In general, it should be noted that many humanities scholars today, especially historians, clearly lack Gumilyov. (As well as politicians.) Under the current ideological confusion, humanitarian science lacks the most important thing - the methodology of history. As a result, it is not the cause but the effect that is at the heart of it. When there are many streams - small and secondary laws, there is no river itself - the main Law of historical development. Hence there is the lack of understanding of the underlying mechanisms of Big History. Failure to understand the present, failure to understand the future.

        And now let us turn to the challenges of our time. How to combine all these challenges with the theory of ethnogenesis?

_____________

        Gumilev did not address the question of the direct influence of the NTR on the natural process of ethnogenesis. He posed a broader question: "How did one mammalian species manage to corrupt the entire Earth on which it lives to such an extent?"

        Today it is already obvious that scientific and technological progress has entered into an insoluble contradiction with nature in general, and with the process of ethnogenesis in particular. NTP, of course, makes significant adjustments to the programmed ethnogenesis: some ethnic processes are accelerated, some are slowed down, and some are distorted. And some are distorted quite a lot. This issue at the beginning of the XXI century is particularly relevant and deserves detailed consideration. Today we are witnessing another revolution in technology. For example, completely new kinds of weapons have appeared and are already actively used: organizational, informational (including "networking"), psychological, psychotropic, etc. War nowadays can be waged in a completely different way, not the way it was waged during the previous millennia.

        If we look at this problem, as Gumilyov taught, "from the height of the eagle's flight", we will see the following picture. "Man the intelligent" appeared on the planet about 50,000 years ago. The first resource crisis hit mankind in the 10th millennium B.C. It was caused by improvements in the tools and methods of hunting (corral hunting), which led to a reduction in the number of animals. The transition to agriculture and cattle breeding - the Neolithic Revolution - began in the 10th and 9th millennium BC.

         Having set out on the path of civilization, i.e., having separated from nature, man immediately began to destroy nature. At first, this was almost imperceptible. Then, from about the 4th-3rd millennium BC, the pressure on nature intensified. Ancient farming and cattle-breeding began to cause noticeable damage to the environment. However, some part of landscapes managed to recover. But from the beginning of the 19th century, with the development of financial capitalism and big industry, everything began to accelerate rapidly - and in the era of the scientific and technological revolution, there was an ecological collapse. Think about it: in the twentieth century alone, people have destroyed more on Earth than in the many thousands of years of human history! And this is a brief episode in the history of mankind, not to mention the evolution of living nature.

         Today, "civilized" man thinks that nature can be "subjugated".  He does not understand what any "savage" understands: one should not interfere with nature rudely, it will take its revenge. Modern "globalized" man hastily invents artificial nature - models, clones, genomodifies it. He saws through the branch on which he sits.

        It is obvious that such "technical progress", despite its apparent infinity, is also intermittent - it has its beginning and its end. And knowing Gumilyov's theory we can predict that this end is not far off.

         Another problem of our time is demographic. Passionary push of the XVIII century, passing through the Eurasian continent from Japan to North Africa, has awakened from hibernation the vast masses of the population.  The vast expanses of Asia began to proliferate, spurred on by the nineteenth century's rush of the scientific and technological revolution and the rapid development of the world economy. On the yeast of these developments in the twentieth century rose the slumbering civilizations of the East: Japan, China, India, and the Islamic countries. Latin America began to gain strength almost simultaneously. Africa is waking up before our eyes.

         In recent decades mankind has experienced an unprecedented population explosion. In the past 100 years, it has increased from 1.5 billion to 7 billion! The Earth has become crowded. And this has led to the migration of people away from their super-ethnos on a much larger scale than in ancient times. What does it threaten? An increase in inter-ethnic conflicts? Shifts of ethnogenesis?

         Along with this, the question of the nature and driving forces of globalization deserves special attention. It is important to understand how this destructive process affects individual ethnogenesis and the course of world history as a whole? (More on this in a separate chapter.) Today, many countries and peoples have fallen under the terrible roll of globalization. It has caught Russia. And it has caught Russia pretty badly.

        I must say that literally before our eyes, humanity is entering into a completely new quality. We live not just another pre-war era, we live in an era of planetary historical watershed - history is compressed and accelerated, as before the global explosion. (Let's hope it's a purifying explosion.)

         All of the above gives reason for the critics of Gumilyov's theory to say that in modern conditions the concept of ethnogenesis does not work, that it is outdated and something new must be invented.  

        One can agree with the critics in the sense that in our time it is necessary to make serious adjustments for globalization, NTR, demographic explosion and other challenges of our time. As already mentioned, Gumilyov barely touched on these issues in his books. Only in one of his last lectures did he remark that if technology continues to develop in the same way, humanity will perish, and the theory of ethnogenesis will not be needed. (Actually, the remark is exhaustive. But it refers to the final phase of human history.)

         However, in our opinion, all these problems and challenges of modernity do not change the essence of Gumilyov's doctrine, because the main thing in the theory of ethnogenesis is a principle. Gumilyov formulated it simply: "The end and the beginning again. It is the age, passionary factor that explains to us how and why the movement of world history occurs. And which, before Gumilev, it was practically not taken into account. Scientists of the civilization school - Danilevsky, Spengler and Toynbee, of course, made a breakthrough in historical science, identifying the existence of civilizations and showing the algorithm of their development, but they did not answer the key question: Why?

         And if mountains of literature were written about the socio-economic, political, cultural and other factors that influenced the course of world history, nothing was written about the natural, energy factor. Practice has shown that this passionary factor works. Therefore we can safely argue that Gumilyov's theory, despite some ambiguities, is much more reliable and closer to life than all the Western "world-post-theories" put together, not to mention the concept of Marx, which, in its main provisions (historiosophic) was refuted by life trials.

        Times of course change, and sometimes very much, but the laws of nature remain! The strength of Gumilev's concept is that it is built on a solid foundation of the laws of creation. The laws given by God.

        That is why the passionary theory of ethnogenesis is not only logical and clearly argued - it is also beautiful. But most importantly - it is spiritual. For it proclaims the triumph of the spirit over matter, the triumph of blossoming complexity over ruinous simplification, the triumph of life over death!

         And so it is not surprising that Gumilyov's teachings are often not accepted by today's rationalists and accountants from science, brought up on the Marxist-Protestant, purely materialistic approach. The whole point is in the "spirit of the time", in the primitive one-dimensionality, i.e. spirituality, that embraced the civilized world. (When a popular Russian atheist historian seriously suggests that the evolution of human civilization is based on animal motivation - hunger, sexual instinct, and a desire for domination - it becomes frightening ... for historical science. Also, a purely ethnological question arises: weren't there Protestants from Europe among the historian's ancestors?)

         Civilized man over the past centuries has greatly degraded: he has changed his God-given nature and stopped following the laws of nature. He forgot about God, fell out of nature, and began to build an artificial reality on the basis of artificial theories he had invented. Civilized man began to remake nature for his own convenience, believing that he would get nothing more from it.

    It won't work! Nature cannot be cheated. It, as we already know, has the ability to purify itself. Gumilyov's theory once again scientifically confirms the truth that "civilized" man will be punished for all his crimes before nature, and punished severely. The blood-sucking crust of modern consuming civilization will be ripped from the body of the planet. And no Roman Clubs and Grand Inquisitors here will help.

        According to the logic of ethnogenesis, the end of the planetary "post-modernity" should be the end of the degenerated "civilized" man. Western man in the first place. But there is hope that this will be the end, followed by the beginning. Gumilyov's theory tells us that even in such seemingly "last times," regeneration is possible. And when, under the influence of new impulses of passionarity, the biosphere will be cleared of "civilized" rapists, and the ethnosphere will be free from the dictates of anti-systems, then in the life of ethnoses will no longer be such destructive shifts of ethnogenesis, which take place in our time. And most peoples will return to themselves. To their feeding landscape and their ethnic traditions.

        Thus, after the Great Planetary Cleansing, everything will go its natural way, as it has been going. Until the next Great Purification. And so until the planetary civilization enters its final, destructive phase, after which the earthly history of mankind will be over.  But here we are already moving from the scientific methodology to a deeper and more perfect methodology - religious methodology, which has long ago given its answers to all our questions.

        Gumilev's Passionary theory in the spiritual sense, is the last step in the transition from strict scientific knowledge to the Divine Revelation. From earthly to heavenly. This is why it is so hated by "metaphysical nihilists" - eternal enemies of the human race, who come into this world not to create, but to destroy. 

.