IRANITY

What is Iranity?

On one hand, Iranity is the solution against Islamic intolerance, a solution to do without any religion that destroys human spirit of free thinking, and annihilates human dignity. Be aware: most Muslims are not Islamic. They are just born Muslim. 

On the other hand, and simultaneously, yes simultaneously, Iranity has a set of cultural values that works against greedy mercantilism, against a system that has been established during the past 500 years by greedy merchants, unscrupulous merchants thirsty for power and driven by the need to dominate, a system prone to competition, conflicts and war, a system that has been destroying our planet’s environment and depleting our natural resources, without consideration for future generations’ life on Earth.

The cultural values of Iranity have their roots in Zoroastrianism, Mithraism, and later with the teachings of Mâni. That was before Iran was conquered seven centuries after J. C. by the Arabs who imposed Islamic rules. Iranians feel also very much akin to Jesus’ teachings promoting love, peace, compassion, and tolerance. Whether Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Zoroastrian or Atheist, Iranians commonly call him respectfully  Jesus the Messiah (in persian: Isâ Massih). After the Arab-Islamic conquest of the Iranian plateau, the Iranic culture survived in form of Sufism, Dervishism, Pantheism through thinkers, poets, and philosophers such as Omar Khayyam, Mowlânâ (Mowlavi or Rumi), and Hâfez, to just name a few. And, more contemporary, the Bahai Faith. The Shi’a branches of Islam are also various versions of Islam mixed with elements of Iranity. That is why you see pan-arab traditional (sunni) Muslim extremists, like those of Taliban, Al Qaeda,  Wahhabite, Salafi, and so on,  prone to physically eliminate Shi’as, Sufis and Dervishes, throughout history.

Zoroastrianism is an old Iranic religion based on two principles, one on how to behave towards oneself, and the other one how to behave toward one's environment. To personal principle is to behave according to the trilogy of Good Thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds (in Persian: Pendâr-e Nik, Goftâr-e Nik, Kardâr-e Nik). The other, related to the environment, is to keep clean, the air, the water, and the soil, and to keep alive the flame of fire symbolizing natural resources. One should know that in order to fight Zoroastrianism, Muslim conquerors and those submitted to the Mohammedan religion, called Zoroaster’s  fire worshippers, far from the Truth.

Zoroaster’s cosmology can be summarized as follow: there are two opposite forces in the universe and in social life: light versus darkness, health versus illness, truth versus lies, knowledge versus ignorance, love versus hate, peace versus war, and so on, … in short, goodness versus evil; and individuals  shall side with the forces of goodness (Ahura Mazda or God) against evil (Ahriman or Satan). Being loving, and working towards increasing knowledge, are amongst the main elements of Zoroastrianism. I just summarized the fundamental philosophy of Zoroastrianism, the way I understand it. We do not care about present practice and rituals, which can differ from one community to another, from one person to another, from one zoroastrian sect to another.

Love, warmth, and affection are also the main elements in another Iranic religion: Mitraism (Mithraism). Mitraïsm has the Sun as god figure. A religion that precedes Christianity before becoming contemporary to it, and which was dominant in Minor Asia, where is now Turkey and Greece, before gaining  the whole Europe, including today’s Spain, France and England, as well as Rome, the capital of the Roman Empire, was in fact a rival to Christianity, until one of the Roman emperor decided to adopt Christianity as the official religion of the Empire.  The force of Mithraism resided in its knowledge of the Solar system. They have been called pagan and sun worshippers. But sun worshippers might be a biased expression. They’ve just realized and accepted the fact that our life on Earth depends on the Sun. They were extremely advanced and discovered the seven main planets evolving around the Sun. The seven days in a week is a consequence of Iranian Mithraism dominance. A fantastic progressive knowledge for the time, and a fantastic religion based on astronomical knowledge! In the relics found in Mithraid temples excavated throughout Europe, the depiction of the God-Sun Mithra killing the bull is crowned by the seven planets revolving around the Sun. The seven days of the week seems to be a  Mithraist legacy to the world. The name of the days of the weeks illustrate and are witness to it: Moon (Monday/Lundi=Lune), Mars (Mardi / Tuesday), Mercure (Mercredi / Wednesday), Jupiter (Jeudi / Thursday), Venus (Vendredi / Friday), and Saturn (Samedi / Saturday). And Sunday, Sun-day, is obviously a reminiscence of Mithraism and not Christianity. Christianity, as adopted by the Roman Emperor, is a syncretic religion that absorbed many elements of Mithraism, including Christmas, which is the coming back of Light, corresponding to the Winter Solstice. Perhaps, it explains why Iranian Iranics have always felt so close to Christianity, perhaps instinctively and unconsciously.

However, Mithraism and its followers were ferociously fought within the Roman Empire, once the Emperor decided to definitely adopt Christianity as a sole religion of the Empire, and after integrating elements of Mithraism into it. Perhaps it explains why the Roman Christian Church, even centuries later,  even during the Renaissance, was still so ferociously and irrationally punishing whoever would say that the Earth is round and evolving around the Sun. But not always successfully.  Italians' main folkloric song is still today O Sole Mio (O my Sun)! That is also why terms of astrology and astrologists were looked with suspicion in the Christendom.

Be aware:

Iranity is not merely a nationality. It is mainly a spirituality, a way of being in the world. Some Iranian citizen do not adhere to it, or are deprive from it. Those who adhere to that spirituality, we call Iranic, in order to distinguish them from merely Iranian citizens. Iranity is a spirituality that tends to be  synonymous with humanity at its best,  and to be a hope and a positive participant in humanity’s potential infinite love and infinite knowledge, which for Iranics best signifies and represents the idea or notion of God.

Shodja

WORLD MOVING TOWARDS A SOLUTION FOR SYRIA ?

President Assad with first lady Sama

UK-US establishments seem to have given up in trying to overthrow Assad by supporting the Islamist rebels. Recent development resulting from the US presidential elections and the present presidential election in France are some indication of a change in North Atlantic policy. In the past days, Islamic ‘’jihadi’’ rebels seem to be loosing ground in Aleppo, from what transpires from their own words, blaming a ‘’lack of hospitals’’. They are not receiving the same support from the Anglo-Americans. Videos and reports indicate civilians escaping from East-Aleppo towards the Syrian army and governmental liberated zone.

Egyptian government seems also to be aligning openly itself with Syrian government in fighting Islamic ‘’rebels’’ supported by Muslim Brotherhood that were kicked out from power in Egypt. Cairo doesn’t want to see an Islamist regime in Syria, and is probably now encouraged in doing so by foreseeing a favourable change in US policy after the defeat of Hillary Clinton who supported Muslim brotherhood, was a strong supporter of the Saudis and Qatar, and was fiercely anti-Iranian, also anti-Russian. It is claimed that Egyptian airplanes and helicopters relocated to an airport in Syria. Egypt has a large ground army and open sea access towards Syria. 

As a consequence of these latest new developments, one should expect an internal fight over Syria within the Saudi rulers.

Not least importantly, radical change is coming to France in terms of its Foreign policy! François Fillon, who handily won the Republican primary for the presidency, with 67% of the votes, and who seems to have the best chances to become next French president in May, as the polls indicate, has declared that France will by siding with Russia and trying to find a political solution in Syria with the participation of Iran.

As part of UK-US sanctions organized over Ukraine, France was not allowed to deliver two Mistral-class amphibious assault ship to Russia. They were, in the end, sold to Egypt. Now, equipped with Russian helicopters and electronics, it is rumoured that they operate with Russian officers on board! Quite embarrassing for President Hollande who supports the Jihadis in Syria, to see his “Egyptian” Mistrals come in support of the Syrian government under Russian command!

A report by Global Research, a Montreal based think thank, indicates there are currently some 4,000 Iraqi and some 4,000 Iran hired forces in Syria, and that 400 Iranian officers are there to advise and command those troops. According to the same report, Lebanese Hizbullah has send some 2,000 of its special forces Rizwan units. The Egyptian force will also have some 4,000 soldiers.

All these new developments might on another positive outcome come to help the European Union that is in verge of collapse over the mess created by the Anglo-American hypocritical moves in the Middle East, by the invasion of refugees into Europe, by the spread of Islamic totalitarianism in some European countries, and by the growing acts of Islamic terrorism in the past years.

Things start now to look better for Syria, and one can foresee a light at the end of the tunnel.

SEZ

Iran & the Struggle for Iraq's Soul

The below article was written at their request, and published as such (slightly re-edited and minus the formatting) in Islam online, a few years after the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the US (-led) troops. Subtitles and headlines are by Islam Online.

Iran & the Struggle for Iraq's Soul 

The Saga of Iranians in Iraq

By  Dr. Shuja’ Ed-Din Zia’ian

York Center for International & Security Studies - Canada

(Read Dr. Mahjoob Zweiri’s comment on this article : History Alone Is Not Enough)

***

The invasion of Iraq has opened the door to a fiery debate over Iraq's identity, with different factions and groups making claims over land and resources. And given the cultural intermixing between Iran and Iraq over the centuries, some Iranian analysts raise major questions about Iraq's national and religious identities. Below, Dr. Shuja’ Ed-Din Zia’ian discusses Iraq's history and current situation from an Iranian viewpoint.

***

Coming from the other side of the planet, astonishingly, the Anglo-American troops have been accusing neighbouring Iran of interfering in Iraqi affairs. While dictating what the policies of the democratically elected government in Iraq should be, the Anglo-American troops, with their fantastic military and financial might, are attempting to "protect" Iraq from the Iranian influence. It sounds like strangers invading your home and forcing you to deny your family and to oust your parents and relatives. 

Iraq and Iran are not separate entities, a point which is rarely - if ever - mentioned. The two have been separated and forced to live separately only following the British victory over the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I, which resulted in the creation of the state of Iraq with its present boundaries.

With the approval of the newly formed League of Nations, Great Britain gained control over the mandate of Iraq in 1919, installing a non-Iraqi Arab as the ruler of Iraq in 1921. A member of the Sunni Hashemite family, Emir Faysal of Mecca (who had never put his feet in Iraq) was rewarded the Iraqi throne for leading the Arab revolt against the Ottomans under Colonel T. E. Lawrence – known as Lawrence of Arabia. The newly created British state of Iraq was proclaimed an Arab state despite the existence of two other major ethnic and religious groups: the Sunni Kurds in the north and the Persian Shiites in the south.

Naturally, Iranian Iraqis[1] protested. Shiite Scholars called for Jihad against foreign colonialism, waging an armed rebellion against the British mandate in Iraq. It was an Arab–Persian rebellion in which Arab tribes and Persian mujtahids (religious scholars) fought side by side. Under the leadership of Ayatollah Shirazi, who was born in Shiraz and raised in Karbala, the rebellion gained almost all over the country by August 1920 (before the crowning of Faysal).  Contrary to what was happening in other countries, where Arabs urged by the British rebelled against the Ottoman Empire, the population in Iraq rebelled against the British.

Ottoman or Persian Iraq?

The creation of an Iraqi Arab state resulted in the so-called Shiite-Sunni clash, which is a religious façade to a cultural and political dispute.

From the 14th century till World War I, Ottoman and Persian rulers disputed over the province of Iraq, which, at the time of WW1, was administrated as a condominium where citizens could choose to hold either the Ottoman or the Persian/Iranian nationalities. The cities of Karbala and Najaf, in particular, had a status of extraterritoriality, never being ruled completely by the Ottoman Empire.

In the 18th century, Karbala and Najaf became a center of attraction for Persian Shiites, who moved and settled there. The architecturally Persian mausoleums were constantly embellished by the successive Persian rulers. Besides Karbala and Najaf, both Persian language and culture were dominant in two other major religious centres in Iraq: Kazemeyn and Samara. The Persian cultural influence affected all Iraqi social classes, particularly in southern Iraq. Such an effect could be felt on farmers, businessmen, workers and, of course, the religious scholars and students who came from all over the world (Luizard, 2005).

The British occupation and creation of an Iraqi Arab state resulted in the so-called Shiite-Sunni clash, which can be perceived as a religious façade to a cultural and political dispute in which Persians/Iranians challenged the Arab domination imposed by the British mandate in Iraq. For the Persians/Iranians in Iraq, it was a fight for their survival as a cultural entity and for their right to protect their Iranian roots. Thus, Arab rulers suspected that their real allegiance was to Persia – later known as Iran.

The British occupation proved to be fatal for Iranians in Iraq. From a population of around 3 million at the time of Iraq's creation, the number of Persian citizens dropped to several hundreds of thousands (Luizard, 2005).

It is however important to note that the numbers for Kurds and Lors, who shared their "Iranity" with Persians, should be added to the above mentioned figure. Yet, according to a British census conducted in 1919, the number of Persians in Iran was about 80,000 only — less than 3 percent of the inhabitants of Iraq. The British census excluded mixed marriages, Persian families living in Iraq for several generations, and all those who had Persian citizenship but were not considered purely Persian. This was the first phase of an ethnic cleansing process carried out by the British (Luizard, 2005).

In 1919, Sir Arnold Wilson, the British civil commissioner in Baghdad, argued that there were too many Persian consulates in Iraq and suggested the closure of a number of them. The British then proceeded with reinforcing the Arab character of Karbala by proclaiming Arabic as the administrative language in Iraq. Religious leaders of Persian origin were expelled to Persia (Luizard, 2005).

The Sunni-Arab Domination 

In 1969, twenty thousand Iranian Iraqis were expulsed to the Iranian city of Ghasr-e Shirin.

With the assistance of the British, Sunni Arabs took control over governmental institutions, disregarding three quarters of the population, which consisted of Kurds (Sunnis) and Persian-Arab Shiites. Furthermore, an anti-Persian propaganda was orchestrated by the British. Persian businessmen lost all protection in the British- Iraqi courts in 1922 (Luizard, 2005)

On October 9, 1924, the Code of Nationalities obliged Persians in Iraq to choose between two nationalities: Persian or Iraqi. Arabs and other ethnicities were not forced to make such a choice; they could remain Arab and Iraqi, or Kurd and Iraqi. This law was used by the successive Sunni Arab-dominated Iraqi governments as part of an ethnic cleansing process of Persians in Iraq (Luizard, 2005).

Naturally, Tehran did not recognize the new state created by British colonialism, dissuading its nationals in Iraq from accepting to hold the new Iraqi citizenship and identity in an attempt to protect their rights. But, by 1929, the Iranian resistance waned and Tehran eventually accepted the new status quo

Left without protection, Persians left their homes and there was an exodus of Persians from Iranian Iraq to the Iranian neighbouring province of Khuzestan. The massive purge of Iranians continued under British-protected Arab governments.

The pan-Arab Baathist governments of Ahmad Hassan al-Bakr and Saddam Hussein emphasized the Arab nature of the system and its anti-Iranian stand[2]. In 1969, twenty thousand Iranian Iraqis were expelled to the Iranian city of Ghasr-e Shirin, followed by other waves of massive deportations in the subsequent years (Babakhan, 2005).

Under the British mandate, being Iraqi became equivalent to being a Sunni Arab; hence, three quarters of Iraq’s population turned into second class citizens or foreigners on their own land. Although they had been living in Iraq for many centuries and generations, some Iraqis were considered foreign nationals, because they were Shiites or because they were of Persian origin — the two being often associated to each other.

Ironically, foreigners who were neither born, nor raised in Iraq and who had no attachment of any sort to the land were considered Iraqis because of their Sunni- Arab affiliations. King Faysal, who ascended the throne with the help of the British, who brought him form Mecca, symbolized such a dichotomy.

Silent Rebellion 

Persians assimilated into Arab culture, but the assimilation was less than genuine. A certain Iranian "cultural gene" survived — hidden and censored though.

The Persian-Arab struggle has deep roots in history; it goes back to the time of the Arab-Muslim conquest of Mesopotamia and the defeat of Persian armies fourteen hundred years ago. Out of respect for Islam, historians rarely mention that the conquest was brutal[3].

Persians had to speak Arabic, convert to the new religion and adopt Muslim Arab names not only to survive, but also to benefit from the spoils of war. They assimilated into the conquerors' culture, but the assimilation was less than genuine. A certain Iranian "cultural gene" survived — hidden and censored though. A silent rebellion was manifested in different forms: the promotion of a free-thought-approach towards Islam, asceticism, Sufism and Shiism[4], resulting in what can be called an Iranian-Islamic schizophrenia. 

Many Shiites in Iraq are of Iranian origin, but they need to keep such a fact secret. It has been always dangerous for Iraqis of Iranian origin to reveal their ethnic background; however, the issue became even more serious after the creation of the Iraqi state because Iraq was now considered a separate entity. If labeled "Iranian", an Iraqi Shiite would be considered a foreign enemy and a traitor. This was the case especially during the eight-year-war between Iran and Iraq.

Interestingly, the argument that the words "Iraq"[5]  and "Baghdad"[6]  themselves are Persian is often made. Also, the last name of Ayatollah Sistani, the spiritual leader of Iraqi Shiites, refer to his Iranian origin. Despite the fact that Ctesiphon, the capital of the Persian Empire for many centuries, is located in today's Iraq, and the fact that, under Islamic rule, Persian scholars made significant advances in different fields, from the study of Prophetic traditions to art, architecture, science and literature, there is much hesitance about recognizing the right or presence of Iran in Iraq.

The most important pieces of Arab Iraqi literature were written by Iranian Iraqis.
The Umayyads were toppled by Persian Iraqis and their successors, the Abbasids, were brought and kept in power by Persians.

Persians Under the Islamic Empire

Under Saddam, many Iraqis, including members of Sadr and Hakim families, accused of sympathizing with Iran were executed.

A striking example is Abdullah Ibn al-Muqaffa, the famous author of Kalila and Dimna, a masterpiece of Arab literature. Ibn al-Muqaffa, who was known as Ruzbeh in Persian, was a Zoroastrian Persian who converted to Islam after the Islamic conquest. Astonishingly, in all scholarly books and encyclopedias, Abdullah Ibn al-Muqaffa is identified as a Muslim or as Arab, not as a Persian. Today, Kalila and Dimna is taught as part of Arabic courses in many prestigious academic institutions, including Yale university.   

Although he worked at the court, Ibn al-Muqaffa was executed by orders of the Abbasid Caliph, al-Mansur, who had doubts about his allegiance. He was accused of heresy and of importing Zoroastrian ideas into Islam.

This is not an isolated example; being Persian jeopardized one's very existence. It was a taboo to recognize works and authors as Persian, and is still today.

Abu Muslim al-Khorassani is another famous example. A major supporter of the Abbasid Caliphate, Abu Muslim's military skills helped defeat the Umayyads and brought the Abbasids to power in Baghdad. But soon after, Abu Muslim was assassinated by the Abbasid Caliph who was concerned about his popularity, given Abu Muslim's Persian ethnic background.

Under Saddam, many Iraqis, including members of Sadr and Hakim families, accused of sympathizing with Iran were executed.

Thus, a strong form of censorship has been practiced with regard to the issue of Persians/Iranians in Iraq. And such censorship still exists today. In any geographical map drawn before the British colonization, two "Iraqs" were highlighted: Arab Iraq and Ajam Iraq (Ajam in Arabic means non-Arab, a word that refers mostly to Iranians/Persians).

As a result of  the Islamic Revolution in Iran, the Iran-Iraq war and later the invasion and occupation of Iraq by American troops, many books on Iraq have been published since 1979. However, almost all those books mention nothing about the Iranian presence in Iraq; rather, they focus only on the Babylonian and Assyrian periods — referred to as the Cradle of Civilization, the Islamic period, and modern history. Strangely enough, the fact that Iranians have had an uninterrupted presence in Mesopotamia for over twenty five hundred years is always overlooked.

Successive Conquests

Despite successive conquests, the Iranian presence in Iraq has been continuous. 

Despite successive conquests, the Iranian presence in Iraq has been continuous. Using the term ‘foreign intervention’ to describe the Iranian influence in Iraq during the American occupation is like describing the French in Paris during the Nazi occupation as foreigners.   

Some historians, influenced by British historians of the colonial era, refer to the Greek era as the end of the Iranian rule. According to them, Alexander the Great defeated the Persian army in 333 BC, bringing Persia under his rule. 

What is rarely stated in history books, however, is that Alexander’s military success did not mean a cultural defeat for Persians. Persian soldiers and officers continued to be part of the ruling elite after Alexander’s victory. Alexander himself married a Persian princess and adopted Persian costumes, forced his Greek officers to marry Persian women and kept undamaged the Iranian administration of Satrapies (governors of the provinces of ancient Median). Alexander the Macedonian is actually a respected figure in Iranian history books and literature.

Encouraged by his teacher Aristotle, Alexander was an admirer of Persian culture. He considered himself an Iranian king, adopting the Persian title of Shahinshah (King of kings). Hence, a Macedonian Shahinshah replaced a Persian Shahinshah, continuing a long line of Iranian rulers. The Macedonian rulers were succeeded by Parthian rulers, then by the Sassanians. They all were Iranians who continued the Iranian governance in Iraq until the Arab-Muslim invasion.

The Saga of Iranian Iraqis

There is — or was — a naïve hope that colonial powers came to Iraq as liberators.

In most history books, there is no — or little — mentioning of Iraq’s history from Alexander’s death to the Muslim-Arab conquest of Iraq. During the 1000 years in between, the history of Iraq and Iran cannot be separated. Yet, much emphasis is put on ancient pre-historic Iraq, and on modern Iraq, and astonishingly over thousand years of history when the capital of Iran was Ctesiphon or Tīsfūn (تیسفون) (near present Baghdad) built 4 centuries B.C., is overlooked.

Thus, for around 1200 years, Iraq was purely part of the Iranian homeland. More precisely, from 550 BC to 652 AD, Mesopotamia or Iraq was, fundamentally, Persian. 

Except in a few books or articles, there is no mentioning of the saga of Iranians in Iraq since the creation of the Iraqi state at the end of World War I, when hundreds of thousands of Persians had either to accept to change their identity, or to flee.

It is only recently, due to the dramatic international developments of the last two decades, that the world started noticing that Iranians exert some "influence" on Iraq. But, what everyone should know is that next to an Arab Iraq, there is — and has always been — an Iranian Iraq which continued to exist for a thousand years before the Arab invasion.

Today, with the neo-colonial presence of coalition forces in Iraq and the toppling of  the pan-Arab, anti-Iranian Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein, the Persian fight for survival has taken a different form. On the one hand, there is — or was — a naïve hope that colonial powers came to Iraq as liberators. Yet, on the other hand, there is a growing fear that these forces came to the region only to secure their imperial interests and that they will resist any form of Iranian revival.

Despite all attempts to marginalize them, Persians have managed more or less to survive, sometimes disguised under an Arab name, speaking Arabic and wearing an Arab mask. Hence, honest historians need to reveal the truth about the story of Iranian Iraq, which is an important part of human history.

Sources:

Babakhan, Ali. Des Irakiens en Iran Depuis la Révolution Islamique. Cahiers D'Etudes Sur La Méditerranée Orientale el Le Monde Turco-Iranien, n° 22 - Arabes et Iraniens, [En ligne], mis en ligne le 4 mars 2005. Consulté le 5 avril 2007.

Luizard, Pierre-Jean. Iraniens d'Irak, Direction Religieuse Chiite et Etat Arabe Sunnite.  Cahiers D'Etudes Sur La Méditerranée Orientale el Le Monde Turco-Iranien, n° 22 - Arabes et Iraniens, [En ligne], mis en ligne le 4 mars 2005. Consulté le 8 avril 2007.

Notes

[1] The words "Iran" and "Iranian" in this article do not refer to the state that monopolized the name in 1935, creating the Shahanshahi state of Iran, which became later the Islamic Republic of Iran; rather, they refer to Iranians as a linguistic-cultural group that includes all Iranian languages, including Persian, Kurd, Lor, and Pashtun. Therefore, referring to Kurds and Persians as Iranians has to do with them being part of the wider Iranian linguistic-cultural group. The confusion comes from the fact that the judicial-political boundaries of the modern state of Iran do not correspond to the linguistic-cultural affiliations.

[2] In 1986, the Iranian Ministry of Interior denounced the presence of 500,000 Iraqi refugees, who were deported to Iran. On June 30, 1985, in a press conference in Paris, Laurent, Baudoin and Blum, members of the French Commission of the International Federation of Human Rights, stated that the Iraqi regime had deported to Iran more than 400,000 Iraqis suspected and accused of being opposed to the regime.

[3] Obviously, it was impossible for anyone to risk keeping any account of the brutality of the Muslim invaders, which urged many Persian thinkers and historians to talk about two centuries of silence in Persia/Iran after the Muslim conquest (See: Zarrinkoob, Abdolhossein. Two Centuries of Silence.  Tehran, Sukhan, 2000 and see: Al-Biruni, Abu Rayhan. The Remaining Signs of Past Centuries. p.35, 36, 48).

[4] According to historical accounts that might be legendary rather than truthful, the daughter of the last Persian king, Yazdgerd III, was taken prisoner and she got married to the son of Ali Ibn Abitaleb. Such a story provides some sort of reconciliation and legitimacy for Persians by mixing both Persian and Arab blood to produce the line of  twelve Shiite Imams, who are, according to that line of reasoning, both Persian and Arab. It makes the Shiites to be affiliated both to the Arab-Islamic and Persian-Iranian heritage and ancestry.

[5] Iraq could be the Arabized word for the Middle Persian word “Erak” or “Arak”, meaning “Low land”. (See: Moin Persian dictionary and encyclopedia)

[6] The word "Baghdad" means "God-given" in Middle Persian.

The ''Modern'' and ''PostModern'' invasion of Europe ... and how to stop it.

THE 'MODERN' / 'POST MODERN' INVASION OF EUROPE

Most people are trapped into the mercantilist hypocrite propaganda on Europe accepting more refugees, a movement that in fact aims to suppress national and european cultures and replace them by the homogeneous a-culture of pure mercantilism (profit searching), using hypocrite slogan and excuses such as 'human rights' and compassion.

I might be ignorant, but I am unaware of any change or threat of change of this magnitude in population, in any european country in the past. The issue is the SCALE.

So, please instruct me and respond to my two concerns: 1) When and where have you seen a population change threat of this magnitude. I have seen it in the new continent that became America, where European colonialist invaders ended up killing savagely the aboriginal people, raped them, destroyed and suppressed their peaceful and nature-loving culture, and displaced and oppressed those who survived. We don't want this to happen to our beautiful Europe, do we?

Second question: where do you want to locate 2 billion people in Europe, because that's probably a minimum number of people who would love to move there and take the statute of refugee? And as a supplement to this question: why discriminate between those who managed to 'invade' Europe and those more peaceful and decent people who didn't 'invade' as refugees although have as much reasons if not more to wanting to be accepted as refugees. In the name of ''human rights'' why discriminate and not have a survey on who in Africa and Western Asia (Middle East) needs and wants to be a refugee; and based on the result of the survey, accept all of them on an EQUAL basis. Why give advantage to those who are more violent, agressive and risk taking over those who are softer, nicer, and gentler, more peaceful and peace loving?

Ask Syrians or Afghanis for example. I am sure a huge majority of them would want to become a refugee in Europe, England, Canada and so on, and are looking to flee from the savagery of the Islamists (some call them 'jihadists') and from the Anglo-American invaders who (secretly supporting the islamists) have created the mess in the first place, and who continue to do so, then pushing Europeans to accept the refugees (that is probably the main reason for Brexit). That would make some tens of million candidates to join Europe as refugees, just from these two countries.

Third question, both as a conclusion and as proposed solution: Why not stop the mess, and ask Anglo-American troops to go back where they came from and to leave people live their peaceful life they used to have, so that people would't need and want to leave their country [once beautiful and peaceful] in Western Asia (baptized Middle East by English colonialists)?

A third term Clinton?

Shameless Clinton couple are set for a third term in the White House, aren't they? Walking once more and so many times on the edge of what is legal or illegal. Trump or Clinton, the rigged USA presidential primary elections, the brutality of its police force, the gun culture and its record number of people killed by gun, its military interference around the globe, its gigantic amount of debt, its millions of people put in jail, its millions of people living in poverty, this world super-power shows many signs of a Third World country, ... and of decadence.

US media - Islamic terrorism : objective alliance

SUPER STUPID US MEDIAS: OBJECTIVE ALLIES OF TERRORISM

I was longing to hear President Obama's Speech at the end of his historic trip to Cuba, ending an era of cold war and starting a new era of USA - Cuba friendship. But the American News Channels CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, broadcasted this historical speech live only on half of their screen, the other half was a disturbing stupid low quality video clip of a chaotic scene in Brussels' airport as a result of 'a 'terrorist'' attack, continuously repeated! That is precisely what those stupid youngsters called ''terrorists'' (I call them ''idiots'') would have hoped: publicity! The Golden Palm for stupidity was won by Fox News who stopped broadcasting U.S. President's historic speech live, in favor of a ''news alert'' (2 or 3 American Mormons among victims); and then Fox News continued the publicity for a ''terrorist attack'' that had occurred 3 hours earlier, and never went back to continue broadcasting live the US President's historic speech!  I am wondering which one is the biggest idiot, those young stupid brainwashed kids who kill some people or those ignorant stupid brainwashing American media bosses who give them the publicity they are dreaming to get for their actions.

Toronto, March 2016 / year 71 universal

La nouvelle religion universelle - Interview pour Radio Canada

La (nouvelle) religion universelle

Q et R avec Ramin Pezeshki, Radio Canada

​

- A quelle occasion se tient cet événement ? Il peut se tenir à tout moment, mais ce premier jour du printemps, que l’on peut considérer comme le premier jour de l’année astronomique est la meilleure occasion pour célébrer notre présence sur notre fragile planète. Cette célébration, le respect de la nature, la reconnaissance du cycle de vie et des saisons, est un pilier de cette (nouvelle) religion universelle. Il nous faut sauver notre planète. Ce renouveau de la révolution annuelle de la Terre est une occasion pour entreprendre cette révolution religieuse, économique, politique, radicale, révolution absolument  nécessaire pour la paix mondiale et la survie de la femme et de l’ homme. Nous emploierons un nouveau vocabulaire, correspondant, lae fomme.

- Qui sont les participants ou conférenciers ? (leur titre complet)

Shodja Ziaïan est docteur d’État en sciences économiques (économie de la paix) et professeur à Glendon, ayant enseigné dans plusieurs universités et diverses disciplines académiques : économie, études françaises, études internationales, linguistiques, sociologie, sciences politiques et traduction.

Gretta Vosper est pasteure à l’église West Hill United Church qu’elle anime depuis de nombreuses années. Elle est auteur de deux best-sellers dont: With or Without God (Why the Way We Live Is More Important Than What We Believe).   

- Quelle est ton implication ? Organisateur, modérateur, conférencier ?

C’est moi qui ai pris l’initiative d’organiser cet événement et ai invité Gretta Vosper comme Guest Speaker. Ce n’est pas la première fois que je parle de la futurologie d’une religion universelle.

- Comment ça se déroule ? discours et séance de questions-réponses ?

J’introduis l’idée et le concept de Religion Universelle et l’explique. Ensuite, je passe la parole à Gretta Vosper qui nous parlera de ses années d’expérience en tant que ministre ou pasteur  de l’église unie du Canada à l’église unie West Hill (West Hill United Church).

Je parlerai anglais et français, selon le public. Gretta, unilingue, parlera en anglais. Et la période Question et Réponse sera bilingue, anglais-français.

Les 90 minutes se répartiront plus ou moins en 3 temps de 30 minutes, moi, Gretta et Q-R.

- Pourquoi ce titre ? Religion universelle ?

Tu me demandes de  présenter mon exposé de causerie ! Religion universelle, parce que on en a besoin pour vivre en une communion universelle planétaire, et non pas de rester divisés en diverses religions qui s’affrontent. C’est un besoin facile à ressentir.

La religion a plusieurs définitions dans les dictionnaires. Beaucoup plus qu’on le croit, car il faut tenir compte des définitions, non seulement en référence aux fameuses trois religions abrahamiques que sont le Judaïsme, le Christianisme et l’Islam, non seulement en référence aux autres religions, mais aussi en référence aux diverses langues que parle l’humanité ! J’emploie une définition que je crois universelle. Elle a 2 éléments : (1) L’énigme de notre existence, c’est la cosmologie des diverses religions, à laquelle on apporte des réponses comme Le monde a été créé par Dieu ou d’autres concepts similaires et on essaie de définir ce dieu. C’est la vieille cosmologie. D’autres plus contemporaines peuvent parler de big bang  ou de théorie physiques ou de probabilité plus compliquées. Selon le degré et les étapes de développement de la science et de la conscience humaines, on cherche des réponses qui, évidemment son différentes et qui évoluent. Mais ce qui demeure inchangé est la question. Qui sommes-nous, pourquoi sommes-nous ? L’énigme que la femme et l’homme cherchent à connaître, la question que l’on se pose, en privé ou en public. Elle est universelle. Peu importe la réponse, pour le moment. La question est universelle (1) Deuxièmement, la religion est le domaine des principes de morale, principes acceptables par l’ensemble d’une communauté. La religion a pour but d’unir. Aujourd’hui les religions font le contraire, parce qu’elles sont justement des religions communautaires limitées. Un monde uni, a besoin d’une religion unique. Va-t-on renier l’Islam et le Christianisme ? Oui et non. Ces vieilles religions vont évoluer, et de par leur évolution vont se ressembler. On n’a pas besoin de créer de nouveaux temples pour la religion universelle. Les ministres, les pasteurs, les mollahs et autres se chargeront de diffuser l’esprit de la religion universelle. L’Église West Hill United Church en est un exemple probant. Une église où on ne parle ni de dieu ni y fait-on référence à Jésus ou aux évangiles. La même évolution, à degrés divers, se manifeste en d’autres religions, relative au degré de développement des communautés dans lesquelles la vieille tradition religieuse évolue.

Le vide moral est aujourd’hui évident. Alors, demandons-nous ce qui est commun à toutes les religions sur le plan de la moralité. Ce sont ces valeurs communes à toutes les religions qui sont celles de la religion universelle. Il y aura quand même un choix à faire et j’expliquerai ces choix, comme la règle d'or : comporte-toi envers les autres comme tu souhaiterais que les autres se comportent envers toi. En plus, les problèmes auxquels nous faisons face ne sont plus les mêmes que ceux de nos ancêtres, chrétiens, musulmans, hindous ou autres. Les plus grands périls auxquels nous faisons face sont ceux de la survie de  notre espèce sur notre planète que nous avons partiellement détruite et que nous continuons à détruire à un point de non-retour. La religion universelle dont nous parlerons et dont parlent d’autres que nous de par le monde et à laquelle nous aspirons, est en fait en train de se former, non par un nouveau prophète mais par des centaines, des milliers, de nouveaux prophètes, prophètes non pas au sens strict désuet d’oracles mais de ceux qui tentent de prédire l’avenir, de révéler, de professer mais aussi de contribuer à forger un avenir de bonheur et de paix pour tous les habitants de notre planète.   

La nouvelle religion universelle est constituée des nouvelles règles de morale et d’éthique correspondant au niveau développé de la science et de la conscience humaine. Et toutes nos valeurs, tous nos critères, doivent devenir, par la force sociologique des choses, universelles.

Un point capital dont je parlerai est le besoin d’un calendrier universel, base d’une religion, d’une communion planétaire. Nous ne sommes pas en 2016, cela ne veut absolument  plus rien dire. C’est du folklore chrétien. Nous ne sommes pas en 1395, c’est une sorte d’aberration islamique. Que nous importe la date supposée de la naissance de Jésus ou d’un voyage de Mahomet de la Mecque à Médine, pour servir d’origine calendaire. Quels effets ont-ils ? En fait des effets beaucoup plus négatifs que positifs, des effets d'exclusion et non point d'inclusion. Il y a beaucoup d’autres calendriers en vigueur. Pourquoi en choisir l’un et non pas l’autre ?

Nous pouvons nous considérer comme vivant en l’an -----. Choisir une date marquant l’invention et l’utilisation de l’électricité. Universelle. Sans quoi, universellement,  nous ne pourrions pas vivre la vie que nous menons. Ou encore, selon moi, nous sommes en l’an 71.  C’est celle que je préfère. Fin de la grande guerre mondiale. Création des Nations-Unies. Et surtout : Hiroshima. Le monde entier sera universellement d’accord que c’est une date fatidique après laquelle les esprits acclamant les valeurs héroïques de la guerre ont commencé à se poser des questions et à réfléchir et penser en terme de besoin de paix et de solidarité planétaires.

Tout ce qui précède ces deux dates, ou qui précède la colonisation européenne des continents devrait être considéré comme de la préhistoire et être relégué aux musées de l’histoire. Toutes les dates d'origine comme année zéro des vieux calendriers religieux ou nationaux sont des calendriers périmés de conflit. Nous avons besoin d’un calendrier universel, acceptable universellement par tous, un calendrier futuriste de paix et nous pas de regard sectaire vers le passé.

La religion universelle existe en état chaotique. Nous la formulons et lui donnons forme.  Je veux la formuler et lui donner forme.

10 10 10 in San Miguel de Allende

El Corazon de Mexico

Life is made of accidents and coincidences ... and that's probably how Creation occurred! Creation, God, the Big Bang, whatever you call it, was probably an improbable coincidence.  

I never had much interest for Mexico, a country of machos, and, coincidently, some circumstances created in me some negative feelings about it and about a certain type of Mexicans. Coincidently again, someone else just made my feelings turn from negative to positive!

I am back from my trip to San Miguel De Allende where I went to meet with Francesca Fisher, my wonderful host and now special friend with the best memories. I had no idea that I was also going to be in a special place at a special time, in el Corazon De Mexico (the heart of Mexico), and for its unforgettable Bicentennial Festivities: Fiestas del Bicentenario en San Miguel; para no olvidar! Francesca is a founder and the General Director of Los Senderos, a comprehensive project of real estate based on sustainability and respect for the environment combined with great taste in artistic expression. And I enjoyed being with her as well as the quiet time with the music of a fountain and tasty Margaritas at its Bistro overlooking the naturally beautiful environment, also the lunch at the Bistro with her friends. 

http://www.los-senderos.com/ 

Los Senderos Bistro is a Feast for the Senses

During my very short stay I met many of Francesca’s friends and of those working for her and with her at Los Senderos, Richard and Gail, George and Lauda, Kathy, Ron who is also running the show, local journalist Susanne Ludekens, Cynthia co-owner of the restaurant I had food the first night of my arrival at The Restaurant, Mandinga, Francesca’s assistant Marisol, Vanessa who is taking over the bistro and Gaby (Gabriella), Chema who is running the stables, Eduardo who drove me all the way from San Miguel to Mexico City; and meeting with Jay who started talking some words to me in Persian and who is from Wisconsin was a special surprise, and I didn’t see his mother but I heard about her; and Rita - we went to her art studio and then to Aurora for a snack where there are all these art studios;  not to forget the very friendly and likeable Alejandro Guerra Quirogam, sub-director de Desarrollo Urbano and his wife, Françoise, with whom we talked in French, and their daughter, son-in-law and grand-children; and the chance of talking with Damián Alcázar, one of the best and most famous actor of the new Mexican cinema, probably best known to an English-speaking audience as Lord Sopespian in the 2008 film The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian. (Prince Caspian? Sounds like myself or one of my Persian Iranian ancestors!) The filming of Prince Caspian began in 2007 in New Zealand. (New Zealand? Hmmm, that would be Francesca’s land!) We both went the next evening to see Alcázar’s last film, newly released, Infierno! Infierno? Hmmm, that sounds like the Islamic Republic of Iran (!), the concept of Infierno also originating in the old Iranian religion of Zoroastrianism and Mithraism before entering in Judaism (the term in Persian, Arabic and Hebrew is something like Jehenam) and Christianity! it was a hell of shooting and killing and torturing and bribing in the world of the Mexican drug mafia, an extremely violent movie à la Hollywood. Although all in Spanish without subtitle, I was able to follow the story with some little help from Francesca. Talking about the wonderful people I met, all introduced to me by Francesca, I also should mention Bobby Caplan, a great New-Yorker jazz musician and singer we met and talked with before his performance at the restaurant Tio Lucas. 

San Miguel De Allende is known as the Heart of Mexico, El Corazón de México, and I found myself being there at the time of festivities for Mexico's Bicentennial Day of Independence. It started in September and was continuing with fireworks when I was there, culminating with a Light show followed by a Firework, both fantastic, on the 10/10/10, another special Day! Such light show I have never seen anything comparable in virtuosity in my life... And it was the work of a French artist, let me add.

Before this trip, I had only heard and was thinking Cinco de Mayo. That's all I heared in the United States and Canada as for Mexico’s national holiday. Well, probably because Cinco de Mayo is more of an Anglo-American celebration for Mexico! Why? Now I understand: the Anglo-Americans were happy that some few French were beaten on that specific day somewhere in Mexico! 

But Mexico's Independence Day is September 16th, not the Fifth of May. And it all started with two heroes: Miguel Hidalgo and Ignacio Allende, the latter a son of the city who would give his name to it, a city where I found myself... 

And, if you think deep about it, you realize that Mexicans somehow owe their independence to the French! I will tell you why later.

One hundred years ago, on September 16, 1810, at 2 a.m., Miguel Hidalgo, a village priest (but not quite a conventional one!), supported by Captain (later called General) Ignacio Allende and other members of their secret society, launched a rebellion that would become the Revolution marking the Independence of Mexico from Spain. According to Boyé Lafayette De Mente (in his book: There's a Word for It in Mexico. The Complete Guide to Mexican Thought and Culture, a gift to me by Francesca): 

«Around 2 a.m. on the morning of September 16, 1810, Hidalgo, Allende and their small band first captured the local prison and released all of the prisoners. Returning to the church with the released prisoners and others picked up along the way, Hidalgo preached an impassioned sermon that has been immortalized in Mexican history. In his speech, Hidalgo coined the phrase that was to become the slogan of the revolution: El Grito de Dolores, Mexicanos, Viva Mexico! («The Cry of Dolores, Mexicans, Long Live Mexico!») 

If not mistaken (I am not a historian and certainly not of Mexico) until then the land was known as New Spain (Virreinato de Nueva España), and it was Hidalgo supported by Allende who was coining the concept of Mexico as a nation.

Like most other revolutions, this one also turned ugly, to violence and atrocities, «the rebellion turning into an orgy of burning, killing and looting» by the indigenous and the Métis population, the Mestizos, who soon adopted the slogan: Mueran los Gachupines! - Death to the Spaniards! Of course, the violence was already there and the violent actions of the oppressed were an understandable reaction to the atrocities committed for centuries by the Spaniard ruling class, the colonialists - the conquistadors.

Ignacio Allende one of San Miguel's native sons, being a leading player in the war against Spain for independence (he was eventually captured and beheaded), is a national hero, and the town, founded in 1542 by the Franciscan monk Fray Juan de San Miguel, featured prominently in the Mexican War of Independence, renamed itself "San Miguel De Allende" (in 1826) in honor of the heroic actions of Ignacio Allende.

Now, violence never stopped and the history of Mexico is just a sad story of violence and brutalities, like in many other places. From the day the Spaniard Cortés and his gang of fortune hunters landed in the place in 1519, it has been a history of killing men and impregnating women!  

The population of the indigenous people at the time Cortés reached the land was estimated around 25 million (Spain at that time had 8 million only). Spaniards slaughtered large numbers of Aztecs and other local population. They destroyed the Aztec capital Tenochtitlan (now Mexico City), libraries, documents, civilizations; and they enslaved and subjugated those who survived the slaughtering. Also, from the beginning, the Spaniards made a valiant effort to impregnate as many indigenous people as possible, a policy that created the social and racial fabric of Mexico, today. 

By the early 1800s the long rape of Mexico had just about run its course. The mixed-bloods had blended into a new race which outnumbered the Spaniards as well as later the Indigenous. Records published in 1808, two years before the revolution for independence, show that Mexico had approximately 80,000 residents who had been born in Spain (so-called peninsulars), one million pure-blooded Spanish residents who had been born in Mexico, and 1.5 million mixed-bloods. The Mestizos (Spanish-Indigenous mixed blood) were going to reverse the structure of power and to compose the main population of the land, to form the core of the Mexicans. For the ruling peninsulars, they were a population of bastards, of inferior people (note that infierno has its root in inferior!), to be ruled over. Meanwhile, diseases brought into Mexico by Europeans had swept across the country several times, altogether killing some 80 percent of the indigenous population.

Today, the trend of carelessly embarrassing females is not over, but has taken an unexpected turn: Méxicanos  joyfully impregnating caucasian females from Estados Unidos! They proudly seduce liberated American girls and women, open minded, spoiled, bored desperate housewives. The gringa enjoys the libido and the machismo of the Mexicano who enjoys the sex party! 

The concept of Love, Amor, is not the same everywhere. In different cultures, in different social classes, it is different. Below, I copied some extracts from the chapter of the above mentioned book on Love, Mexican Style, and it can be better understood if the reader keeps in mind the context of Mexican history:

Mexicans point out that love is not a natural thing as far as mankind is concerned. It is manmade and subject to being subverted and perverted at any time by any number of factors.

Mexicans have traditionally treated romantic love as a falsehood and as the betrayal of one’s inner self to another, which leads both men and women but especially men, to exaggerate their passion to an extraordinary degree.

For Mexicans, the most important form of love is always «family love».(…) For most of the history of Mexico, the lives of ordinary people were in constant danger from government troops, the police, rural bandits, city criminals, violence-prone drunks and machismo-obsessed men. Their only choice was to take refuge in their families.

The attitudes and behavior of both fathers and sons toward female members of their families had a strong Arab flavor with a harem mentality. Generally speaking, men demonstrated unselfish, romantic love toward women only in the courting stage. Once the relationship was sexually consummated, with or without marriage, men reverted to their potentate mentality, treating women more like property objects than love partners.  

The only Mexican women who continued to have romance and passionate sexual encounters in their lives were those who had the courage and opportunity to engage in affairs with other men, something that put them in mortal danger.

The violence and killing in Mexico have continued all the way, after the revolution and the independence. It is probably only in our times that things are changing for better... calming down... if it wasn't for the drug dealers, for poverty, and the related situation...

Now, what about Cinco de Mayo? Well, it was simply a single isolated battle in which a French troop was defeated by a Mexican troop in Puebla. It didn’t stop the French presence that expanded for many years more in Mexico until the end of the American civil war. It’s a day that should and in fact is more celebrated by Americans than by Mexicans!  Americans badly wanted the French to be stopped and ousted from the New Continent while the French wanted to help Mexico become an industrial power to contain the US. The Monroe doctrine to prevent any European country (perhaps with the exception of England) to further colonize or govern any country in the New Continent was in fact to help the US dominate the continent. 

From 1821 when an American pioneer obtained a concession from the Mexican general in Texas until 1846 when the US declared war to Mexico, «the US had captured and occupied a wide swath of northern Mexico comprising what is now Arizona, Nevada, part of Utah and California as well as Mexico City itself. A Peace treaty gave all of northern Mexico to the US who had taken over more than half of the Mexican national territory». So, the enemy wasn't the French but the US greedy merchant colonialists. 

Cinco de Mayo

Cinco de Mayo is a celebration to make French the scapegoat of American imperialism.

Between 1822 and 1855, Mexico had 25 presidents!  In 1858, Mexico was to have Benito Juarez as president, a Zatopec indigenous. He was a reformer who proposed the separation of Church and State, to abolish special privileges enjoyed by the military and the clergy and to introduce education for the masses. It didn't please those ruling classes who's privilege where threatened. They asked the Archduke Maximilian of Austria to become Emperor of Mexico. In late 1861 a consortium of English, Spanish and French troops landed in Vera Cruz (soon the English and Spanish left and the French remained). In 1864 Maximilian (of Austria) reluctantly accepted the throne of Mexico with the goal to make the country an industrial country comparable to its northern neighbor. His liberal views and his approval of Juárez's reforms were opposed not only to the forces backing Juárez but also by those who had brought him to Mexico. When the Civil War in the US ended, American began pressuring France to withdraw his forces from Mexico and supplied arms to Mexican rebels. In 1867 it was obvious to France that it could not hold into Mexico, and its troops were withdrawing.

Although the French intervention was slowed by their loss at Puebla (May 5, 1862), the invasion continued. In September 1862 an additional 30,000 French troops arrived in Mexico. The following year, the French captured Puebla (May 17) and the capital of Mexico City (June 7), forcing Juárez's government into exile in northern Mexico, and the Austrian Archduke Maximilian became ruler of the short-lived Second Mexican Empire. 

Below, an extract from Wikipedia about Cinco de Mayo:

«On September 16, 1862, President Juárez declared that the anniversary of the Battle of Puebla would be a national holiday, regarded as "Battle of Puebla Day" or "Battle of Cinco de Mayo". Although today it is recognized in some countries as a day of Mexican heritage celebration, it is not a federal holiday in Mexico. A common misconception in the United States is that Cinco de Mayo is Mexico's Independence Day, the most important national patriotic holiday in Mexico.  Grito de Dolores (Mexico's Independence Day) falls on September 16 (dieciséis de septiembre in Spanish) ».

In fact, the Mexican Independence Revolution of 1810 was inspired by the French revolution and by the ideas it brought and spread. It was the French (also American) ideals of personal freedom, justice, equality, human rights and democracy that began to penetrate the thinking of a growing group of criollos (Mexican born Spaniards) and a few Mestizos (mixed blood).

But perhaps most importantly, in practical terms, it was Napoleon Bonaparte who provided the first spark for the fire that was to set Mexico free from its Spanish overlords when he invaded Spain, forcing the King of Spain to abdicate and imprisoning his son. It happened in 1808, just 2 years before the Mexican independence movement began. The defeat of the Spanish regime by Napoleon obviously gave Mexicans the idea that if the Roy (King) can be defeated in Spain and was not anymore ruling, so can his representative the Viceroy in Spain’s colonies. In fact, following the defeat of Spain by Napoleonic France, not only Mexico, but also Argentina, Bolivia, Colombia, Peru and Venezuela had all declared independence from Spain by 1824.

That was the history of Mexico the way I intiendo, and the way I interpreted it to share with you. I obviously became particularly interested about Mexican history during my delightful short journey in México, in San Miguel De Allende, thanks to mi amoriga (a Spanish neologism created by Francesca and I, not yet in dictionaries!) and thanks to my computer laptop not working, giving me the time to read Francesca’s book gift and other literature related to México.

Bienvenido a San Miguel! 

The future of México is to be built by Mexican men and women, not by looking backward but forward: Viva la revolución de Ideas! 

The Los Senderos project and the inaugural TEDx San Miguel De Allende Conference that the city is hosting, are examples of its futuristic outlook; and there is a whole dynamic of many projects of the sort being put in place: educational, environmental, touristic, and artistic. 

San Miguel de Allende, el Corazon de Mexico, the birthplace of the nation’s proud independence, is now a place of art, culture and fiesta, a place of gathering, a place of real estate growing value, a place to learn something new, to heal your body and spirit, a place to retreat from the world! 

San Miguel is a place where people can have a sense of well-being due to the year round spring-like climate of the Sierra Madre Mountains (San Miguel De Allende, su clima, su suelo y sus jardines!), a place «where magic is more than an illusion», a place to escape into nature and rediscover it, meet farmers and vendors selling delectable organic produce and artisanal food, a place to delight your palate and enjoy live music (the 16^th Festival internacional de Jazz & Blues will be held on 10-14 November), a place to find a wonderful selection of artists’ studios and galleries, antiques, bookstores, restaurants, steak house, cafés and bars, a place to find stores with fine treasures for the home, beautiful architectures, jewelry, sombreros and interiors, lady’s and men’s fashion clothing, and hotels for all kinds of budget. It is a magic town where everybody feels welcome, and «a place to create something from nothing»! Halla tu camino! Find your way!

Vivan los mexicanos que trabajan por un mejor pais! 

Viva San Miguel de Allende! 

Viva México!

--
Shodja Eddin Ziaian

October 2010