Is modern Turkey still the successor of the Ottoman Empire?

TOPICS: Why does Turkey resist the label of Genocide? – does Turkey see itself as the Ottoman Empire? – masters want all nations to rise above their past – Germany has transcended the Nazi past better than Turkey has transcended the Ottoman past – the dream of being an important empire – the definition of genocide too narrow  Stalin committed genocide – some want the Holocaust to be the ultimate atrocity – fallen consciousness wants power – Turkey should move on

Question: In March, 2010 a United States Congressional panel voted to label as genocide the killing of 1-1.5 million Armenians by the Ottoman Empire at the end of World War I. A week later, the Swedish Parliament has done the same. Modern Turkey has consistently denied that the event was a genocide, although it admits that atrocities took place. Turkey attempted to put pressure on both the U. S. Congress and the Swedish Parliament to NOT label this as genocide and have now recalled its ambassadors to both the U. S. and Sweden, apparently as a form of retaliation. I wonder if Jesus has any comments on this matter?

Answer from ascended master Jesus through Kim Michaels.

I do have some comments, and let me begin by going to the heart of the matter: “Why does the modern state of Turkey oppose that these events are labeled as genocide?”

Turkey does not dispute that a large number of Christian Armenians were killed (although it disputes the figures accepted by most other countries). Turkey does not dispute that these killings were orchestrated by the Ottoman Empire. The Ottoman Empire ended in 1922. The Ottoman Empire was centered in what is now Turkey, and it is generally accepted that the Republic of Turkey (officially announced in 1923) is the successor of the Ottoman Empire.

The real question is: “Is the modern state of Turkey – in 2010 – still the successor of the Ottoman Empire, or has it evolved into a modern state that is worthy of membership in the EU?” How exactly does today’s Turkey look at itself; how does it define its national identity?”

If modern Turkey has transcended the consciousness of the Ottoman Empire, then why would it in any way object to the Armenian massacre being labelled as a genocide? If modern Turkey no longer identifies itself with or as the Ottoman Empire, what difference could it possibly make to modern Turkey if the Ottoman Empire – a dead empire from a distant past – had committed a genocide? It should be an irrelevant matter—that is, if Turkey has transcended its past.

So the real question is: “Has Turkey transcended its past—or is it still hanging on to the sense of power and importance that the Ottoman Empire enjoyed for so many centuries?”

No one would seriously say that modern Turkey is guilty of a genocide, as you cannot seriously say that modern Germany is guilty of the Holocaust. Yet it is a fact that modern Germany has transcended its Nazi past to a far greater extent than modern Turkey has transcended its Ottoman past.

I realize that there are many people who want the German nation to forever feel guilty about what was done by Nazi Germany. Yet as we have explained before, we of the ascended masters have no desire whatsoever to see individuals or nations stay stuck in the past. We desire all life on earth to transcend the past, but what does that mean? The Holocaust happened because at the time, the German people were in a specific state of consciousness. The cause of the Holocaust was that specific state of consciousness—NOT the nation in which the events took place, and not necessarily even the people who took part in that mass consciousness at the time.

The point being that once an event comes to an end, the important question is to what extent individual people and the collective psyche of a nation or group are willing to transcend the consciousness that precipitated the event. There are still people who were embodied in Nazi Germany and who have not transcended the consciousness they had at the time. However, most of them are no longer embodied in Germany (many of them now being embodied in Israel as an expression of cosmic justice). Thus, it is clear to any neutral observer that the German nation has to a large degree transcended the consciousness that precipitated Nazism and the Holocaust—although certainly more healing work would be very constructive for both Germany itself and European unity.

Yet it is equally clear that modern Turkey has not transcended its Ottoman past to a sufficient degree. If it had, the topic of labeling the Armenian massacre as genocide would have become irrelevant to modern Turks. Likewise, the state would not have enacted the rather immature measure of recalling its ambassadors because other nations would not be pressured into compliance.

If the consciousness had been transcended, Turkey would have simply allowed the events to be labeled as genocide and have moved on. The reason this has not happened is that many of the people who were the leaders of the Ottoman empire are still embodied in modern Turkey. They have not let go of the consciousness of wanting to be the leaders of a powerful and important empire—and they are seeking to further that dream by holding the modern state of Turkey hostage. There are, of course, also many among the people of Turkey who want their nation to be important on the world stage, and thus cannot accept a new image of Turkey being an equal member of the international community.

This is not that different from my own disciples fighting over who should be chief among them after I was no longer there to lead them. It is a childish game of superiority, fought by the fallen beings for so long that is is amazing that anyone can still find it worth killing or dying for. Yet it is precisely the consciousness behind this superiority game that sets the stage for any type of genocide. Because this consciousness is willing to go to almost any extent to secure its dream of superiority—including exterminating large groups of people who seem to threaten that dream.

In that respect, it should be noted that the main objection that Turkey has is that according to international law, two requirements must be met before an event is labeled as genocide. One is that mass killings have been committed, the other is that there must be proof of a premeditated intent to exterminate a specific group of people. And because such intent has not been proven for the leaders of the Ottoman Empire (because they erased any proof of their intent), Turkey claims the event is not a genocide.

My immediate comment is that the definition of genocide is typical of the entire consciousness of what I rebuked in the lawyers, when I said they had taken away the Key of Knowledge. The Key of Knowledge is Christ discernment, which can always discern what is real and unreal. The lawyers represent the fallen consciousness, which wants to shut the Christ out from this world, so that there is no absolute way to determine what is real and unreal. Thus, they know that because they are intellectually more sophisticated than all other people on earth, they can always win an argument or at least leave it inconclusive.

Yet beyond that, my comment is that the current definition of genocide is artificial and too narrow. It should not apply only to a group of people defined by their outer characteristics, such as race, ethnicity or religion. Joseph Stalin committed genocide against 21 million Russians. They did not belong to one particular ethnic, religious, racial or economic group. The brutal fact is that Stalin killed anyone who opposed his authority. Thus, Stalin committed genocide against anyone in Russia who had creativity or respect for principles—precisely the kind of people who can build a nation. And this is precisely why the Soviet Union was an unsustainable nation and even why modern Russia struggles mightily to lift itself above is non-creative past (another example of a nation that has not sufficiently transcended its past).

I would also like to mention that there is a generally unrecognized cause behind the current definition of Genocide. There are people who do not want it to be too easy to label an event as genocide. The reason is that if more world events become labeled as genocide – as they should – then these people feel it would take away the focus on and the shock effect of their own pet event, namely the Holocaust. There are people in today’s world who want to make sure that the Holocaust against the Jews will forever stand as THE single-most terrible atrocity ever committed against any group of people. These are the people who suffer from the consciousness of wanting to be above all others, as we exposed in Israel.

I know this will sound paradoxical, but it is precisely the people who engineered the Holocaust who want it to stand forever as the ultimate atrocity. Yet for those who have begun to see the paradoxical nature of the duality consciousness, it will be possible to see the mechanism behind this. There is an element of the fallen consciousness that wants power above anything else—and it wants that power to be recognized by as many as possible. Those who precipitated the Holocaust derived an immense sense of power from the fact that they were able to orchestrate such an event. And they want to continue to enjoy this power for as long as they are on this earth—which will not be that much longer.

So my advice to modern Turkey would be (not that anyone in a predominantly Muslim county is likely to listen): Simply withdraw from the debate and let the international community do what they want to do. Instead, focus on making the – rather substantial – transition in consciousness and organization that is required for Turkey to join the EU and become an equal member of the international community. The more you demonstrate your willingness to transcend the past, the more irrelevant it becomes what happened during the Ottoman Empire—or how it is labeled today.

Be willing to be reborn. Of course, for you to be reborn, you must first let the old identity die. And perhaps this is what is truly being resisted.


 Copyright © 2010 by Kim Michaels