zenpundit.com » Blog Archive » Dajjal and Antichrist: the family resemblance

Dajjal and Antichrist: the family resemblance

[ by Charles Cameron — on the assignment of archetypal roles to members of the British Royal Family ]

For those having trouble distinguishing the Dajjal from the Antichrist, I thought I’d post two screen-caps from a video of the Royal Wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton, one of whom is identified as the Dajjal:

together with the cover of a book identifying the Antichrist — by his coat of arms — as Prince Charles:

In true conspiracist connect-the-dots fashion, then, the Antichrist is the Dajjal’s father.


Dajjals, Antichrists, Messiahs and Mahdis all function as Rorschach blots on which people project their hopes and fears, associating celebrities and leaders they despise and admire with archetypal instances of the final evil and the final savior.

By now, we should surely have figured out that this tells us more about those making the attributions than it does about the supposed, dreaded or hoped for end of days…

3 Responses to “Dajjal and Antichrist: the family resemblance”

  1. larrydunbar Says:

    As having a family name that was in-line to the throne, I guess we barely miss that one!

    Realy Charles, does anyone think about this religious crap anymore? Have you asked those guys in Silicon Valley about this?

    I mean with the Mormons moving the land of plenty to North America and our Conservatives of the Republic Party supporting Mormons, does the Middle East have any importance anymore, except for their resources?

    Aren’t those End Timers like Bachmann, and perhaps Boehner, just users of religion to get themselves re-elected? They think they are special and become false prophets, but it is really about power, right?

  2. Charles Cameron Says:

    Hi Larry:
    There’s still an enormous market for apocalyptic enthusiasm here in the 21st century — and while some leaders undoubtedly manipulate it to their own power-advantage, the people they manipulate are real and (some of them) impassioned, and their passion constitutes a sub-current, an undertow that’s easily dismissed by the more rational / secular thinkers who populate many decision-making circles.
    I monitor this stuff partly because it makes me laugh, partly because I’ve witnessed the same millenarian passions and tendencies in myself, and partly because millenarian movements, once they get under way, can have quite devastating impact — witness the 20+ million who died in the Taiping affair.

  3. larrydunbar Says:

    Just saying, the nobles of Scotland were not the elites, in that they had resources.

    As Boyd would say: the Nobles were an orientation from what is observed, and those who were observing were elites, not Nobles. The elites were across the gap from Nobles, which at times is a position with extreme advantage. 

    Especially for the strategy of the elites: Form your orientation from across the gap of Nobles, but never become noble.

    Great strategy, if you can make it work, ha! 

Switch to our mobile site