It's interesting, because even Kazakhstan itself seems to be a place of little strategic importance, perhaps it also has some symbolic importance. Although, in my opinion, all that seems a simple device, mere appearance, symbolism without much to really symbolize.
We could make a connection between these symbols and those of the ancient Egyptian, for sure, but the Egyptians, for their part, focused enough on doing their work well, the pyramids are perfectly constructed, the eye of Horus, which you mention, was made with materials that came from very distant places, such as lapis lazuli, known in antiquity as "sapphire", which was taken from the far afghanistan, in short, work a lot for their symbols, because they really cared what they symbolized.
On the other hand, these symbols in Kazakhstan, like most Masonic symbols, seem to be hollow symbology, with nothing to represent. I don't think they have tried so hard to make such constructions, and I don't think it is their best work, the Egyptian pyramids have lasted thousands of years, these works will do much if it reaches two centuries.
It looks like an amusement park, something tourist, to get money. Maybe I'm wrong of course, maybe something goes unnoticed, it's obvious that the symbology is done on purpose, but it seems to be just a trick.
Regards!
Hi @viera, thanks for your insights as you may very well know much more than I do about symbolism, I'm no expert. I just find this to be a curious phenomenon.
The in your face, out in the open, masonic symbolism in Astana is quite provocative in some ways. As you say, it could very well be a vanity project of Nursultan Nazarbayev and a display of power and opulence with nothing below the surface. I really don't know enough about Kazakhstan at this point to be able to persuade anyone that it's anything else but an over the top gaudy tourist project. It's possible that it serves no other purpose.
I beg to differ with you on this point.
Kazakhstan is a very important geopolitical strategic location, it's just that it's not on the radar of western-centric political strategists. It's located in the heart of Central Asia, between Russian China and the Caucus region. It's also perched on the Caspian sea, and is an oil rich nation because of this. In addition it is one of the most mineral-rich countries in the world.
In a speech last year on Eurasia, James Corbett quotes Sir Halford Mackinder a british geographer, academic and politician from the London School of Economics on the importance of the Eurasian heartland (Mackinder is known as the godfather of geopolitical strategy).
Now, I'm not saying that Kazakhstan itself will emerge as some kind of world dominating force but in today's context with the Chinese plan to construct a modern day Silk Road, and considering the location and vast oil and mineral wealth of countries such as Kazakhstan, it's not hard to see that Central Asia's importance on the world stage will grow significantly in the long term.
Anyways, I appreciate your input and if you've got the time - I would recommend checking out the entire presentation by @corbettreport, it's very interesting.
Cheers!
That is, yes I was missing something, the Mackinder's pivot theory, that seems something that people with globalist aspirations would fervently support.
However, there is still a lot of mystery just because, if we accept the fact that the West, and all that that represents, have interests in dominating Central Asia, and with it Kazakhstan, then we accept that the West does not dominate Kazakhstan. And if it does not dominate it, where do those symbols come from?
Maybe they represent something in the East, maybe I'm wrong to make a dichotomy, but Nazarbayev seems to be from all sides of the political board, and unless we accept that there is a greater power acting on all of them, which is unlikely, because it would be to put China and the United States in the same bag, the symbolism seems very present in a place that is supposed to be in dispute.