40 years ago, during the 'Jesus Freak' movement, the hubub was 'the late great planet earth', where Hal Lindsey predicted the end within a few years.. Before that, there was some guy who talked a bunch of people into sitting on a hill to wait.. he knew the date when the world would end. Of course, there are the real wack jobs, who drink kool aid & try to catch a ride on a comet as they die, but some kind of apocalyptic view of the world seems to be universal. Martin Luther.. the reformer.. was in a time of great persecution. Martyrs were dying regularly. Someone asked him what he would do if he knew the Lord was coming back tomorrow. 'I would plant a tree', was his reply.
If you're 60 or so, these are the last days. You might live a few more years, but plenty of your friends are gone who died much younger than you, so you know it can happen. I have been a philosopher obsessed with death my whole life, so it seems like a familiar friend. But i have no idea how i will cross the river.. whether with great faith & victory, or in terror & despair. My will is inadequate in this matter. I leave the welfare of my soul (if there is one) with the Creator.
But as far as the last days of America, that seems fairly obvious. All of the fundamentals for a stable collective system of organization (aka, govt) are out of whack. The currency is in shambles. Dependency is rampant. Enemies of America have infiltrated every institution. Corruption, lies, & every imaginable immorality runs freely in this land that was once a beacon of stability, morality, & freedom. The cry of innocent blood rises against us, & demands justice. We will have to face our Maker, & we have no excuse. We have loved amusements & opulence, & have lost our place in the universe, history, & humanity. Instead of the light of Liberty, we bring the stench of Death.
If there is a judgement in my lifetime.. If fire & brimstone falls from heaven & leaves the land barren.. If gnashing & wailing are all we have to look forward to, all i can say is that God is just. Our collective sins have risen to the heights, & cry out against us. Millions of dead babies will stand in judgement upon this generation, & all we can do is hang our heads. We have stood idly by while thieves, murderers & liars have taken control of our once proud system of self rule, that once shook the world & was the envy of the nations.
But while there is life there is hope. A spiritual awakening.. a moral revival.. a return to the standards that brought us to the pinnacle of human freedom.. these *might* turn away the wrath & judgement of God. But that has become a trite saying.. a religious cliché that people parrot, but without feeling. Revival. It could save America, but it seems impossible. The irreligious are entrenched, & there is no fear of God in our culture.
Hos 4:1Hear the word of the Lord, you Israelites,because the Lord has a charge to bring
against you who live in the land:
“There is no faithfulness, no love,
no acknowledgment of God in the land.
2There is only cursing, lying and murder,
stealing and adultery;
they break all bounds,
and bloodshed follows bloodshed.
3Because of this the land dries up,
and all who live in it waste away;
the beasts of the field, the birds in the sky
and the fish in the sea are swept away.
4“But let no one bring a charge,
let no one accuse another,
for your people are like those
who bring charges against a priest.
5You stumble day and night,
and the prophets stumble with you.
So I will destroy your mother—
6my people are destroyed from lack of knowledge.
Philosophical Musings
Thursday, November 26, 2015
Spiritual Awakenings, Part 2
WW2 was, IMO, the pinnacle of enlightenment thinking. The concepts of the scientific method, technology, human equality, & Natural Law were in sharp contrast to the axis views of power, elitism, & racial superiority. Post WW2 church attendance was very high, & the baby boomers were the result. Strong religious views & family values are connected. But by the 60s, the trend began going the other way.
In 1950, 2% of people said 'none' for religious preference in the gallup poll. By 2010, this had grown to 16%. I'm sure it is higher, now. Why is this? Has science proven that there is no god? Why has atheism exploded in western culture? I see one central reason: Indoctrination
IMO, atheists are made, not born. Years of indoctrination from the naturalistic, atheistic, secular humanist educational system, complicit with the media, entertainment, sesame street, national parks, & nearly EVERY worldly institution have convinced young people from an early age that belief in God is quaint & outdated. Science has proved that religion is all a myth, they assert, & the naturalistic view of the universe has become the default western view. Years of affluence & opulence have removed the sense of fear & dependency on nature for survival. Beginning in the late 60s, the super-naturalistic view of the universe has steadily declined. This is not because of any scientific discoveries, or proof of naturalistic origins, but is mere indoctrination & removal of any competition in the educational system. Evolution is no more a proven fact than it was in the mid 19th century. In fact, the discovery of dna & the science of genetics has dealt the 'theory' a severe blow. But the indoctrinaires have not been deterred, & not only has evolution been allowed to be taught since 1925, it is now the ONLY allowed theory, as creation is forbidden as being 'religious'.
And as the spiritual beliefs of people in the west have declined, so has the expansion of socialism & marxism. People no longer look to God for their direction, provision, & wisdom for life's problems, but to the state. It has become the new god, & the alter of statism has become the new place of worship.
It seems to me that the growth of socialism/Marxism EXACTLY parallels the growth of atheism in the west. Marx believed that religion was the 'opiate of the masses', & had to be eliminated. Atheism was the necessary ideological basis for Marx's brand of collectivism to flourish. And in those places where atheism flourishes, Marxism is the dominant ideology. In the 50s, America was at war with the 'godless commies'. But now, godless Marxism has become mainstream in American politics. Admitted socialists are valid candidates for president. Anarchic Marxists openly protest & commit violent, anarchist acts in the streets, under racial cover.
If you look at this world map, it is hard to not see the correlation between atheism & the embrace of Marxist ideology.
And it is also plain to see that in places where state indoctrination is high, so is the perception of atheism. And of course, this has no bearing on reality. Atheism is no more a proven fact than theism, from empirical evidence. The mysteries of life, origins, & the universe have no scientific explanation, but only philosophical ones, either by naturalistic or supernatural assumptions. So these percentages do NOT indicate a presentation of Truth, but only successful indoctrination by the propaganda of statism. Reason & enlightenment have not compelled these beliefs, but state sponsored, ideologically driven propaganda.
Is there another 'awakening' on the horizon? I don't know. But without a spiritual revival, & a return to enlightenment values of Natural Law, freedom, & human equality, western civilization is finished. The other competing world views are both based in elitism, power, & control. Both Islamism & Progressive leftism will destroy the basis for western civilization, & return us to the dark ages.
To wrap up this article, i challenge the reader to consider the source of their beliefs. Is it based on personally acquired knowledge, or from sources with an agenda? The universe is vast & mysterious. Don't limit your perceptions with dogma from propagandists. Wake up! Don't be driven underground by a bullying ideology that tries to trivialize & ridicule any alternate beliefs. Seek the truth, & don't let anyone deter you from that noble quest.
You shall know the Truth, & the Truth shall make you free.
Jesus
In 1950, 2% of people said 'none' for religious preference in the gallup poll. By 2010, this had grown to 16%. I'm sure it is higher, now. Why is this? Has science proven that there is no god? Why has atheism exploded in western culture? I see one central reason: Indoctrination
IMO, atheists are made, not born. Years of indoctrination from the naturalistic, atheistic, secular humanist educational system, complicit with the media, entertainment, sesame street, national parks, & nearly EVERY worldly institution have convinced young people from an early age that belief in God is quaint & outdated. Science has proved that religion is all a myth, they assert, & the naturalistic view of the universe has become the default western view. Years of affluence & opulence have removed the sense of fear & dependency on nature for survival. Beginning in the late 60s, the super-naturalistic view of the universe has steadily declined. This is not because of any scientific discoveries, or proof of naturalistic origins, but is mere indoctrination & removal of any competition in the educational system. Evolution is no more a proven fact than it was in the mid 19th century. In fact, the discovery of dna & the science of genetics has dealt the 'theory' a severe blow. But the indoctrinaires have not been deterred, & not only has evolution been allowed to be taught since 1925, it is now the ONLY allowed theory, as creation is forbidden as being 'religious'.
And as the spiritual beliefs of people in the west have declined, so has the expansion of socialism & marxism. People no longer look to God for their direction, provision, & wisdom for life's problems, but to the state. It has become the new god, & the alter of statism has become the new place of worship.
It seems to me that the growth of socialism/Marxism EXACTLY parallels the growth of atheism in the west. Marx believed that religion was the 'opiate of the masses', & had to be eliminated. Atheism was the necessary ideological basis for Marx's brand of collectivism to flourish. And in those places where atheism flourishes, Marxism is the dominant ideology. In the 50s, America was at war with the 'godless commies'. But now, godless Marxism has become mainstream in American politics. Admitted socialists are valid candidates for president. Anarchic Marxists openly protest & commit violent, anarchist acts in the streets, under racial cover.
If you look at this world map, it is hard to not see the correlation between atheism & the embrace of Marxist ideology.
And it is also plain to see that in places where state indoctrination is high, so is the perception of atheism. And of course, this has no bearing on reality. Atheism is no more a proven fact than theism, from empirical evidence. The mysteries of life, origins, & the universe have no scientific explanation, but only philosophical ones, either by naturalistic or supernatural assumptions. So these percentages do NOT indicate a presentation of Truth, but only successful indoctrination by the propaganda of statism. Reason & enlightenment have not compelled these beliefs, but state sponsored, ideologically driven propaganda.
Is there another 'awakening' on the horizon? I don't know. But without a spiritual revival, & a return to enlightenment values of Natural Law, freedom, & human equality, western civilization is finished. The other competing world views are both based in elitism, power, & control. Both Islamism & Progressive leftism will destroy the basis for western civilization, & return us to the dark ages.
To wrap up this article, i challenge the reader to consider the source of their beliefs. Is it based on personally acquired knowledge, or from sources with an agenda? The universe is vast & mysterious. Don't limit your perceptions with dogma from propagandists. Wake up! Don't be driven underground by a bullying ideology that tries to trivialize & ridicule any alternate beliefs. Seek the truth, & don't let anyone deter you from that noble quest.
You shall know the Truth, & the Truth shall make you free.
Jesus
Wednesday, November 25, 2015
Spiritual Awakenings
One of the great flaws of a secular education is the ignoring of spiritual movements in history. Great effort is made to interpret the actions & thoughts of people through the lens of purely secular motivations. But this ignores the very real & very significant impact of spiritual beliefs in society. It would be like future historians trying to explain the current terrorist actions without the driving belief system of Islam. You can explain everything with a purely secular view, but it misses some important factors in our interactions.
I won't be going back too far. Any discussion about spiritual awakenings has to include the biggest one in human history: The reformation. Some people view this as just political maneuvering. But they ignore the great volume of written works that provided the ideological basis for resisting the established religious institution. The Anabaptists, the Huguenots, & the concurrent protestant revival that swept through Europe unhinged the status quo, & threatened their power base. The establishment fought vigorously against it, killing, torturing, & undermining this spiritual awakening, for it not only upset the basis for their rule, but it went against their core beliefs. The divine right of kings, a professional priesthood, an aristocracy of privilege, & their right & duty to control the rest of humanity were all under attack by this awakening.
So they fought it. They killed the apostates. They gave them 'second baptisms' by drowning them. They tortured them to deny this new found faith in late night inquisitions. They burned them openly at the stake, to deter any more departures from the status quo. But it did not work. Instead of nipping this new awareness in the bud, it spread like wildfire. The priesthood of believers, not a professional religious class. The authority of scriptures, not the ruling elite. The equality of man, not a divine order of elitism. These were earth shaking revelations. It changed the course of history, & opened up the enlightenment era of reason, human freedom, & human equality. Philosophers began to question the authority structures, & called for them to be based on Natural Law, not mandates from a monarchy. The king was a mere man, & was not above the law.
About this same time, the new world was being settled with refugees & rejects from the European inquisitions. Quakers, Presbyterians, & Puritans moved en masse to start their religious utopias. They fled the intolerance & oppression of the European status quo, but at first, kept the intolerant part, demanding strict conformity to the tenets of their faith. Many religious colonies formed in the new world.
Massachusetts- Puritan separatists, with some English congregationalists.
Pennsylvania- Quaker, Mennonites, Moravians, Calvinists, Lutherans & more. A large segment from Germany came here.
New Amsterdam- Primarily a trading port, it become more diverse than some of the others. Jews, Lutherans, Scandinavian & Dutch fortune seekers mingled with the varied religious beliefs.
Virginia- Anglicans, loyal to the church of England were the bulk of the colonists there.
Maryland- In the irony of the reformation, English Catholics were no longer comfortable in protestant England, & many came to Maryland.
Rhode Island- The famous 'religious tolerance' colony, where outcasts from all the other colonies could come. It was not a large colony, but significant as a refuge for dissenters.
Almost all the colonies had some kind of religious basis.. they were formed as religious utopias, where the faithful could practice their beliefs without fear of persecution; all of them a direct result of the reformation. But after a few generations, the original religious fervor waxed cold, as it always does. Heartfelt piety gave way to ritual instruction, & the power of spiritual living waned.
But by the mid 1700s, a significant movement began sweeping across protestant Europe, & it found its way to the new world. This was the first Great Awakening. George Whitefield, a preacher in this time, drew huge crowds in New England, & Benjamin Franklin, a non Christian, was so impressed with his speeches that he printed the text in his newspaper. It was a movement that emphasized PERSONAL spirituality.. a living relationship with God, & centralized Jesus as the way of salvation. It was characterized by great emotion, often with tears.. 'white gutters' on the cheeks of weeping coal miners. The idea of the priesthood of believers was rekindled, & itinerant preachers fanned out across the new world bringing the message of salvation. Lost souls were their targets, & they sought to bring people back to God. Race was immaterial to many of these preachers, & many targeted plantations & slaves, & included them as equals in the Kingdom of God.
This Awakening led DIRECTLY to the American revolution, the Declaration of Independence, & the writing of the constitution. Reformation concepts, such as the equality of man, Natural Law, & individual sovereignty found its collective expression in the revived spiritual climate of America.
Thus was born the Experiment in self rule. These was not academians, pontificating about dry concepts of philosophy, but fiery eyed true believers, filled with zeal for God & inspired to LIVE and DIE for a cause higher than themselves. It was religious revival that sparked the American revolution, that brought not only the philosophical basis for the beliefs, but the earnestness & passion that is needed for any social change.
It should be clear that the earnest beliefs of the early American Christians did not predispose them to intolerance. They saw the value in FREEDOM, & preferred that over partisan theology. That is why so many of the founders did not support a Christian based govt, but only in the principles of freedom & Natural Law. Multitudes of reference were given to God, as the Creator, or the Lord of Nature, but defining Him in denominational terms went beyond their desire. They saw the State as the enemy of religion, & THAT was the basis for the separation clause, not that religion was in enmity toward the state.
The inclusion of the spiritual condition of the people provides a much clearer, insightful analysis of history, rather than trying to force humanity to act from purely secular motivations. The reformers in Luther's time, & the Awakening in the mid 1700s provide a better foundation for the actions of the people, their motivations, & their ideological basis. Man is not a pure animal, but acts from his beliefs. It is ridiculous to ignore those beliefs when learning from history.
After the American Revolution came another period of slow spiritual decline. The first Great Awakening in the US brought vigorous activity: the founding of universities, outreach to the Indian tribes, & conversion of African slaves. But the subsequent generation had only the stories of the revival, & were not smitten by 'holy ghost power' like their predecessors. So expediency trumped idealism, & acceptance of moral decline became the norm.
Slavery as a symbol of human oppression was not widely embraced, until the next Great Awakening, which occurred early in the 19th century. There was some reaction to the advent of Deism & the age of reason, where skepticism & cold rationalism became a popular mode of communication, writing, & speaking. The second awakening was characterized by more emotion & romantic views of life & God, & not just the cold, calculating reasonings of the logicians. Intermingled in this was the view that the Advent, or the second coming of Christ was imminent, & some believed it was their Christian duty to prepare the way, by promoting social change & legislating morality. Abolitionism exploded during this time, & radical actions were taken by some to usher in this era of moral purity. The civil war was the ultimate expression of the second great awakening, & the north, especially, carried the banner of Jesus & took the moral high ground.
Consider the lyrics & even the tune of the 'Battle Hymn of the Republic'.
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord;
He is trampling out the vintage where grapes of wrath are stored;
He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword,
His truth is marching on.
CHORUS:
Glory, glory, hallelujah! Glory, glory, hallelujah!
Glory, glory, hallelujah! His truth is marching on.
I have seen Him in the watchfires of a hundred circling camps;
They have builded Him an altar in the evening dews and damps;
I can read His righteous sentence by the dim and flaring lamps,
His day is marching on.
CHORUS
He has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat;
He is sifting out the hearts of men before His Judgement Seat.
Oh! Be swift, my soul, to answer Him, be jubilant, my feet!
Our God is marching on.
CHORUS
In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea,
With a glory in his bosom that transfigures you and me;
As he died to make men holy, let us die to make men free,
While God is marching on.
CHORUS
The significance of this 'hymn' cannot be overlooked. The tune comes from 'John Brown's body', a pop tune ridiculing abolitionists. 'John's Brown's body lies a moldering in his grave', was replaced with the coming glory of the Advent. The call was for the faithful to follow Christ's example, & 'die to make men free'. The south lacked this moral high ground, & was much more laid back in their religious overtones, though they still tried to rally the troops to die for the southern cause. But it was not as altruistic as dying for the freedom of Man, in service to the Almighty. For the common soldier in the south, dying so the plantation owners could keep their way of life did not have the same appeal. Of course there were many factors for the south's loss, but the spiritual drive of the northern moralists was certainly one of them.
But the second great awakening laid the foundation, morally & spiritually, for not only the abolition of slavery in the US, but throughout all of Europe, where the same spiritual fires were burning. That movement went on to be the source of classic liberalism, fought for women's suffrage, the banning of alcohol, & promoted moral purity in schools & public life. Education was hailed as a great tool for instructing morality & the foundation of their views, & literacy exploded in the nation. History, science, & religious instruction went on simultaneously, with no conflict. The second great awakening moved into our collective social structures farther than the previous awakenings had. Earlier ones concentrated on individual piety, & the personal transaction of salvation between God & man. The second awakening included social activism, & was the logical next step for a nation of self rule taking charge of their governance.
This religious revival early in the 19th century had a profound impact on not only the fledgling nation, but the world. 'Manifest Destiny' was the belief in not only America's right & duty to conquer & subdue savage people, but was the basis for European imperialism. Add to that the mix of Darwinism, that took off mid 19th century, & the moral imperative was clear for the white man to subjugate the uncivilized world. The western culture was one of science, technology, & moral superiority, & they forced the whole world into the modernization of the 20th century. With expanded travel methods, global communication, & a superior war machine, no one could argue that the white Europeans (which included America) had every right & duty to civilize the world, & bring order, justice, hygiene, & Law to the uncivilized, barbaric worlds they invaded.
Early in the 20th century, the Nazis & American eugenicists took it to the next logical step, that of purifying the human race into better suited, more highly evolved beings. This same ideological movement into social activism extolled the virtues of a centralized State, empowered to enable the superior social engineers to do their necessary job of managing the inferior masses.. supported, of course, by these same masses. It was a return to aristocracy, or maybe just a simple changing of the guard. The jumbling together of religious morality, righteous indignation, social Darwinism, & the new concepts of collectivist atheistic Marxism, coalesced into the perfect storm of progressive, liberal thought. This is the mismatched jumble of ideology that progressives try to combine into a single ideology, & provides the charges of irrationality that are so often thrown their way. They have conflicting ideals, but cling to them with the same religious fervor that their predecessors had.
I get it. This is not a popular subject, especially in a post Christian, revisionist age, where the past is viewed through the prism of secular humanism, & all advances are proclaimed to be from atheistic scientists. But that is an illusion, & it too will pass. IMO, there are other awakenings before us, yet to occur, that will revive the soul of the nation & return America to her spiritual roots. But that is a future hope. This is an analysis of the past. Let us continue.
During the period from the late 19th century into the early 20th century, there were not any major spiritual revivals. The 'gay 90s' was a time of abundance & affluence for many, & the cult of youthful idealism took off. Parties & socializing became a mainstream event. Epicurean ideals of pleasure & self gratification rose, replacing the age old monastic, austere values of more difficult times.
Technology & mechanization took off during this time, as travel & communication shrunk the world. Great ships made ocean voyages easy, & the internal combustion engine changed the world forever. One man with a tractor could out produce 10 men with horses. Food production exploded & became cheaper. Wealth building of the nation grew, as more money was available for consumer items, & new industries burst onto the scene every year. Change & advancement became the norm, & modernism swept the civilized world. The old notions of spirituality were fading, & the self made man burst onto the scene. Man makes himself, & is not subject to provision from God or gods. A brave new world was forming before everyone's eyes, & nothing was impossible.
Political upheaval continued in Europe through the 19th century, & into the new millennium. Monarchies continued to fall, & enlightenment thinking regarding Natural Law & Absolute morality lost traction. Collectivist Marxism & social Darwinism replaced the trend toward human freedom & equality. Among the intelligentsia & social elite, the concepts of a Creator granting 'unalienable rights' seemed old fashioned & quaint. This was a new age of elitism. The highly evolved rose to the top. Their technology & knowledge of machinery & harnessing the laws of physics seemed boundless.
The Russian revolution began the national experiment of Marxism, a totalitarian system of collectivism, that claimed to be the wave of the future. They held the keys to the future, & would usher in a human utopia, free from oppression, war, famine, & any of the typical fears of man.
Imperialism became the duty of these new elite. They were bound by nature to lead all humanity into their brave new world of technology, hygiene, medical advancements, & civilized rule. The new ruling elite brought a world of order & control, & the British hegemony exemplified the European's burden to civilize the world.
This was a time of European expansionism, & included America & her responsibility of manifest destiny. But with great social pride & elitism came competition among the major players. Large central power was the new god. More area. More colonies. More expansion. The world was not enough, so they began to covet their neighbor's turf.
The Kaiser began expanding Germany to his view of superior domination. He was the first grandson of Queen Victoria, ironically, but envied & hated the British hegemony. Power was the only true god. Massive war machines were built, & the first world war ushered in a global conflict, where the imperialistic nations battled for supremacy across the globe. In less than a blink of an eye, historically, the world went from WW1 to WW2, as the Germans again pursued their right to dominate the world, based on their evolutionary superiority. The Nazis blended the collectivist, state centered ideology of Marxism with the ideals of Darwinism & the duty of the highly evolved elite to manage & control the earth.
Many people in America supported the National Socialists in Germany. It was good & proper, they reasoned, for the more highly evolved among us to weed out the inferior stock. Everyone knew who the elite were. They were the white Europeans, who held the keys of power & technology. Their weaponry was proof of that. Their intelligent harnessing of technology was proof to the world of their right & duty to dominate. God & gods are always appealed to by despots, but these new power mongers worshiped the god of technology, & the fear of that god swept the world. The Japanese added to the fear, as they also used their cultural superiority to vanquish the lessor beings.
This set the stage for a new spiritual awakening, not based on the typical philosophical concepts of the individual soul, but on national survival. Across Europe & much of the world, a cry to heaven arose to deliver them from the godless aggressors. This was a mini awakening, but it became the mainstream view. Church attendance boomed, & talk of God & religious devotion became mainstream again. Politicians & civic leaders openly prayed & acknowledged God in their civil duties. 'There are no atheists in foxholes', & in a time of national crisis, the call was for mercy & strength to face the evil foe. For a time, the rise of modernism stalled. Their victories in the Scopes trial in 1925, where evolution won the right to be taught alongside of creation was forgotten, & calls to the Creator for deliverance drowned out the rising global elitism. WW2 became a symbol of God fearing traditionalists vs godless elitists. It was 'God vs the Devil', in this never before seen global conflict.
I don't really consider the early 20th century revivals 'great awakenings', on par with previous ones. They were significant, but they were more of a reaction to world events, rather than shaping them, as the earlier ones did.
I won't be going back too far. Any discussion about spiritual awakenings has to include the biggest one in human history: The reformation. Some people view this as just political maneuvering. But they ignore the great volume of written works that provided the ideological basis for resisting the established religious institution. The Anabaptists, the Huguenots, & the concurrent protestant revival that swept through Europe unhinged the status quo, & threatened their power base. The establishment fought vigorously against it, killing, torturing, & undermining this spiritual awakening, for it not only upset the basis for their rule, but it went against their core beliefs. The divine right of kings, a professional priesthood, an aristocracy of privilege, & their right & duty to control the rest of humanity were all under attack by this awakening.
So they fought it. They killed the apostates. They gave them 'second baptisms' by drowning them. They tortured them to deny this new found faith in late night inquisitions. They burned them openly at the stake, to deter any more departures from the status quo. But it did not work. Instead of nipping this new awareness in the bud, it spread like wildfire. The priesthood of believers, not a professional religious class. The authority of scriptures, not the ruling elite. The equality of man, not a divine order of elitism. These were earth shaking revelations. It changed the course of history, & opened up the enlightenment era of reason, human freedom, & human equality. Philosophers began to question the authority structures, & called for them to be based on Natural Law, not mandates from a monarchy. The king was a mere man, & was not above the law.
About this same time, the new world was being settled with refugees & rejects from the European inquisitions. Quakers, Presbyterians, & Puritans moved en masse to start their religious utopias. They fled the intolerance & oppression of the European status quo, but at first, kept the intolerant part, demanding strict conformity to the tenets of their faith. Many religious colonies formed in the new world.
Massachusetts- Puritan separatists, with some English congregationalists.
Pennsylvania- Quaker, Mennonites, Moravians, Calvinists, Lutherans & more. A large segment from Germany came here.
New Amsterdam- Primarily a trading port, it become more diverse than some of the others. Jews, Lutherans, Scandinavian & Dutch fortune seekers mingled with the varied religious beliefs.
Virginia- Anglicans, loyal to the church of England were the bulk of the colonists there.
Maryland- In the irony of the reformation, English Catholics were no longer comfortable in protestant England, & many came to Maryland.
Rhode Island- The famous 'religious tolerance' colony, where outcasts from all the other colonies could come. It was not a large colony, but significant as a refuge for dissenters.
Almost all the colonies had some kind of religious basis.. they were formed as religious utopias, where the faithful could practice their beliefs without fear of persecution; all of them a direct result of the reformation. But after a few generations, the original religious fervor waxed cold, as it always does. Heartfelt piety gave way to ritual instruction, & the power of spiritual living waned.
But by the mid 1700s, a significant movement began sweeping across protestant Europe, & it found its way to the new world. This was the first Great Awakening. George Whitefield, a preacher in this time, drew huge crowds in New England, & Benjamin Franklin, a non Christian, was so impressed with his speeches that he printed the text in his newspaper. It was a movement that emphasized PERSONAL spirituality.. a living relationship with God, & centralized Jesus as the way of salvation. It was characterized by great emotion, often with tears.. 'white gutters' on the cheeks of weeping coal miners. The idea of the priesthood of believers was rekindled, & itinerant preachers fanned out across the new world bringing the message of salvation. Lost souls were their targets, & they sought to bring people back to God. Race was immaterial to many of these preachers, & many targeted plantations & slaves, & included them as equals in the Kingdom of God.
This Awakening led DIRECTLY to the American revolution, the Declaration of Independence, & the writing of the constitution. Reformation concepts, such as the equality of man, Natural Law, & individual sovereignty found its collective expression in the revived spiritual climate of America.
Thus was born the Experiment in self rule. These was not academians, pontificating about dry concepts of philosophy, but fiery eyed true believers, filled with zeal for God & inspired to LIVE and DIE for a cause higher than themselves. It was religious revival that sparked the American revolution, that brought not only the philosophical basis for the beliefs, but the earnestness & passion that is needed for any social change.
It should be clear that the earnest beliefs of the early American Christians did not predispose them to intolerance. They saw the value in FREEDOM, & preferred that over partisan theology. That is why so many of the founders did not support a Christian based govt, but only in the principles of freedom & Natural Law. Multitudes of reference were given to God, as the Creator, or the Lord of Nature, but defining Him in denominational terms went beyond their desire. They saw the State as the enemy of religion, & THAT was the basis for the separation clause, not that religion was in enmity toward the state.
The inclusion of the spiritual condition of the people provides a much clearer, insightful analysis of history, rather than trying to force humanity to act from purely secular motivations. The reformers in Luther's time, & the Awakening in the mid 1700s provide a better foundation for the actions of the people, their motivations, & their ideological basis. Man is not a pure animal, but acts from his beliefs. It is ridiculous to ignore those beliefs when learning from history.
After the American Revolution came another period of slow spiritual decline. The first Great Awakening in the US brought vigorous activity: the founding of universities, outreach to the Indian tribes, & conversion of African slaves. But the subsequent generation had only the stories of the revival, & were not smitten by 'holy ghost power' like their predecessors. So expediency trumped idealism, & acceptance of moral decline became the norm.
Slavery as a symbol of human oppression was not widely embraced, until the next Great Awakening, which occurred early in the 19th century. There was some reaction to the advent of Deism & the age of reason, where skepticism & cold rationalism became a popular mode of communication, writing, & speaking. The second awakening was characterized by more emotion & romantic views of life & God, & not just the cold, calculating reasonings of the logicians. Intermingled in this was the view that the Advent, or the second coming of Christ was imminent, & some believed it was their Christian duty to prepare the way, by promoting social change & legislating morality. Abolitionism exploded during this time, & radical actions were taken by some to usher in this era of moral purity. The civil war was the ultimate expression of the second great awakening, & the north, especially, carried the banner of Jesus & took the moral high ground.
Consider the lyrics & even the tune of the 'Battle Hymn of the Republic'.
Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord;
He is trampling out the vintage where grapes of wrath are stored;
He hath loosed the fateful lightning of His terrible swift sword,
His truth is marching on.
CHORUS:
Glory, glory, hallelujah! Glory, glory, hallelujah!
Glory, glory, hallelujah! His truth is marching on.
I have seen Him in the watchfires of a hundred circling camps;
They have builded Him an altar in the evening dews and damps;
I can read His righteous sentence by the dim and flaring lamps,
His day is marching on.
CHORUS
He has sounded forth the trumpet that shall never call retreat;
He is sifting out the hearts of men before His Judgement Seat.
Oh! Be swift, my soul, to answer Him, be jubilant, my feet!
Our God is marching on.
CHORUS
In the beauty of the lilies Christ was born across the sea,
With a glory in his bosom that transfigures you and me;
As he died to make men holy, let us die to make men free,
While God is marching on.
CHORUS
The significance of this 'hymn' cannot be overlooked. The tune comes from 'John Brown's body', a pop tune ridiculing abolitionists. 'John's Brown's body lies a moldering in his grave', was replaced with the coming glory of the Advent. The call was for the faithful to follow Christ's example, & 'die to make men free'. The south lacked this moral high ground, & was much more laid back in their religious overtones, though they still tried to rally the troops to die for the southern cause. But it was not as altruistic as dying for the freedom of Man, in service to the Almighty. For the common soldier in the south, dying so the plantation owners could keep their way of life did not have the same appeal. Of course there were many factors for the south's loss, but the spiritual drive of the northern moralists was certainly one of them.
But the second great awakening laid the foundation, morally & spiritually, for not only the abolition of slavery in the US, but throughout all of Europe, where the same spiritual fires were burning. That movement went on to be the source of classic liberalism, fought for women's suffrage, the banning of alcohol, & promoted moral purity in schools & public life. Education was hailed as a great tool for instructing morality & the foundation of their views, & literacy exploded in the nation. History, science, & religious instruction went on simultaneously, with no conflict. The second great awakening moved into our collective social structures farther than the previous awakenings had. Earlier ones concentrated on individual piety, & the personal transaction of salvation between God & man. The second awakening included social activism, & was the logical next step for a nation of self rule taking charge of their governance.
This religious revival early in the 19th century had a profound impact on not only the fledgling nation, but the world. 'Manifest Destiny' was the belief in not only America's right & duty to conquer & subdue savage people, but was the basis for European imperialism. Add to that the mix of Darwinism, that took off mid 19th century, & the moral imperative was clear for the white man to subjugate the uncivilized world. The western culture was one of science, technology, & moral superiority, & they forced the whole world into the modernization of the 20th century. With expanded travel methods, global communication, & a superior war machine, no one could argue that the white Europeans (which included America) had every right & duty to civilize the world, & bring order, justice, hygiene, & Law to the uncivilized, barbaric worlds they invaded.
Early in the 20th century, the Nazis & American eugenicists took it to the next logical step, that of purifying the human race into better suited, more highly evolved beings. This same ideological movement into social activism extolled the virtues of a centralized State, empowered to enable the superior social engineers to do their necessary job of managing the inferior masses.. supported, of course, by these same masses. It was a return to aristocracy, or maybe just a simple changing of the guard. The jumbling together of religious morality, righteous indignation, social Darwinism, & the new concepts of collectivist atheistic Marxism, coalesced into the perfect storm of progressive, liberal thought. This is the mismatched jumble of ideology that progressives try to combine into a single ideology, & provides the charges of irrationality that are so often thrown their way. They have conflicting ideals, but cling to them with the same religious fervor that their predecessors had.
I get it. This is not a popular subject, especially in a post Christian, revisionist age, where the past is viewed through the prism of secular humanism, & all advances are proclaimed to be from atheistic scientists. But that is an illusion, & it too will pass. IMO, there are other awakenings before us, yet to occur, that will revive the soul of the nation & return America to her spiritual roots. But that is a future hope. This is an analysis of the past. Let us continue.
During the period from the late 19th century into the early 20th century, there were not any major spiritual revivals. The 'gay 90s' was a time of abundance & affluence for many, & the cult of youthful idealism took off. Parties & socializing became a mainstream event. Epicurean ideals of pleasure & self gratification rose, replacing the age old monastic, austere values of more difficult times.
Technology & mechanization took off during this time, as travel & communication shrunk the world. Great ships made ocean voyages easy, & the internal combustion engine changed the world forever. One man with a tractor could out produce 10 men with horses. Food production exploded & became cheaper. Wealth building of the nation grew, as more money was available for consumer items, & new industries burst onto the scene every year. Change & advancement became the norm, & modernism swept the civilized world. The old notions of spirituality were fading, & the self made man burst onto the scene. Man makes himself, & is not subject to provision from God or gods. A brave new world was forming before everyone's eyes, & nothing was impossible.
Political upheaval continued in Europe through the 19th century, & into the new millennium. Monarchies continued to fall, & enlightenment thinking regarding Natural Law & Absolute morality lost traction. Collectivist Marxism & social Darwinism replaced the trend toward human freedom & equality. Among the intelligentsia & social elite, the concepts of a Creator granting 'unalienable rights' seemed old fashioned & quaint. This was a new age of elitism. The highly evolved rose to the top. Their technology & knowledge of machinery & harnessing the laws of physics seemed boundless.
The Russian revolution began the national experiment of Marxism, a totalitarian system of collectivism, that claimed to be the wave of the future. They held the keys to the future, & would usher in a human utopia, free from oppression, war, famine, & any of the typical fears of man.
Imperialism became the duty of these new elite. They were bound by nature to lead all humanity into their brave new world of technology, hygiene, medical advancements, & civilized rule. The new ruling elite brought a world of order & control, & the British hegemony exemplified the European's burden to civilize the world.
This was a time of European expansionism, & included America & her responsibility of manifest destiny. But with great social pride & elitism came competition among the major players. Large central power was the new god. More area. More colonies. More expansion. The world was not enough, so they began to covet their neighbor's turf.
The Kaiser began expanding Germany to his view of superior domination. He was the first grandson of Queen Victoria, ironically, but envied & hated the British hegemony. Power was the only true god. Massive war machines were built, & the first world war ushered in a global conflict, where the imperialistic nations battled for supremacy across the globe. In less than a blink of an eye, historically, the world went from WW1 to WW2, as the Germans again pursued their right to dominate the world, based on their evolutionary superiority. The Nazis blended the collectivist, state centered ideology of Marxism with the ideals of Darwinism & the duty of the highly evolved elite to manage & control the earth.
Many people in America supported the National Socialists in Germany. It was good & proper, they reasoned, for the more highly evolved among us to weed out the inferior stock. Everyone knew who the elite were. They were the white Europeans, who held the keys of power & technology. Their weaponry was proof of that. Their intelligent harnessing of technology was proof to the world of their right & duty to dominate. God & gods are always appealed to by despots, but these new power mongers worshiped the god of technology, & the fear of that god swept the world. The Japanese added to the fear, as they also used their cultural superiority to vanquish the lessor beings.
This set the stage for a new spiritual awakening, not based on the typical philosophical concepts of the individual soul, but on national survival. Across Europe & much of the world, a cry to heaven arose to deliver them from the godless aggressors. This was a mini awakening, but it became the mainstream view. Church attendance boomed, & talk of God & religious devotion became mainstream again. Politicians & civic leaders openly prayed & acknowledged God in their civil duties. 'There are no atheists in foxholes', & in a time of national crisis, the call was for mercy & strength to face the evil foe. For a time, the rise of modernism stalled. Their victories in the Scopes trial in 1925, where evolution won the right to be taught alongside of creation was forgotten, & calls to the Creator for deliverance drowned out the rising global elitism. WW2 became a symbol of God fearing traditionalists vs godless elitists. It was 'God vs the Devil', in this never before seen global conflict.
I don't really consider the early 20th century revivals 'great awakenings', on par with previous ones. They were significant, but they were more of a reaction to world events, rather than shaping them, as the earlier ones did.
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
Life is Impossible, yet here we are
I find several truths to be very disturbing.
1. Life is impossible. The universe is hard, cold, & uninhabitable by living things, as we know them. Yet in the midst of it, a planet formed that had a delicate balance to allow conditions for life. But that is not enough. Somehow, living things filled the earth. Varieties that our minds cannot imagine populate the planet. But we don't stop there, either. Not only is this life impossible.. we cannot define it, or see how, where, or why it is here. With all of man's knowledge, he cannot create a gnat.. or even an amoeba. Life surrounds us, yet we don't know what it is, or how it came to be. We speculate. We come up with all kinds of hare brained 'theories' of how & even why, but we don't really know.
2. The universe is impossible. A purely naturalistic explanation of the universe seems more absurd to me every day. The universe would have dissipated any matter eons ago.. billions times billions of years would have expanded the universe into distant nothingness, all stars burnt out, & life would be impossible. How could this matter appear, in a universe devoid of anything? How & why would electrical impulses arrange themselves into different compounds, adhere to some unseen natural laws, & produce a universe of order? We can barely define matter, can't replicate it, & have no clue how or why it is here.
3. That we can ponder such abstract concepts is amazing. How can there be this ability? We have the capacity to ponder abstract thoughts of eternity, infinity, & other dimensions. With all our technological prowess, we cannot create matter. We cannot create life. We cannot really grasp infinity or eternity. And some among us claim insight into other unseen dimensions. We can't even grasp empirical reality, yet some people add a metaphysical reality, too! .. and not just a few crackpots or loons.. millions of people throughout history have claimed some kind of supernatural experience. Naturalism cannot explain this. Naturalism cannot really explain anything. It is an absurd attempt to blend science & philosophy, promoting atheistic explanations to things that cannot be explained. They dogmatically declare that only the visible is possible. But how? The universe is much too vast, complex, & impossible to try to explain it in purely naturalistic terms.
4. There are 2 disturbing & terrifying possibilities:
We are alone in the universe.
We are not.
Neither of these brings any comfort. Neither of these gives us an explanation as to how or why we are here.
5. God is impossible. How can there be a all wise, omnipresent, omniprescient, eternal, all powerful Being? How can there be a spirit world, with incorporeal beings living with consciousness, apart from matter & time? How & why can anything exist apart from our visible reality?
Yet with all these impossible things, here we are. We exist for a short time on this earth, trapped in space & time. We don't know what we are, or how we came to be, or why. As thinking entities, we still have no consensus on these questions. We speculate about God & the spirit world, but we don't really know. Life is too mysterious & fantastic to draw any conclusions. It is unbelievable, impossible, & beyond our grasp, but here we are in the midst of it.
1. Life is impossible. The universe is hard, cold, & uninhabitable by living things, as we know them. Yet in the midst of it, a planet formed that had a delicate balance to allow conditions for life. But that is not enough. Somehow, living things filled the earth. Varieties that our minds cannot imagine populate the planet. But we don't stop there, either. Not only is this life impossible.. we cannot define it, or see how, where, or why it is here. With all of man's knowledge, he cannot create a gnat.. or even an amoeba. Life surrounds us, yet we don't know what it is, or how it came to be. We speculate. We come up with all kinds of hare brained 'theories' of how & even why, but we don't really know.
2. The universe is impossible. A purely naturalistic explanation of the universe seems more absurd to me every day. The universe would have dissipated any matter eons ago.. billions times billions of years would have expanded the universe into distant nothingness, all stars burnt out, & life would be impossible. How could this matter appear, in a universe devoid of anything? How & why would electrical impulses arrange themselves into different compounds, adhere to some unseen natural laws, & produce a universe of order? We can barely define matter, can't replicate it, & have no clue how or why it is here.
3. That we can ponder such abstract concepts is amazing. How can there be this ability? We have the capacity to ponder abstract thoughts of eternity, infinity, & other dimensions. With all our technological prowess, we cannot create matter. We cannot create life. We cannot really grasp infinity or eternity. And some among us claim insight into other unseen dimensions. We can't even grasp empirical reality, yet some people add a metaphysical reality, too! .. and not just a few crackpots or loons.. millions of people throughout history have claimed some kind of supernatural experience. Naturalism cannot explain this. Naturalism cannot really explain anything. It is an absurd attempt to blend science & philosophy, promoting atheistic explanations to things that cannot be explained. They dogmatically declare that only the visible is possible. But how? The universe is much too vast, complex, & impossible to try to explain it in purely naturalistic terms.
4. There are 2 disturbing & terrifying possibilities:
We are alone in the universe.
We are not.
Neither of these brings any comfort. Neither of these gives us an explanation as to how or why we are here.
5. God is impossible. How can there be a all wise, omnipresent, omniprescient, eternal, all powerful Being? How can there be a spirit world, with incorporeal beings living with consciousness, apart from matter & time? How & why can anything exist apart from our visible reality?
Yet with all these impossible things, here we are. We exist for a short time on this earth, trapped in space & time. We don't know what we are, or how we came to be, or why. As thinking entities, we still have no consensus on these questions. We speculate about God & the spirit world, but we don't really know. Life is too mysterious & fantastic to draw any conclusions. It is unbelievable, impossible, & beyond our grasp, but here we are in the midst of it.
Tuesday, October 27, 2015
The Equality of Man
Elitism seems to be the natural state of mankind. For millennia we have believed that certain people are endowed with special dispensations.. divine privileges to lead & rule over the lessor humans. Physical might used to be an indicator of human superiority, & is still highly regarded. Egyptian Pharaohs were considered to be gods, as were the Roman emperors. The concept of 'divine right of Kings' was widely believed for thousands of years in Europe & in most of the world. Chinese Emperors & even African tribal lords were seen as being empowered with special privilege by the gods, or were gods themselves.
But then came the Reformation. Martin Luther & others reasoned against the concepts of special human privilege by the clergy. They had no power to absolve sin, or to declare someone pardoned or grant 'indulgences' for a price. Salvation came through faith, alone, & had nothing to do with any human hierarchy or pontifications. There was an allegiance between the religious leaders & the aristocracy, & most clergy were part of the elite. But as reformation thought burned through Europe, the lofty view of the clergy came down, & along with them their secular enablers. What were kings but mere mortal men? They lived & died like anyone else, & were mere humans.
As the Reformation morphed into the Enlightenment, and the 'Age of Reason' took hold, the logical consequences of this line of thinking brought the idea of the Equality of Man. There was nothing special about the nobility. Kings were mere men. The aristocracy were just elitists who lived off the labors of the working man. The commoner labored in poverty to keep the royal classes in opulence. They began to evaluate the purpose of human governance. Locke, Rousseau & many others reasoned that man was endowed with Natural Rights to life, liberty, & property. Locke said that govt had no other purpose than the preservation of property. Montesquieu reasoned that govt should be split into separate powers of the legislative, judicial, & executive branches. Jefferson, Franklin, & Paine stirred them all together & the American Experiment was born.
But even then, there were some differences. Hobbes believed man was stupid & brutish, & needed a strong central govt to keep him in line. Many believed in 'manifest destiny', or the duty of the white race to control & manage the rest of the world. But this was in opposition with the basic idea of human equality, & caused a conflict. Eventually, slavery was outlawed by the people where enlightenment thought was dominant. Even in the wilds of America, a great civil war was fought to settle this issue. The idea of the dignity & equality of Man, had become mainstream. Monarchies were relinquishing power, & representative governments were replacing them, either peacefully or by force.
The foundation of this view was in that of a Creator. Man was endowed by his creator with unalienable rights, as Jefferson put it in the declaration of independence. But even for the Deists & naturalists of the time, 'Nature' or 'Nature's God' also worked as the source of these natural rights. 3 of the most significant philosophical leaders in the American theater were Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, & Thomas Paine, all deists. They did not believe in Christianity or the Bible, but still saw the divine empowerment of the individual with basic, equal rights, granted by Natural Law.
But the enlightenment did not usher in an era of peace & utopia. The French revolution was a disaster, with mob rule & bloodshed seeming to confirm Hobbes's analysis:
"During the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that conditions called war; and such a war, as if of every man, against every man. To this war of every man against every man, this also in consequent; that nothing can be unjust. The notions of right and wrong, justice and injustice have there no place. Where there is no common power, there is no law, where no law, no injustice. Force, and fraud, are in war the cardinal virtues. No arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death: and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short." ~Thomas Hobbes
The American thinkers concluded that their experiment in self rule could only succeed if the people were moral.
"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." ~Benjamin Franklin
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." ~John Adams
But the correlation between a 'moral & religious people' & the equality of man are clear. Without morality & a sense of a higher 'Law', only force matters. Force is not equal, but favors the ruthless & amoral. So the view of man as equal & having inherent rights is incumbent upon a moral & religious people. To the enlightenment thinkers, force was something for a moral people to own & control, to secure their rights, not to be used for despotism & exploiting your fellow man.
But as the enlightenment era drew to a close, new thought was beginning, rooted in the works of Karl Marx & Charles Darwin. These were anti-enlightenment concepts, based on a naturalistic view of man & nature, & moved man back to a more elitist view. They undermined the power of religion & morality, declaring religion to be the opiate of the people, not a force for social good. Man was not a created being, in the image of God, but a mere brute.. an animal evolved from lower forms with no moral law or purpose other than survival. Both of these concepts laid the foundation for the Russian revolution, based on Marxism, & the rise of the Nazis, based on the evolution of the Master Race. The equality of man took a big hit in this time, as powerful elitists pushed their own agenda, empowered by their acquired force. Even in the American Experiment, progressives were gaining power, based on their elitist view. They were duty bound by the cosmos to manage & control the huddled masses, & of course should be provided for lavishly for their administration. Eugenicists like Margaret Sanger & other progressives hailed the virtues of elitist central power. They would engineer society & end all injustice. FDR compiled his 'second bill of rights', which is a collectivist, central power agenda, not one of individual freedom & Natural Law. Progressives need an elite of superior intellect & zoo like management skills to control the workers, which is what they have worked tirelessly toward for decades.
And here we are, in the death throes of the enlightenment, with the dignity & equality of Man slowly dying. Natural Law gives way to imperial decree, & we are plodding a steady return to elitist rule. We are in a convoluted blend of enlightenment memory concepts of Higher Truth & morality, & the conflicting conclusion of a world without God, purpose, or higher law. And with the death of Natural Law, so goes the concept of the equality of Man. Social engineers might give lip service to it, for propaganda purposes, but it is not inherent in their basic world view. They are elitists, & view the inferior beings with contempt. It is a short ride to genocide from this collectivist village. They worship only power, as there is nothing higher than that to the naturalist elites. They view the principles of the enlightenment as charmingly quaint, but completely irrelevant in their brave new world of elitist control. The achievements we have made in women's suffrage, abolition, worker's rights, & due process will all give way to imperial rule by a New King.
So is that it? Will the values from centuries of progress toward self rule, human equality, & natural law give way to another ruling elite? This time, they don't claim Divine Ordination, but are appointed by the god of power, to rule over the pathetic lower race of men. Will we revert back to the dark ages? Will we surrender what has taken millennia of blood, sweat & tears to arrive at, only to see it tossed aside for a lie?
"The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." ~Thomas Jefferson
But then came the Reformation. Martin Luther & others reasoned against the concepts of special human privilege by the clergy. They had no power to absolve sin, or to declare someone pardoned or grant 'indulgences' for a price. Salvation came through faith, alone, & had nothing to do with any human hierarchy or pontifications. There was an allegiance between the religious leaders & the aristocracy, & most clergy were part of the elite. But as reformation thought burned through Europe, the lofty view of the clergy came down, & along with them their secular enablers. What were kings but mere mortal men? They lived & died like anyone else, & were mere humans.
As the Reformation morphed into the Enlightenment, and the 'Age of Reason' took hold, the logical consequences of this line of thinking brought the idea of the Equality of Man. There was nothing special about the nobility. Kings were mere men. The aristocracy were just elitists who lived off the labors of the working man. The commoner labored in poverty to keep the royal classes in opulence. They began to evaluate the purpose of human governance. Locke, Rousseau & many others reasoned that man was endowed with Natural Rights to life, liberty, & property. Locke said that govt had no other purpose than the preservation of property. Montesquieu reasoned that govt should be split into separate powers of the legislative, judicial, & executive branches. Jefferson, Franklin, & Paine stirred them all together & the American Experiment was born.
But even then, there were some differences. Hobbes believed man was stupid & brutish, & needed a strong central govt to keep him in line. Many believed in 'manifest destiny', or the duty of the white race to control & manage the rest of the world. But this was in opposition with the basic idea of human equality, & caused a conflict. Eventually, slavery was outlawed by the people where enlightenment thought was dominant. Even in the wilds of America, a great civil war was fought to settle this issue. The idea of the dignity & equality of Man, had become mainstream. Monarchies were relinquishing power, & representative governments were replacing them, either peacefully or by force.
The foundation of this view was in that of a Creator. Man was endowed by his creator with unalienable rights, as Jefferson put it in the declaration of independence. But even for the Deists & naturalists of the time, 'Nature' or 'Nature's God' also worked as the source of these natural rights. 3 of the most significant philosophical leaders in the American theater were Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, & Thomas Paine, all deists. They did not believe in Christianity or the Bible, but still saw the divine empowerment of the individual with basic, equal rights, granted by Natural Law.
But the enlightenment did not usher in an era of peace & utopia. The French revolution was a disaster, with mob rule & bloodshed seeming to confirm Hobbes's analysis:
"During the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that conditions called war; and such a war, as if of every man, against every man. To this war of every man against every man, this also in consequent; that nothing can be unjust. The notions of right and wrong, justice and injustice have there no place. Where there is no common power, there is no law, where no law, no injustice. Force, and fraud, are in war the cardinal virtues. No arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death: and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short." ~Thomas Hobbes
The American thinkers concluded that their experiment in self rule could only succeed if the people were moral.
"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters." ~Benjamin Franklin
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." ~John Adams
But the correlation between a 'moral & religious people' & the equality of man are clear. Without morality & a sense of a higher 'Law', only force matters. Force is not equal, but favors the ruthless & amoral. So the view of man as equal & having inherent rights is incumbent upon a moral & religious people. To the enlightenment thinkers, force was something for a moral people to own & control, to secure their rights, not to be used for despotism & exploiting your fellow man.
But as the enlightenment era drew to a close, new thought was beginning, rooted in the works of Karl Marx & Charles Darwin. These were anti-enlightenment concepts, based on a naturalistic view of man & nature, & moved man back to a more elitist view. They undermined the power of religion & morality, declaring religion to be the opiate of the people, not a force for social good. Man was not a created being, in the image of God, but a mere brute.. an animal evolved from lower forms with no moral law or purpose other than survival. Both of these concepts laid the foundation for the Russian revolution, based on Marxism, & the rise of the Nazis, based on the evolution of the Master Race. The equality of man took a big hit in this time, as powerful elitists pushed their own agenda, empowered by their acquired force. Even in the American Experiment, progressives were gaining power, based on their elitist view. They were duty bound by the cosmos to manage & control the huddled masses, & of course should be provided for lavishly for their administration. Eugenicists like Margaret Sanger & other progressives hailed the virtues of elitist central power. They would engineer society & end all injustice. FDR compiled his 'second bill of rights', which is a collectivist, central power agenda, not one of individual freedom & Natural Law. Progressives need an elite of superior intellect & zoo like management skills to control the workers, which is what they have worked tirelessly toward for decades.
And here we are, in the death throes of the enlightenment, with the dignity & equality of Man slowly dying. Natural Law gives way to imperial decree, & we are plodding a steady return to elitist rule. We are in a convoluted blend of enlightenment memory concepts of Higher Truth & morality, & the conflicting conclusion of a world without God, purpose, or higher law. And with the death of Natural Law, so goes the concept of the equality of Man. Social engineers might give lip service to it, for propaganda purposes, but it is not inherent in their basic world view. They are elitists, & view the inferior beings with contempt. It is a short ride to genocide from this collectivist village. They worship only power, as there is nothing higher than that to the naturalist elites. They view the principles of the enlightenment as charmingly quaint, but completely irrelevant in their brave new world of elitist control. The achievements we have made in women's suffrage, abolition, worker's rights, & due process will all give way to imperial rule by a New King.
So is that it? Will the values from centuries of progress toward self rule, human equality, & natural law give way to another ruling elite? This time, they don't claim Divine Ordination, but are appointed by the god of power, to rule over the pathetic lower race of men. Will we revert back to the dark ages? Will we surrender what has taken millennia of blood, sweat & tears to arrive at, only to see it tossed aside for a lie?
"The issue today is the same as it has been throughout all history, whether man shall be allowed to govern himself or be ruled by a small elite." ~Thomas Jefferson
Thursday, October 8, 2015
A Central Bank
Our current problems with currency & the economy is not the direct problem of the federal reserve, but that is where the currency dilution began, in America. The fed was created to allow increased fractional reserve banking, remedy bank runs, & encourage bank savings, instead of gold buried in a fruit jar in the back yard. That was a noble concept, but it opened the door for expansion via debt, rather than production. People could borrow, invest, work the system, & become fabulously wealthy, without producing anything. It is ponzi scheme parameters.. skimming off each new 'investment' until the bubble bursts. ..and it ALWAYS bursts. The great depression, though exacerbated by the dust bowl & drought, was primarily caused by a bursting bubble.. the stock market crash of 1929.
When the fed was restrained by the gold standard, it could not expand its power or control over the currency by increasing debt. That was why FDR ended it in 1933, to keep the fed solvent, as people were converting their savings to gold, instead of buying federal reserve notes. It was govt mandating the use of their currency, to control the people & the economy (or so they thought). That is a typical tactic of statist systems.
I'm not singling out the fed, nor am i condemning fractional reserve banking, as it has been around for centuries. And while i agree that a moral people make laws less necessary, simple, fair laws, with a system of checks & balances is more difficult to corrupt. A central banking power, with no public accountability, but has control over the currency of the nation, is NOT a good system, & needs to change. Here are a few things we can require for a central bank:
1. oversight by elected officials.. congress is responsible to spend money, they should be responsible to provide a stable currency.
2. Hard assets.. something solid to base the currency on.. gold, silver, oil, land.. improvements.. even military hardware or national parks.. but a basis for the currency, not some ginned up numbers reflecting a fake gdp.
3. Limits on fractional reserve banking. .. a minimum requirement of assets to loans, so banks do not loan irresponsibly, or just borrow cheap money from the fed to loan out.
4. Money created from actual production.. no Quantitative easings 'just because', or 'for the children!' If the productivity of the nation did not grow, neither should the money supply. This would cut down on inflation, & lessen the impact of corrections, which will always happen.
5. balanced budget. this is mostly related to the fed, & is not a direct currency issue, but if the govt can borrow for future spending, they will, for votes. It compounds the problems of the currency. If the govt was required to keep a balanced budget, they would have more motivation to keep a stable currency.
Some form of bankruptcy has been around for centuries. Perhaps you were sold into indentured servitude for your debts, or all your assets taken to cover them. There was also 'debtors prison'. That was the 'bite' in borrowing.. you had to be sure you could pay it back. Banks & money lenders were also under those laws, & if they went under, they often took others with them. 'Caveat Emptor' was always the rule of the day for investing in any bank or savings plan ..even life insurance or mutual funds.
But the feds policies removed the threat of default from the banks. They could overextend themselves, & loan more than they had fractional assets to cover, & the fed would bail them out! That's why gold didn't work. There was more money being 'created' by the lending process than was actually justified by production, so any jitters in the market would spell an end to the system.. it would crash unless it could 'create' more money by fiat.. which is what they did. It had no basis in production, but was simply 'declared'.
IOW, the system is corrupt by default.. but it is almost imperceptive. It SOUNDS good, & promises lots of benefits, like most ponzi schemes. But its basis is in dilution, not production, which is why it is failing, & seems to be out of control.
I have come to see this as THE most crucial issue of the day, & one that will have the most impact on everyone. The politicians cannot control the fed. They cannot stabilize the currency, because it would cause a collapse of the system. It would take years of austerity, from both the people & the govt, to bring us to a solvent financial state. Even though this would be best for our long term health as a nation, & future generations, i don't think it will happen. Each generation kicks the can down the road, hoping it will hold up for a few more years.
When the fed was restrained by the gold standard, it could not expand its power or control over the currency by increasing debt. That was why FDR ended it in 1933, to keep the fed solvent, as people were converting their savings to gold, instead of buying federal reserve notes. It was govt mandating the use of their currency, to control the people & the economy (or so they thought). That is a typical tactic of statist systems.
I'm not singling out the fed, nor am i condemning fractional reserve banking, as it has been around for centuries. And while i agree that a moral people make laws less necessary, simple, fair laws, with a system of checks & balances is more difficult to corrupt. A central banking power, with no public accountability, but has control over the currency of the nation, is NOT a good system, & needs to change. Here are a few things we can require for a central bank:
1. oversight by elected officials.. congress is responsible to spend money, they should be responsible to provide a stable currency.
2. Hard assets.. something solid to base the currency on.. gold, silver, oil, land.. improvements.. even military hardware or national parks.. but a basis for the currency, not some ginned up numbers reflecting a fake gdp.
3. Limits on fractional reserve banking. .. a minimum requirement of assets to loans, so banks do not loan irresponsibly, or just borrow cheap money from the fed to loan out.
4. Money created from actual production.. no Quantitative easings 'just because', or 'for the children!' If the productivity of the nation did not grow, neither should the money supply. This would cut down on inflation, & lessen the impact of corrections, which will always happen.
5. balanced budget. this is mostly related to the fed, & is not a direct currency issue, but if the govt can borrow for future spending, they will, for votes. It compounds the problems of the currency. If the govt was required to keep a balanced budget, they would have more motivation to keep a stable currency.
Some form of bankruptcy has been around for centuries. Perhaps you were sold into indentured servitude for your debts, or all your assets taken to cover them. There was also 'debtors prison'. That was the 'bite' in borrowing.. you had to be sure you could pay it back. Banks & money lenders were also under those laws, & if they went under, they often took others with them. 'Caveat Emptor' was always the rule of the day for investing in any bank or savings plan ..even life insurance or mutual funds.
But the feds policies removed the threat of default from the banks. They could overextend themselves, & loan more than they had fractional assets to cover, & the fed would bail them out! That's why gold didn't work. There was more money being 'created' by the lending process than was actually justified by production, so any jitters in the market would spell an end to the system.. it would crash unless it could 'create' more money by fiat.. which is what they did. It had no basis in production, but was simply 'declared'.
IOW, the system is corrupt by default.. but it is almost imperceptive. It SOUNDS good, & promises lots of benefits, like most ponzi schemes. But its basis is in dilution, not production, which is why it is failing, & seems to be out of control.
I have come to see this as THE most crucial issue of the day, & one that will have the most impact on everyone. The politicians cannot control the fed. They cannot stabilize the currency, because it would cause a collapse of the system. It would take years of austerity, from both the people & the govt, to bring us to a solvent financial state. Even though this would be best for our long term health as a nation, & future generations, i don't think it will happen. Each generation kicks the can down the road, hoping it will hold up for a few more years.
Subjective & Objective Wealth
There is SUBJECTIVE wealth, & OBJECTIVE wealth. I tend to see everything as subjective wealth, but make a distinction based on human commonality.
For example:
A certain man loves colorful plastic buttons. He searches near & far, & amasses a great collection. He considers himself rich beyond measure. That is 'subjective' wealth. There might be a few people who would give money for these items, but not many.
There are other things that are more universally accepted as having value. A house. A functional car. Ownership in a business. Gold coins. Weapons. A silo full of grain. These are commonly valued items among the human collective, as most of them relate to survival. In an affluent society, hobbies proliferate, & many other items gain SUBJECTIVE value. Comic book collectors place great value on first edition popular comics. But that value is not inherent in the item.. it is just printing on paper. It is the IDEA of the item that has value, which makes it much more subjective.
For real wealth to be created, it must be done by useful labor. It must create SOMETHING of real value, for it to count as PRODUCTION. I do not deny that the comic book publishers, the sports heros, & the hollywood actors work. They give themselves to their profession & are compensated for it. The distinction i am making is that this is NON productive, for humanity. Entertainment is not essential to human survival.. at least paying for it like we do is not. Essentially, they are moochers on the productive sectors of society. They can ONLY survive if the economy is prosperous.. if there is abundant food, clothing, shelter, etc. Historically, court jesters & wandering minstrels were not rich. They barely eked out a living, sponging on the productive segments of society, unless they could hook up with a wealthy patron. This was true of most artists, writers, & musicians, too.
So the difference in perceived value can be put back in objective terms, if other mitigating factors are eliminated. Abundance & prosperity create a false bubble of value. The russians post czar found out about that. Some THINGS, like clothing, jewelry, pots, etc retained their value in an economic downturn. But food, housing, & protection items are always valued. These are the OBJECTIVE things that add to a society's wealth, more than fickle items that rich people play with. If you were suddenly transported into an apocalyptic time, where the struggle for survival was the foremost thing on everyone's mind, the button collection or even the comic books would not have the value that your dad's smith & wesson collection or your mom's gold necklaces.
So while perceived value is subjective, there are objective things that humans need. Those are the things that must be created for a society to thrive. If non productive sectors are esteemed over productive ones, & value is perceived where there is no objective value, that says more about the society & its skewed values, rather than objective truth.
For example:
A certain man loves colorful plastic buttons. He searches near & far, & amasses a great collection. He considers himself rich beyond measure. That is 'subjective' wealth. There might be a few people who would give money for these items, but not many.
There are other things that are more universally accepted as having value. A house. A functional car. Ownership in a business. Gold coins. Weapons. A silo full of grain. These are commonly valued items among the human collective, as most of them relate to survival. In an affluent society, hobbies proliferate, & many other items gain SUBJECTIVE value. Comic book collectors place great value on first edition popular comics. But that value is not inherent in the item.. it is just printing on paper. It is the IDEA of the item that has value, which makes it much more subjective.
For real wealth to be created, it must be done by useful labor. It must create SOMETHING of real value, for it to count as PRODUCTION. I do not deny that the comic book publishers, the sports heros, & the hollywood actors work. They give themselves to their profession & are compensated for it. The distinction i am making is that this is NON productive, for humanity. Entertainment is not essential to human survival.. at least paying for it like we do is not. Essentially, they are moochers on the productive sectors of society. They can ONLY survive if the economy is prosperous.. if there is abundant food, clothing, shelter, etc. Historically, court jesters & wandering minstrels were not rich. They barely eked out a living, sponging on the productive segments of society, unless they could hook up with a wealthy patron. This was true of most artists, writers, & musicians, too.
So the difference in perceived value can be put back in objective terms, if other mitigating factors are eliminated. Abundance & prosperity create a false bubble of value. The russians post czar found out about that. Some THINGS, like clothing, jewelry, pots, etc retained their value in an economic downturn. But food, housing, & protection items are always valued. These are the OBJECTIVE things that add to a society's wealth, more than fickle items that rich people play with. If you were suddenly transported into an apocalyptic time, where the struggle for survival was the foremost thing on everyone's mind, the button collection or even the comic books would not have the value that your dad's smith & wesson collection or your mom's gold necklaces.
So while perceived value is subjective, there are objective things that humans need. Those are the things that must be created for a society to thrive. If non productive sectors are esteemed over productive ones, & value is perceived where there is no objective value, that says more about the society & its skewed values, rather than objective truth.
Wealth is Created, not Declared
Real wealth is created, not declared. That seems obvious, but evidently not.. our whole financial system is based on declared value, not real production.
What is 'wealth'? It is not pieces of paper, or minted coins. Wealth is something of value that a human has found, created, or discovered. Labor was involved, even if it was digging gold nuggets from the ground. Here are some examples of wealth:
1. A farmer plants a crop.
2. A builder builds a house.
3. A miner extracts metals or value from the ground.
4. A manufacturer makes a tractor, washing machine, or other manufactured item.
5. A lumberjack harvests timber for boards & lumber goods.
These are all examples of REAL production. Now, let's look at some examples of non production:
1. A banker charges interest on a loan.
2. A govt taxes a producer.
3. A stock broker buys low & sells high & makes a profit.
4. A welfare queen draws a welfare check for years.
5. A sports figure gets paid to play a kid's game.
6. A hollywood actor gets paid to pretend to be someone else.
What is the difference? The second group had to do something.. they had to 'labor' to get the money. The sports hero had to practice, & even the welfare queen had to meet with the social worker & plead for some free stuff. IRS agents had to audit the taxpayers, so do they 'earn' their wages?
This is not about earning a wage, but the production of a nation. THAT is what WEALTH is based on, not just human work or effort. A person can labor long & hard & produce nothing. Another might labor efficiently & produce a great deal. The true wealth of the nation is not based on labor, but what that labor ACTUALLY PRODUCES.
There are support industries for the production of wealth that do not directly produce, but provide a useful service for the producers. Here are some examples of those:
1. Police, fire, & military. They provide protection, regulations, & justice so the producers can create the wealth.
2. Schools & education. They provide the knowledge base for the advancement of society, & build upon the successes of past producers, as well as learn from the mistakes.
3. Processing, marketing, & distribution. Much of the nation's wealth needs markets, & requires processing & distribution to get to the people who will buy it.
4. Capital. Acquired wealth can be used to enable the worker to expand the scope of their operation. They can buy tractors or lumber using their future production as collateral.
These examples rely completely on the producers.. they do not support themselves, but the demand for their services will rise & fall with production. But the ORIGINATION of the wealth begins with production. The farmer harvests a crop. He exchanges that crop for a new building or a tractor, or a washing machine. He sends his kid to school, to learn about better farming practices that will enable them to have increased production. His crop enabled the builder to hire laborers, buy lumber, & build a new house & barn. All of those activities are interrelated, & build what we call an 'economy'. But it begins not with printing currency, but REAL PRODUCTION.
This is why the emphasis of a successful society has to be on producing goods & services, instead of money shuffling, entertainment, or mooching. A healthy work ethic, that produces something of value is the only thing that keeps an economy going. Economies are cyclical. The are in constant flux. They self correct, & are affected by many factors, like weather, population increase, & new discoveries.
Some new discoveries can radically change an economy. The invention of the internal combustion engine & cheap, portable fuel put a big dent in the horse industry. It put a glut of food on the market, & made prices much lower. It enabled the industrialization of the world, & created a more complex economy.. the interdependence of other producers. It allowed the expansion of many support industries, including technology, education, research, mining, chemistry, transportation, & just about all of the world's economies. But everything begins at the simple act of food production. Without that, there is no demand for machines, education, technology, transportation, or anything. Food production then is the catalyst for the rest.. construction, machinery, education, law enforcement.. none of these are possible without the initial creation of wealth by the food producers.
A non food producing economy can survive, if it is able to exchange goods & services with another economy that has an abundance of food. Or, if they have superior military strength, they can take what others have produced by force. But that usually just motivates the producing nations to defend themselves better. They will allocate their resources to provide a better deterrence against foreign looters.
But without real production, there is no wealth created, & the society is in decline. As more & more jump on the support industries, or settle into the mooching sectors, production declines & the downward spiral has begun. Unless it is turned around & the society sees the common sense reality of production as the basis for any wealth, the illusion that wealth can be created, or just taken from someone else will permeate the culture & promote dependency. Moochers & looters will multiply, until the society collapses upon itself.
What is 'wealth'? It is not pieces of paper, or minted coins. Wealth is something of value that a human has found, created, or discovered. Labor was involved, even if it was digging gold nuggets from the ground. Here are some examples of wealth:
1. A farmer plants a crop.
2. A builder builds a house.
3. A miner extracts metals or value from the ground.
4. A manufacturer makes a tractor, washing machine, or other manufactured item.
5. A lumberjack harvests timber for boards & lumber goods.
These are all examples of REAL production. Now, let's look at some examples of non production:
1. A banker charges interest on a loan.
2. A govt taxes a producer.
3. A stock broker buys low & sells high & makes a profit.
4. A welfare queen draws a welfare check for years.
5. A sports figure gets paid to play a kid's game.
6. A hollywood actor gets paid to pretend to be someone else.
What is the difference? The second group had to do something.. they had to 'labor' to get the money. The sports hero had to practice, & even the welfare queen had to meet with the social worker & plead for some free stuff. IRS agents had to audit the taxpayers, so do they 'earn' their wages?
This is not about earning a wage, but the production of a nation. THAT is what WEALTH is based on, not just human work or effort. A person can labor long & hard & produce nothing. Another might labor efficiently & produce a great deal. The true wealth of the nation is not based on labor, but what that labor ACTUALLY PRODUCES.
There are support industries for the production of wealth that do not directly produce, but provide a useful service for the producers. Here are some examples of those:
1. Police, fire, & military. They provide protection, regulations, & justice so the producers can create the wealth.
2. Schools & education. They provide the knowledge base for the advancement of society, & build upon the successes of past producers, as well as learn from the mistakes.
3. Processing, marketing, & distribution. Much of the nation's wealth needs markets, & requires processing & distribution to get to the people who will buy it.
4. Capital. Acquired wealth can be used to enable the worker to expand the scope of their operation. They can buy tractors or lumber using their future production as collateral.
These examples rely completely on the producers.. they do not support themselves, but the demand for their services will rise & fall with production. But the ORIGINATION of the wealth begins with production. The farmer harvests a crop. He exchanges that crop for a new building or a tractor, or a washing machine. He sends his kid to school, to learn about better farming practices that will enable them to have increased production. His crop enabled the builder to hire laborers, buy lumber, & build a new house & barn. All of those activities are interrelated, & build what we call an 'economy'. But it begins not with printing currency, but REAL PRODUCTION.
This is why the emphasis of a successful society has to be on producing goods & services, instead of money shuffling, entertainment, or mooching. A healthy work ethic, that produces something of value is the only thing that keeps an economy going. Economies are cyclical. The are in constant flux. They self correct, & are affected by many factors, like weather, population increase, & new discoveries.
Some new discoveries can radically change an economy. The invention of the internal combustion engine & cheap, portable fuel put a big dent in the horse industry. It put a glut of food on the market, & made prices much lower. It enabled the industrialization of the world, & created a more complex economy.. the interdependence of other producers. It allowed the expansion of many support industries, including technology, education, research, mining, chemistry, transportation, & just about all of the world's economies. But everything begins at the simple act of food production. Without that, there is no demand for machines, education, technology, transportation, or anything. Food production then is the catalyst for the rest.. construction, machinery, education, law enforcement.. none of these are possible without the initial creation of wealth by the food producers.
A non food producing economy can survive, if it is able to exchange goods & services with another economy that has an abundance of food. Or, if they have superior military strength, they can take what others have produced by force. But that usually just motivates the producing nations to defend themselves better. They will allocate their resources to provide a better deterrence against foreign looters.
But without real production, there is no wealth created, & the society is in decline. As more & more jump on the support industries, or settle into the mooching sectors, production declines & the downward spiral has begun. Unless it is turned around & the society sees the common sense reality of production as the basis for any wealth, the illusion that wealth can be created, or just taken from someone else will permeate the culture & promote dependency. Moochers & looters will multiply, until the society collapses upon itself.
Wednesday, October 7, 2015
Morality & Evolution
From the naturalistic perspective, there might be instinctive 'morality', based on survival of the herd. That might be the source of altruistic behavior, or at least that is a plausible explanation. And of course, the basic rights to life & property can be seen as social expediency. Anti social behavior, such as killing others, or stealing their stuff, is not a positive for a healthy herd, so the 'instinct' to protect the individual's basic rights *can* be explained as a learned instinct.. something that evolved to improve the survival of the herd.
But i see a problem with that. If 'survival' is the only engine for morality, even from the herd's perspective, how did the larger social morality evolve? The stronger should be the survivors, not the weak & powerless. Why would any altruistic behavior from the strong toward the weak evolve, if it based purely on survival? Humans were not in such large 'herds' in past times. We were smaller tribal/family units, that constantly warred with other tribes & families. Civilization brought the larger sense of morality, that extended beyond the tribal power. Og of the river tribe might take his cousin Thag's goat, & if he is bigger & stronger, who can say he can't do that? If the patriarch Ung intervenes, & makes Og give the goat back, & threatens the collective strength of HIS power, Og must comply, or take off & build his own tribe, with his own power as the core of the new unit. So why would Ung intervene in such a dispute? He needs the power of Og to keep his tribe strong, not weaken it with altruistic delusions. I don't see any way morality could 'evolve' in basic human tribal units. I see it as much deeper than that. There IS an instinctive sense of morality, but i cannot see how it came about from naturalist processes. That is the conundrum of naturalism. How do you explain morality?
Religion brought the concept of a Higher Power, with the added baggage of morality, not instincts. IOW, religion came first, as the driver of morality. Without the appeal to a higher power, & using the collective strength to force compliance with the strong, STRENGTH is the only virtue. Perhaps religion could have been just a scam by the weak, to con the strong, & it furthered scheming and intelligence as a method of survival. Physically weak people could manipulate the strong by deception, & so 'morality' was born. Atouk could threaten Og with eternal torment, if he took his stuff, & that was the deterrent. If it worked, does Atouk's craftiness gain him supremacy? That is a plausible explanation of religion, but it does not explain the universal tendency in ALL humans for this. Some would have evolved with strength as the highest virtue, & collective strength would be a formidable force. Plus, as intelligence 'evolved' as the naturalists tell us, why would not the naturalistic view gain supremacy, & return back to strength as the central virtue over altruism?
The origin of morality is almost like, 'which came first, the chicken or the egg?' Did religion & the concept of a higher power give birth to morality, or did instinctive morality give birth to religion? I can see it either way, from a purely logical standpoint. So it comes back full circle to a belief. Naturalism or Higher Power?
But i will submit that the 'higher power' view has been the major driver of human morality. You might be able to explain morality by instinctive processes, but that does not ensure its survival. As amoral views run amok in a culture, & any sense of a higher power & accountability go out the window, strength returns to its rightful place as the ultimate virtue. The breakdown of western culture is easily seen as driven by moral relativism, & the rejection of moral absolutes. Instead of the instincts remaining intact, they are tossed aside for convenience & the more base drives in humanity. The drive for food, stuff, sex.. these are no longer tempered by a sense of morality, but are given free reign in animalistic expression. So it seems, by observation, that morality must be taught.. instilled in the people as the most basic driver of the culture, or man easily slips back to purely animal instincts. One need look no further than urban ghettos to see this phenomenon in action.
Religious institutions are common in urban areas. But they are no match for the daily indoctrination from the education system, pounding their amoral drum of naturalism & moral relativism. So morality is lost, ignored, rejected, or viewed as something for the weak & stupid.
I am trying to follow the CONSEQUENCES of ideology in this article. There are evidences, both anthropological, & currently observed that seem to indicate a correlation between a healthy, thriving civilization & morality. When morality breaks down, so does the culture. Where morality is revered, those cultures thrive. And the naturalistic view does not esteem moral absolutes. They cannot explain them, or promote them with any credibility. They will try to say, 'why can't we all just get along?' or make other baseless appeals to 'be good', but with no foundation, they are hollow calls for civility. And even when a culture has a foundation of morality, constant undermining of it with naturalistic ideology eventually kills the morality, which is what we are seeing in western culture.
Why is that? There are no rules. Morality & law are inventions of our own minds.
This is the root message of naturalism, even if they SAY, 'be good'. They have no basis to call for such behavior, & everybody knows it.
But i see a problem with that. If 'survival' is the only engine for morality, even from the herd's perspective, how did the larger social morality evolve? The stronger should be the survivors, not the weak & powerless. Why would any altruistic behavior from the strong toward the weak evolve, if it based purely on survival? Humans were not in such large 'herds' in past times. We were smaller tribal/family units, that constantly warred with other tribes & families. Civilization brought the larger sense of morality, that extended beyond the tribal power. Og of the river tribe might take his cousin Thag's goat, & if he is bigger & stronger, who can say he can't do that? If the patriarch Ung intervenes, & makes Og give the goat back, & threatens the collective strength of HIS power, Og must comply, or take off & build his own tribe, with his own power as the core of the new unit. So why would Ung intervene in such a dispute? He needs the power of Og to keep his tribe strong, not weaken it with altruistic delusions. I don't see any way morality could 'evolve' in basic human tribal units. I see it as much deeper than that. There IS an instinctive sense of morality, but i cannot see how it came about from naturalist processes. That is the conundrum of naturalism. How do you explain morality?
Religion brought the concept of a Higher Power, with the added baggage of morality, not instincts. IOW, religion came first, as the driver of morality. Without the appeal to a higher power, & using the collective strength to force compliance with the strong, STRENGTH is the only virtue. Perhaps religion could have been just a scam by the weak, to con the strong, & it furthered scheming and intelligence as a method of survival. Physically weak people could manipulate the strong by deception, & so 'morality' was born. Atouk could threaten Og with eternal torment, if he took his stuff, & that was the deterrent. If it worked, does Atouk's craftiness gain him supremacy? That is a plausible explanation of religion, but it does not explain the universal tendency in ALL humans for this. Some would have evolved with strength as the highest virtue, & collective strength would be a formidable force. Plus, as intelligence 'evolved' as the naturalists tell us, why would not the naturalistic view gain supremacy, & return back to strength as the central virtue over altruism?
The origin of morality is almost like, 'which came first, the chicken or the egg?' Did religion & the concept of a higher power give birth to morality, or did instinctive morality give birth to religion? I can see it either way, from a purely logical standpoint. So it comes back full circle to a belief. Naturalism or Higher Power?
But i will submit that the 'higher power' view has been the major driver of human morality. You might be able to explain morality by instinctive processes, but that does not ensure its survival. As amoral views run amok in a culture, & any sense of a higher power & accountability go out the window, strength returns to its rightful place as the ultimate virtue. The breakdown of western culture is easily seen as driven by moral relativism, & the rejection of moral absolutes. Instead of the instincts remaining intact, they are tossed aside for convenience & the more base drives in humanity. The drive for food, stuff, sex.. these are no longer tempered by a sense of morality, but are given free reign in animalistic expression. So it seems, by observation, that morality must be taught.. instilled in the people as the most basic driver of the culture, or man easily slips back to purely animal instincts. One need look no further than urban ghettos to see this phenomenon in action.
Religious institutions are common in urban areas. But they are no match for the daily indoctrination from the education system, pounding their amoral drum of naturalism & moral relativism. So morality is lost, ignored, rejected, or viewed as something for the weak & stupid.
I am trying to follow the CONSEQUENCES of ideology in this article. There are evidences, both anthropological, & currently observed that seem to indicate a correlation between a healthy, thriving civilization & morality. When morality breaks down, so does the culture. Where morality is revered, those cultures thrive. And the naturalistic view does not esteem moral absolutes. They cannot explain them, or promote them with any credibility. They will try to say, 'why can't we all just get along?' or make other baseless appeals to 'be good', but with no foundation, they are hollow calls for civility. And even when a culture has a foundation of morality, constant undermining of it with naturalistic ideology eventually kills the morality, which is what we are seeing in western culture.
Why is that? There are no rules. Morality & law are inventions of our own minds.
This is the root message of naturalism, even if they SAY, 'be good'. They have no basis to call for such behavior, & everybody knows it.
Wednesday, August 26, 2015
The Failure of Progressive Education
Education has become a panacea for every problem in society.
Crime? More education.
Racism? Education.
Littering? Education.
Stupidity? Education will fix that.
For every social problem we have, education is pushed forward as the all in one solution.
America has a long & illustrious history of quality education. We have gone to the moon, & made technological advances never imagined in times past, all from the building of the knowledge base, adding to it, & innovation... the sum of good education.
But somewhere along the line, when progressive ideology began to dominate the culture, education became a tool, not for critical thinking & discovery, but indoctrination.
Historic American education had a few basic tenets:
1. Natural law & human freedom.
2. Moral absolutes.
3. A universe of order.
4. The scientific method.
5. Open minded critical thinking.
There was no conflict in these areas, as they all combined to give the aspiring student a broad, liberal arts education. He was taught to read, write, & do arithmetic. He was taught to spell, use proper grammar, & had exposure to the classics. He was taught history & civics, the nature of governments, & the importance of self rule & the American experiment. Teachers from this era were patriotic, & valued the dream of America.
When i was in 4th or 5th grade, in the 60s, my elementary teacher was a fairly young woman in her early 30s (an old hag to a 10 yr old!) She taught civics, & had the class memorize the first part of the Declaration of Independence. I had a head start, as my old grandma had me do that in preschool, but we all dutifully memorized it, & recited it before the class. She saw the power, wisdom, & basis for our country summarized in this document. I don't know if it was her curriculum, or if the whole school did it, but this class knew about human equality & natural rights from an early age. I think by middle school, we studied the constitution, & the different branches of govt. We read classic literature, which covered a wide variety of subjects. Science was science. There was no blending of religion or philosophy, but only factual science. Origins were properly presented as 'theories', not settle science. There was no indoctrination over global warming, or the evils of loggers & industry. Hunting was something many of the locals did, & it was not demonized as bloodthirsty killers of Bambi.
“Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom.” ~Albert Einstein
Progressive education has changed the emphasis:
1. Collectivism. Individual freedom is subordinate to the needs of society, and the ruling elite will decide what is best for us.
2. Moral relativism. There is no god, & everyone can do as they please, but try to be nice.
3. Laws can change with the times, & the goalposts can be moved to make things fair.
4. Science is a tool to accomplish social justice & other more important social issues.
5. Indoctrination can build a pliable, subservient citizenry. Conformity is the goal, not individual thinking.
So we spend millions of taxpayer dollars pursuing the fantasies of progressive utopia, where a New Man can be made, molded, taught, & will evolve us into the perfect society. Justice is not a deterrence, but a place to 'reform' or teach the misguided criminal who is just a victim of inadequate education. But the only basis for teaching morality is, 'why can't we all just get along?', a whiny, pathetic, weak appeal to try to overcome the violence & aggression that is in Man. There is no fear of retribution, or God, or punishment, or even family discipline. The progressive state has emasculated fathers, & promoted the death of the family. We daily see the results of this madness, yet no one says, 'Are you crazy? Stop this, right now!' Instead, the same old tired pleas for more money & more indoctrination go out to the working man, who is expected to foot the bill for these stupid, failed policies that are only destroying the culture.
They teach that there is no need for God, as life happened spontaneously, & has evolved over millions of years, with no morality, no responsibility, & no purpose for life. You are just an accident of nature, & it doesn't really matter what you do. It is a dog eat dog world, & only the strong survive. They use science to preach this philosophy, even though it is not even a good theory. They ridicule God & morality, & undermine any values that the parents or a religious institution might instill.
They do not teach critical thinking, but conformity. They mock & ridicule any outliers, & put tremendous pressure on impressionable young people to align themselves with progressive ideology. They do this in matters of policy, politics, & religion. They indoctrinate the student in all the pet tenets of leftist ideology: collectivism, social justice, global warming, evolution, & naturalism. Students cannot challenge the progressive status quo, though they are encouraged to mock & ridicule traditional values of family, religion, free market capitalism, & American self rule.
So how has that worked out for us? Do we have a more evolved society? Has the New Man created the ideal society? Is there more altruism, tolerance, & acceptance of diversity? Do students all hold hands & sing kum-ba-ya? Are the citizens industrious, responsible, & caring?
No. The fruit of progressive education is rotten to the core. They breed criminals, where the 3 r's are 'rape, robbery, & racism'. They promote dependency & are a breeding ground for crime, drugs, & despair. They do NOT teach skills to survive in the world, or basic values of human dignity. They trap people in a gulag of dependency to make them all wards of the state.
This is the direction progressive ideology is taking us. They are undermining the values that made America the most prosperous, free, & opportune nation in the history of mankind. They are taking us back to the dark ages & totalitarian rule, where lords & masters direct our every choice in life. Education has become an enemy of American society, destroying the foundation of the culture.
It is, in fact, nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of instruction have not entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry. ~Albert Einstein
What is the solution?
1. End all federal involvement in education. Let local & state govts handle it.
2. End teachers unions.. they do not promote what is best for the children, which should be the overriding goal.
3. End tenure. Teaching is a job like any other, & should be based on competence, not seniority.
4. Break up the monopoly on teaching, & promote educators with life experiences, not just indoctrinated education degrees from complicit institutions. Test for competence in the subject matter.
5. Clearly define the goals & mission statement of the schools, & have them be more subject to the community of parents, especially with regard to curriculum & values.
6. Return to recognizing the equality of man, natural law, the basic rights of the individual, & reject the collectivist indoctrination currently preached.
It will not be easy. Hordes of slimy progressives have wormed their way into the institutions of education, do nothing useful, & exploit the children. It will take a national awakening, to see the evils in place, & make a concerted effort to eradicate it. But if we want to return to a civilized society, with freedom, opportunity, & sanity running the culture, this is the only solution. If we surrender to the progressive destroyers, they will continue their destruction, until the nation is a pile of rubble.
Crime? More education.
Racism? Education.
Littering? Education.
Stupidity? Education will fix that.
For every social problem we have, education is pushed forward as the all in one solution.
America has a long & illustrious history of quality education. We have gone to the moon, & made technological advances never imagined in times past, all from the building of the knowledge base, adding to it, & innovation... the sum of good education.
But somewhere along the line, when progressive ideology began to dominate the culture, education became a tool, not for critical thinking & discovery, but indoctrination.
Historic American education had a few basic tenets:
1. Natural law & human freedom.
2. Moral absolutes.
3. A universe of order.
4. The scientific method.
5. Open minded critical thinking.
There was no conflict in these areas, as they all combined to give the aspiring student a broad, liberal arts education. He was taught to read, write, & do arithmetic. He was taught to spell, use proper grammar, & had exposure to the classics. He was taught history & civics, the nature of governments, & the importance of self rule & the American experiment. Teachers from this era were patriotic, & valued the dream of America.
When i was in 4th or 5th grade, in the 60s, my elementary teacher was a fairly young woman in her early 30s (an old hag to a 10 yr old!) She taught civics, & had the class memorize the first part of the Declaration of Independence. I had a head start, as my old grandma had me do that in preschool, but we all dutifully memorized it, & recited it before the class. She saw the power, wisdom, & basis for our country summarized in this document. I don't know if it was her curriculum, or if the whole school did it, but this class knew about human equality & natural rights from an early age. I think by middle school, we studied the constitution, & the different branches of govt. We read classic literature, which covered a wide variety of subjects. Science was science. There was no blending of religion or philosophy, but only factual science. Origins were properly presented as 'theories', not settle science. There was no indoctrination over global warming, or the evils of loggers & industry. Hunting was something many of the locals did, & it was not demonized as bloodthirsty killers of Bambi.
“Everything that is really great and inspiring is created by the individual who can labor in freedom.” ~Albert Einstein
Progressive education has changed the emphasis:
1. Collectivism. Individual freedom is subordinate to the needs of society, and the ruling elite will decide what is best for us.
2. Moral relativism. There is no god, & everyone can do as they please, but try to be nice.
3. Laws can change with the times, & the goalposts can be moved to make things fair.
4. Science is a tool to accomplish social justice & other more important social issues.
5. Indoctrination can build a pliable, subservient citizenry. Conformity is the goal, not individual thinking.
So we spend millions of taxpayer dollars pursuing the fantasies of progressive utopia, where a New Man can be made, molded, taught, & will evolve us into the perfect society. Justice is not a deterrence, but a place to 'reform' or teach the misguided criminal who is just a victim of inadequate education. But the only basis for teaching morality is, 'why can't we all just get along?', a whiny, pathetic, weak appeal to try to overcome the violence & aggression that is in Man. There is no fear of retribution, or God, or punishment, or even family discipline. The progressive state has emasculated fathers, & promoted the death of the family. We daily see the results of this madness, yet no one says, 'Are you crazy? Stop this, right now!' Instead, the same old tired pleas for more money & more indoctrination go out to the working man, who is expected to foot the bill for these stupid, failed policies that are only destroying the culture.
They teach that there is no need for God, as life happened spontaneously, & has evolved over millions of years, with no morality, no responsibility, & no purpose for life. You are just an accident of nature, & it doesn't really matter what you do. It is a dog eat dog world, & only the strong survive. They use science to preach this philosophy, even though it is not even a good theory. They ridicule God & morality, & undermine any values that the parents or a religious institution might instill.
They do not teach critical thinking, but conformity. They mock & ridicule any outliers, & put tremendous pressure on impressionable young people to align themselves with progressive ideology. They do this in matters of policy, politics, & religion. They indoctrinate the student in all the pet tenets of leftist ideology: collectivism, social justice, global warming, evolution, & naturalism. Students cannot challenge the progressive status quo, though they are encouraged to mock & ridicule traditional values of family, religion, free market capitalism, & American self rule.
So how has that worked out for us? Do we have a more evolved society? Has the New Man created the ideal society? Is there more altruism, tolerance, & acceptance of diversity? Do students all hold hands & sing kum-ba-ya? Are the citizens industrious, responsible, & caring?
No. The fruit of progressive education is rotten to the core. They breed criminals, where the 3 r's are 'rape, robbery, & racism'. They promote dependency & are a breeding ground for crime, drugs, & despair. They do NOT teach skills to survive in the world, or basic values of human dignity. They trap people in a gulag of dependency to make them all wards of the state.
This is the direction progressive ideology is taking us. They are undermining the values that made America the most prosperous, free, & opportune nation in the history of mankind. They are taking us back to the dark ages & totalitarian rule, where lords & masters direct our every choice in life. Education has become an enemy of American society, destroying the foundation of the culture.
It is, in fact, nothing short of a miracle that the modern methods of instruction have not entirely strangled the holy curiosity of inquiry. ~Albert Einstein
What is the solution?
1. End all federal involvement in education. Let local & state govts handle it.
2. End teachers unions.. they do not promote what is best for the children, which should be the overriding goal.
3. End tenure. Teaching is a job like any other, & should be based on competence, not seniority.
4. Break up the monopoly on teaching, & promote educators with life experiences, not just indoctrinated education degrees from complicit institutions. Test for competence in the subject matter.
5. Clearly define the goals & mission statement of the schools, & have them be more subject to the community of parents, especially with regard to curriculum & values.
6. Return to recognizing the equality of man, natural law, the basic rights of the individual, & reject the collectivist indoctrination currently preached.
It will not be easy. Hordes of slimy progressives have wormed their way into the institutions of education, do nothing useful, & exploit the children. It will take a national awakening, to see the evils in place, & make a concerted effort to eradicate it. But if we want to return to a civilized society, with freedom, opportunity, & sanity running the culture, this is the only solution. If we surrender to the progressive destroyers, they will continue their destruction, until the nation is a pile of rubble.
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
Monsters Among Us
For thousands of years, humanity has strived toward the basic principle of Natural Law: Each person has a right to their life, liberty, & property. That is Natural Law, in a nutshell. The most basic recognition of this Law is the right to life. You are a sovereign human being, & you have a sacred right to live. Your life is not subject to the whims of other people, who might wish you harm, for whatever reason. No one, regardless of how smart, rich, or powerful they are has the right to take away your basic right to live. We have developed Law & Justice as a deterrence to those who would harm us, & use our collective strength to defend the weak from the strong. There has always been evil in humanity. There are those among us who only wish to kill & destroy. They do it for profit, for fun, or some other twisted, antisocial reason. Responsible, thinking people have opposed them for millennia, promoting Natural Law & the sanctity of human life.
But now, the monsters have ascended to positions of power. They have systematically distorted Law to their own agendas, twisting justice into injustice, & attacking the very core of Law. They redefine life, morality, & try to obscure their evil deeds by moral relativism. Lately, we have seen the face of evil in the planned parenthood videos. Horrible people glibly chat about killing babies, picking over their bones like hyenas. Callously indifferent to the suffering & murder of these innocents, the monsters only joke about the money they will make off of the organs from these murdered children. These are criminals.. vicious animals who only kill & destroy.
But they are not alone. They have co-conspirators in their treachery. For over 50 yrs their propagandists have carried the water for them, enabling them through the distortion of Law, the perversion of Justice, & the corruption of morality. They have done it all through public funds. No civilized, thinking person would contribute money to promote or defend these inhumane practices, so they tap into the public treasury, infiltrating positions of influence to promote their agenda. All the major institutions.. govt, media, academia, entertainment.. ALL of them have been complicit with the destruction of the family & the murder of innocent life. Hitler is condemned for killing millions of jews. We have multiplied his crimes, & made a public institution of it.
It is quite simple. The womb is a place for a new human to grow & develop, depending on the birth mother for nutrients & protection. This amazing phenomena is plainly obvious, but many disagree about it's significance. Some seem to think that because the womb is providing these services, the owner of the womb has to right to terminate the life of the 'boarder'. My contention is that the mammalian status of the nurturer does not give them the right to terminate the new human's existence, for any reason but self defense. Being a mammal is fraught with inconveniences, but also has percs. We have to live with our specie-ial make up. That is the way we procreate.
We all agree about the dependency of the unborn child but there is disagreement about the correlation of the new human's rights in this dependency. Some seem to think that because the host mother is the sole provider of nutrition & protection, she should have the right to terminate the life of the new human developing inside her. I maintain that the new human has rights, which should NOT be negated for the convenience or 'choice' of the host mother. The child is still COMPLETELY dependent, before & after birth. The only difference is the birth mother is the only one who can do it before birth. Why should that simple fact nullify the new human's right to life? Why is he unprotected as a person one minute before birth, but is a protected person 1 minute after birth?
Civilized, enlightened societies try to protect the weak from the strong, & our degeneration as a society reflects our values of human life. I have fully embraced the decline of our culture, & accept the indicators of our decline. This is one of many, & spells the end of civilization in America, as it has in other post moral societies. Killing unborn babies is now acceptable, & has become mainstream. I fought it for many years, in the 70s & into the 80s, but the barbarism of America continues to grow, as other indicators also illustrate. I see abortion as a dehumanizing criminal act, racist in its origins in America, & part of the socially engineered destruction of the family. I have hoped for a return to morality & civility, but i do not see it, or expect it anymore. We are a lost society, with no moral anchor for our culture. Like others before us, we will fade into the anonymity of history. But it is very sad that a once moral people, who valued freedom, built a working system of self rule, & extolled the virtues of human liberty, are now complicit with the destroyers of life & liberty.
We cannot escape the bloodguilt of the innocent, murdered for profit & convenience by evil monsters among us. But our complicity & silence will not be overlooked. The cry of innocent blood calls out from the land, & we can only hang our heads in shame, holding out bloodstained hands. How can a moral people stand idly by while millions of innocents are murdered? Do you think our feigned helplessness will atone for our crimes? No, we have been complicit by our silence, by our taxes, by our turning a blind eye toward the evil in our midst. If we cannot or will not fight the monsters among us, how can we escape the judgment of God? Sodom & Gomorrah were amateurs. Dachau & Auschwitz were wannabes, compared to the human destruction from the American abortion industry. Pol Pot, Stalin, & Mao were rank amateurs. We in America have made murder into a respectable profession. It is big business, yet still subsidized by the taxpayers. This only confirms our own guilt in this bloody war on the unborn.
Where is the indignation over this injustice? Where are the defenders of human life? Why are those charged with providing justice for our nation complicit with the murderers & criminals among us?
America. Once a champion of natural law, & the sanctity of human life, now has fallen to the dredges of humanity, complicit with the unjust murder of millions of innocent people. This is not my America. This is not my heritage, to kill & destroy life. How can a civilized, thinking people fall to such depravity? How can we think that there will be no repercussions from the universe over this crime against life?
But now, the monsters have ascended to positions of power. They have systematically distorted Law to their own agendas, twisting justice into injustice, & attacking the very core of Law. They redefine life, morality, & try to obscure their evil deeds by moral relativism. Lately, we have seen the face of evil in the planned parenthood videos. Horrible people glibly chat about killing babies, picking over their bones like hyenas. Callously indifferent to the suffering & murder of these innocents, the monsters only joke about the money they will make off of the organs from these murdered children. These are criminals.. vicious animals who only kill & destroy.
But they are not alone. They have co-conspirators in their treachery. For over 50 yrs their propagandists have carried the water for them, enabling them through the distortion of Law, the perversion of Justice, & the corruption of morality. They have done it all through public funds. No civilized, thinking person would contribute money to promote or defend these inhumane practices, so they tap into the public treasury, infiltrating positions of influence to promote their agenda. All the major institutions.. govt, media, academia, entertainment.. ALL of them have been complicit with the destruction of the family & the murder of innocent life. Hitler is condemned for killing millions of jews. We have multiplied his crimes, & made a public institution of it.
It is quite simple. The womb is a place for a new human to grow & develop, depending on the birth mother for nutrients & protection. This amazing phenomena is plainly obvious, but many disagree about it's significance. Some seem to think that because the womb is providing these services, the owner of the womb has to right to terminate the life of the 'boarder'. My contention is that the mammalian status of the nurturer does not give them the right to terminate the new human's existence, for any reason but self defense. Being a mammal is fraught with inconveniences, but also has percs. We have to live with our specie-ial make up. That is the way we procreate.
We all agree about the dependency of the unborn child but there is disagreement about the correlation of the new human's rights in this dependency. Some seem to think that because the host mother is the sole provider of nutrition & protection, she should have the right to terminate the life of the new human developing inside her. I maintain that the new human has rights, which should NOT be negated for the convenience or 'choice' of the host mother. The child is still COMPLETELY dependent, before & after birth. The only difference is the birth mother is the only one who can do it before birth. Why should that simple fact nullify the new human's right to life? Why is he unprotected as a person one minute before birth, but is a protected person 1 minute after birth?
Civilized, enlightened societies try to protect the weak from the strong, & our degeneration as a society reflects our values of human life. I have fully embraced the decline of our culture, & accept the indicators of our decline. This is one of many, & spells the end of civilization in America, as it has in other post moral societies. Killing unborn babies is now acceptable, & has become mainstream. I fought it for many years, in the 70s & into the 80s, but the barbarism of America continues to grow, as other indicators also illustrate. I see abortion as a dehumanizing criminal act, racist in its origins in America, & part of the socially engineered destruction of the family. I have hoped for a return to morality & civility, but i do not see it, or expect it anymore. We are a lost society, with no moral anchor for our culture. Like others before us, we will fade into the anonymity of history. But it is very sad that a once moral people, who valued freedom, built a working system of self rule, & extolled the virtues of human liberty, are now complicit with the destroyers of life & liberty.
We cannot escape the bloodguilt of the innocent, murdered for profit & convenience by evil monsters among us. But our complicity & silence will not be overlooked. The cry of innocent blood calls out from the land, & we can only hang our heads in shame, holding out bloodstained hands. How can a moral people stand idly by while millions of innocents are murdered? Do you think our feigned helplessness will atone for our crimes? No, we have been complicit by our silence, by our taxes, by our turning a blind eye toward the evil in our midst. If we cannot or will not fight the monsters among us, how can we escape the judgment of God? Sodom & Gomorrah were amateurs. Dachau & Auschwitz were wannabes, compared to the human destruction from the American abortion industry. Pol Pot, Stalin, & Mao were rank amateurs. We in America have made murder into a respectable profession. It is big business, yet still subsidized by the taxpayers. This only confirms our own guilt in this bloody war on the unborn.
Where is the indignation over this injustice? Where are the defenders of human life? Why are those charged with providing justice for our nation complicit with the murderers & criminals among us?
America. Once a champion of natural law, & the sanctity of human life, now has fallen to the dredges of humanity, complicit with the unjust murder of millions of innocent people. This is not my America. This is not my heritage, to kill & destroy life. How can a civilized, thinking people fall to such depravity? How can we think that there will be no repercussions from the universe over this crime against life?
Monday, July 27, 2015
Destruction of Production
When i was growing up, most men worked. Most of the moms stayed at home, raising the family & managing the household. Teenagers got jobs, when they were old enough. I started working for 50c/hr in a horse stable, mucking stalls at 14. Then, i got a better paying job at 65c/hr at a farmer's produce stand. But the holy grail for the kids where i lived was construction work. Those guys made big bucks. They made $2/hr & more! They drove hot cars, & had hot girls riding with them. My best friend growing up worked with his dad in construction, as a laborer. We didn't get allowances, or a lot of gadgets for birthdays or holidays. We got clothes, & usually one item that was 'fun'. I got a 22 single shot rifle for christmas at 16, & plinked happily away, even though i had to buy my own ammo.. at 50c/box. My buddy had a nice hunting shotgun, & if i wanted to go bird hunting with him, i'd need one too. It took a long time to save up $35 to buy a 16 ga pump from a neighbor, & i could not afford to shoot it much, since i had to buy my shells, too.
I had a bicycle.. one i had cobbled together from broken ones, & it had bad brakes. But i rode it everywhere. At 16, i put together a functional car from broken volkswagen beetles that my dad had acquired for that purpose. One was a mangled mess, but with a good engine. The other had a decent body, but a blown engine. Combined, they made a functional car.. my car, & it enabled me to get a higher paying job to buy gas & other stuff. It was a union job.. $1.60/hr as a dept store stocker. But now, i was flush with cash. I drove all over town with my buddies, & the road was my new home. Mobility was like a drug, & i was addicted. Sometimes we took my car, but it wasn't very powerful or big, so my buddy's impala was better.
But to finance this high rolling lifestyle, i had to work. I had to save my money, manage it, & spend it wisely, or i'd be stuck at home. Gas was cheap, but so were the wages. I'd buy a coke every now & then or a burger, but not much. Eventually i scrimped & saved, & at 17, bought a new car.. really, almost new. ..only a couple of years old, for $1000. That was a TON of money, but this car was nice. A fiat convertible, with less power than my beetle, but was a cream puff & fit my upwardly mobile, flamboyant personality. I had to work full time in the summers to pay for it, making payments to my dad, who financed it at reasonable interest. It was only a 2 seater, so i could only carry one buddy, or a girl at a time. But with this new symbol of status & prestige, my confidence soared. I bought a motorcycle, too, & continued my cruising ways. I kept this car through college, where i credit it to sweeping the girl of my dreams off her feet. She rode with me a few times, dazzled by my confidence, prosperity, & dreams of the future... at least, that's what i thought.
So what does this trip down memory lane have to do with production? That is the point of this article, isn't it?
Yes. The point is cultural changes, & not for the better. Young people in middle America, where i lived, were expected to work & earn their own way. There was no expectation of a free ride. Sure, some rich kids were spoiled & given everything, but they were not respected. Young men had an expectation of working at fruitful labor.. doing something useful for society. Building, farming, manufacturing.. these were the productive, high paying jobs for working class people. College kids went into engineering, medicine, or some other profession. Very few of my peers wanted to be actors or sports heroes, or rock stars, or politicians, or govt workers, or welfare queens. USEFUL PRODUCTION was the expectation, & all the people could see the benefit, not only for the kid working, but for everyone. My folks wanted me to be a lawyer.. they were in real estate, & saw the need of jurisprudence in their industry, & had to pay hefty sums for those services. They also thought that i liked to argue, & was eloquent enough to succeed as a counselor (who, me?). I went to college, continuing my education. But i wanted to do something. I wanted to be outside, & create something useful. So i dropped out of college, & went into construction, still a high paying job for a working stiff. I'm a retired home builder, now, and i do not regret my choice. I am sure i would have been a successful lawyer, but the climate i grew up in.. with farming, construction, & production, elevated as esteemed avocations, put me on that path. I also found out after studying genealogy, that many of my ancestors were in the building trades, so it could have been in my blood, too.
But the cultural influences on me, as a young man, where productive work was esteemed, embedded in my psyche. I have seen those influence waning, over the years. Sales, huckstering, political maneuvering, flash, & celebrity worship has taken over as the cultural admiration point. I watched Gilligan's island & star trek, but did not expect or want to be an actor. I listened to Crosby, Stills, & Nash, & the Beatles, but did not expect or want to be a rock star. But now the dreams of young people seem to be in NON or even counter productive 'work'. Easy living, not hard work is respected & admired. Partying & free stuff are expected as a right. Oh, there were deadbeats in my generation. I knew of many who wanted to just drink & smoke pot, drifting along doing as little as possible to survive. They were early riders on the govt gravy train, which enabled them to pursue uselessness as a career.
I see the corrupting influences of easy living, the 'get rich quick' philosophy of life, & the Great Fiction, that says govt can enable you to live off of everybody else, as taking over as the new cultural norm. The result of this philosophy is decline for the nation. No culture can sustain an increasing number of dependents & moochers. The explosion of govt & the welfare state is destroying the productivity of America. Instead of useful, productive work, people want easy street. Instead of building & growing, we elevate mooching & looting. This philosophy is deadly for a culture, & has caused the collapse of many societies in the past. When a work ethic is disdained, production will continue to decline until supplies dwindle to nothing. Printing money & living on borrowed fiat currency, without a vibrant, productive society to pay for it, only makes the bubble worse, when it pops.
I may not live to see the bubble pop. I can only hope that there will be a cultural awakening, to reverse this trend. But the signs are all there, for those who can see. If we do not return to a productive, strong work ethic value system, we will collapse under our own weight of uselessness & privilege.
I had a bicycle.. one i had cobbled together from broken ones, & it had bad brakes. But i rode it everywhere. At 16, i put together a functional car from broken volkswagen beetles that my dad had acquired for that purpose. One was a mangled mess, but with a good engine. The other had a decent body, but a blown engine. Combined, they made a functional car.. my car, & it enabled me to get a higher paying job to buy gas & other stuff. It was a union job.. $1.60/hr as a dept store stocker. But now, i was flush with cash. I drove all over town with my buddies, & the road was my new home. Mobility was like a drug, & i was addicted. Sometimes we took my car, but it wasn't very powerful or big, so my buddy's impala was better.
But to finance this high rolling lifestyle, i had to work. I had to save my money, manage it, & spend it wisely, or i'd be stuck at home. Gas was cheap, but so were the wages. I'd buy a coke every now & then or a burger, but not much. Eventually i scrimped & saved, & at 17, bought a new car.. really, almost new. ..only a couple of years old, for $1000. That was a TON of money, but this car was nice. A fiat convertible, with less power than my beetle, but was a cream puff & fit my upwardly mobile, flamboyant personality. I had to work full time in the summers to pay for it, making payments to my dad, who financed it at reasonable interest. It was only a 2 seater, so i could only carry one buddy, or a girl at a time. But with this new symbol of status & prestige, my confidence soared. I bought a motorcycle, too, & continued my cruising ways. I kept this car through college, where i credit it to sweeping the girl of my dreams off her feet. She rode with me a few times, dazzled by my confidence, prosperity, & dreams of the future... at least, that's what i thought.
So what does this trip down memory lane have to do with production? That is the point of this article, isn't it?
Yes. The point is cultural changes, & not for the better. Young people in middle America, where i lived, were expected to work & earn their own way. There was no expectation of a free ride. Sure, some rich kids were spoiled & given everything, but they were not respected. Young men had an expectation of working at fruitful labor.. doing something useful for society. Building, farming, manufacturing.. these were the productive, high paying jobs for working class people. College kids went into engineering, medicine, or some other profession. Very few of my peers wanted to be actors or sports heroes, or rock stars, or politicians, or govt workers, or welfare queens. USEFUL PRODUCTION was the expectation, & all the people could see the benefit, not only for the kid working, but for everyone. My folks wanted me to be a lawyer.. they were in real estate, & saw the need of jurisprudence in their industry, & had to pay hefty sums for those services. They also thought that i liked to argue, & was eloquent enough to succeed as a counselor (who, me?). I went to college, continuing my education. But i wanted to do something. I wanted to be outside, & create something useful. So i dropped out of college, & went into construction, still a high paying job for a working stiff. I'm a retired home builder, now, and i do not regret my choice. I am sure i would have been a successful lawyer, but the climate i grew up in.. with farming, construction, & production, elevated as esteemed avocations, put me on that path. I also found out after studying genealogy, that many of my ancestors were in the building trades, so it could have been in my blood, too.
But the cultural influences on me, as a young man, where productive work was esteemed, embedded in my psyche. I have seen those influence waning, over the years. Sales, huckstering, political maneuvering, flash, & celebrity worship has taken over as the cultural admiration point. I watched Gilligan's island & star trek, but did not expect or want to be an actor. I listened to Crosby, Stills, & Nash, & the Beatles, but did not expect or want to be a rock star. But now the dreams of young people seem to be in NON or even counter productive 'work'. Easy living, not hard work is respected & admired. Partying & free stuff are expected as a right. Oh, there were deadbeats in my generation. I knew of many who wanted to just drink & smoke pot, drifting along doing as little as possible to survive. They were early riders on the govt gravy train, which enabled them to pursue uselessness as a career.
I see the corrupting influences of easy living, the 'get rich quick' philosophy of life, & the Great Fiction, that says govt can enable you to live off of everybody else, as taking over as the new cultural norm. The result of this philosophy is decline for the nation. No culture can sustain an increasing number of dependents & moochers. The explosion of govt & the welfare state is destroying the productivity of America. Instead of useful, productive work, people want easy street. Instead of building & growing, we elevate mooching & looting. This philosophy is deadly for a culture, & has caused the collapse of many societies in the past. When a work ethic is disdained, production will continue to decline until supplies dwindle to nothing. Printing money & living on borrowed fiat currency, without a vibrant, productive society to pay for it, only makes the bubble worse, when it pops.
I may not live to see the bubble pop. I can only hope that there will be a cultural awakening, to reverse this trend. But the signs are all there, for those who can see. If we do not return to a productive, strong work ethic value system, we will collapse under our own weight of uselessness & privilege.
Sunday, June 14, 2015
Enlightenment & Reformation
The 'Enlightenment' is sometimes portrayed as a victory over religion.. a secular great awakening where superstition was cast off, & replaced with science & reason. But that is somewhat revisionist, imo. It was the natural consequence of the growing knowledge base, that found its roots in the new christian world view.. one of order, Natural Law, & discovery. The status quo opposed advances & inquiry, as they do now, but the quest for understanding of the world had begun, & most of the early scientists in that time were deeply religious. It was the reformation that opened the door for this movement, by bringing the written word, which was critical to build the knowledge base. Scientific inquiry had a common language, which was the language of religion. Latin brought an increased exposure to the thinking & research of others, & many unknowns were explained. The knowledge of new things brought an increased desire to know more, & a systematic methodology was born.
I don't see these 'eras' as independent of each other. The reformation became the renaissance, which sparked the 'scientific revolution', which spawned the enlightenment. Many of these labels are attempts to revise history, in order to avoid any aspects that don't fit within the desired agenda that the teacher wishes to portray. The times overlap, too. Copernicus, often credited for the beginning of the scientific revolution, was a contemporary of Luther. The reformation is sometimes pegged as 'starting' with Luther's (b. 1483) 95 theses, in 1517. Copernicus was born in 1473, & made his startling discoveries & rash claims that shocked the status quo during the same time that the reformation was happening. These were connected, ideologically & temporally. IOW, the same mindset that brought scientific inquiry also brought religious freedom, & along with that, a longing for human freedom. The table was set for a feast of enlightened human thought, culminating in the American Experiment, where religious freedom, open inquiry, tolerance, & govt as servant rocked the monarchist world, & ushered in a new ideology of human freedom & open inquiry.
History is never compartmentalized, and the most fascinating parts of history are those where human thought & the 'evolution' of social mores & other concepts that directly affect the common man are awakened. It is also necessary to understand the times, & not view historical events through the assumptions & filters of modern day mindsets. There was no 'separation of church & state', or distinction between 'science' & 'religion'. The 'scientists' of the day were also the 'religious'. They were monks, bureaucrats, nobles, & usually upper class. Poor folks didn't have time for such nonsense. That was a luxury for the well to do.
And just what did the printing press have to do with all this? Well, Gutenberg invented it ~ 1440.. right before Copernicus & Luther were born. Coincidence? Not in my opinion. I see a direct cause & effect from both the printing press, the reformation, the renaissance, the scientific revolution, & just about all advances in humanity onward. It brought the knowledge base to others, who could build upon what others had learned. It is said that we can see farther, because we stand on the shoulders of giants. The printing press was the enabler of our knowledge base.. it made it possible.
So do we celebrate knowledge, science, & the holy art of inquiry? Not anymore. Now, we are moving back to the dark ages, memorizing dogma, mandating science, & crushing open inquiry. We are in a time of Anti-Science, where truth is relative, along with morality, & Govt is worshiped as the Provider & Maker of All Things. The current mindset is destroying the foundations of Western Civilization, moving us backwards, towards worship of Man, Position, & Imperial decree.
I am hopeful that the curiosity of Man overcomes the desire & ability to control, but it is a battle. It always has been, & always will be. Anti human, anti freedom, & anti science forces are constantly oppressing us & dragging us back to a stifling atmosphere, where free inquiry is squashed. One need only see the trends from China & Russia, & other collectivist experiments, where science & inquiry were almost completely shut down. Will the west follow the progressive left to a new 'cultural revolution'? Will all science & knowledge that is not 'party approved' be forbidden & destroyed? It could happen. The seeds of statist control are already sprouted & growing.
Freedom is on the line. Freedom to think. Freedom to speak. Freedom to live & do what we want. It has taken us 2000+ years to arrive at the level of freedom we have. Will we let anti freedom liars & destroyers kill what our forebears took generations to achieve?
I don't see these 'eras' as independent of each other. The reformation became the renaissance, which sparked the 'scientific revolution', which spawned the enlightenment. Many of these labels are attempts to revise history, in order to avoid any aspects that don't fit within the desired agenda that the teacher wishes to portray. The times overlap, too. Copernicus, often credited for the beginning of the scientific revolution, was a contemporary of Luther. The reformation is sometimes pegged as 'starting' with Luther's (b. 1483) 95 theses, in 1517. Copernicus was born in 1473, & made his startling discoveries & rash claims that shocked the status quo during the same time that the reformation was happening. These were connected, ideologically & temporally. IOW, the same mindset that brought scientific inquiry also brought religious freedom, & along with that, a longing for human freedom. The table was set for a feast of enlightened human thought, culminating in the American Experiment, where religious freedom, open inquiry, tolerance, & govt as servant rocked the monarchist world, & ushered in a new ideology of human freedom & open inquiry.
History is never compartmentalized, and the most fascinating parts of history are those where human thought & the 'evolution' of social mores & other concepts that directly affect the common man are awakened. It is also necessary to understand the times, & not view historical events through the assumptions & filters of modern day mindsets. There was no 'separation of church & state', or distinction between 'science' & 'religion'. The 'scientists' of the day were also the 'religious'. They were monks, bureaucrats, nobles, & usually upper class. Poor folks didn't have time for such nonsense. That was a luxury for the well to do.
And just what did the printing press have to do with all this? Well, Gutenberg invented it ~ 1440.. right before Copernicus & Luther were born. Coincidence? Not in my opinion. I see a direct cause & effect from both the printing press, the reformation, the renaissance, the scientific revolution, & just about all advances in humanity onward. It brought the knowledge base to others, who could build upon what others had learned. It is said that we can see farther, because we stand on the shoulders of giants. The printing press was the enabler of our knowledge base.. it made it possible.
So do we celebrate knowledge, science, & the holy art of inquiry? Not anymore. Now, we are moving back to the dark ages, memorizing dogma, mandating science, & crushing open inquiry. We are in a time of Anti-Science, where truth is relative, along with morality, & Govt is worshiped as the Provider & Maker of All Things. The current mindset is destroying the foundations of Western Civilization, moving us backwards, towards worship of Man, Position, & Imperial decree.
I am hopeful that the curiosity of Man overcomes the desire & ability to control, but it is a battle. It always has been, & always will be. Anti human, anti freedom, & anti science forces are constantly oppressing us & dragging us back to a stifling atmosphere, where free inquiry is squashed. One need only see the trends from China & Russia, & other collectivist experiments, where science & inquiry were almost completely shut down. Will the west follow the progressive left to a new 'cultural revolution'? Will all science & knowledge that is not 'party approved' be forbidden & destroyed? It could happen. The seeds of statist control are already sprouted & growing.
Freedom is on the line. Freedom to think. Freedom to speak. Freedom to live & do what we want. It has taken us 2000+ years to arrive at the level of freedom we have. Will we let anti freedom liars & destroyers kill what our forebears took generations to achieve?
Monday, May 25, 2015
The Rise & Fall of Western Civilization
Well, this is a very dramatic sounding title, & has the look & feel of being way too long & boring. I'll try to keep it short, but i can't make any promises about boring... :) I will just present the outline.. each part could have a paragraph or more detailing & expounding on it, but i'll leave it simpler for now, for the overview.
Dictionary definition of Civilization:
a : a relatively high level of cultural and technological development; specifically : the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained
b: refinement of thought, manners, or taste
Civilization is more than technology. It is an evolution of social, technical, & spiritual development, advancing a societal interdependency, built on an ever growing knowledge base. Huts give way to houses. Caves are replaced by castles. Lawlessness is punished & order established. Force is still the basic tool of compliance, but it is a collective action, not just the possession of the strong. Specialization builds interdependency. Not all farm, or build, or make clothes or wagons. Not all manage animals or process meat. A currency is born to provide a medium of exchange. Knowledge is acquired, & built upon, providing an advance of technology, efficiency, & efficacy.
The roots of Western Civilization's rise.
1. Roman Empire.
a. Man as a god, not an animal
b. Law, order, administration
c. Art, music, architecture
2. Growth of Christendom & the Catholic Church
a. Man as a created being, in the image of God
b. Superstition replaced by orderly God & glimpses of Natural Law
c. Growth of literacy, records, & a knowledge base
3. Reformation
a. Natural Law over imperial decree
b. Growth of reason, scientific explanations & analysis
c. Concept of human freedom
4. Renaissance & explosion of technology
a. Further building on knowledge base
b. more departure from superstition
c. freedom of thought & expression
5. Birth of America
a. The equality of man
b. Govt as servant, not master
c. Self rule
d. Individual Liberty as goal
e. The State exists to secure the individual's rights
6. Western Imperialism
a. Human power seen as proof of supremacy
b. Manifest Destiny, or 'white man's burden'
c. Dispersal of literacy, history, the knowledge base, the scientific method, & the religious/philosophical basis
d. The global expansion of Natural Law & moral absolutes
7. WW2
a. The pinnacle of western civilization.
b. the battle for freedom, human dignity, & Natural Law over imperial rule, genocide, & oppression
c. the explosion of constitutional law & democracy throughout the world
The roots of decline.
1. Marxism
a. No Natural Law, no god, no moral absolutes
b. Man as an animal to be controlled
c. Collective might makes right
d. Elevation of the State as the means to control & engineer others
e. Promotion of collective ideals: redistribution, no private property
2. Darwinism
a. Man is insignificant.. an evolving animal with no higher purpose
b. No natural law, no moral absolutes, survival is the only function of man
3. Eugenics & social engineering
a. Superior humans should enhance their survival, & eliminate inferior ones
b. The State is the means to control & engineer humans
4. Progressive ideology of control & elite rule
a. Social engineering to solve problems
b. Redistribution & collectivist ideals
c. Empower State to control others
d. elite ruling class
e. Science by decree
5. Islamic Caliphate
a. Kept in check in previous centuries
b. Goal of world domination, not peaceful coexistence
c. Empower State to control others
d. elite ruling class
e. Truth by mandate, Science by decree
The roots of decline have been operating in the world for over 100 yrs, & are weakening the foundations of western civilization. Dark ages practices are being revived, & the concepts of Law over mandate are set aside for the ruler's convenience. Its basis is a fundamental difference in the view of Man & the Universe. As long as these ideals remain the social status quo, we can expect further erosion of western civilization. Tearing something down does not take as long as building it. It took about 2000 yrs of building & moving TOWARD the ideals of Natural Law, the Dignity of Man, Accountability, & a Higher Purpose. It could all come down in a generation, as the ussr & china have illustrated.
The ominous sign is the direction. Pre WW2 there was oppression & inhumanities to man, but the DIRECTION the world headed was TOWARD freedom. Slavery ended in the west. Individual freedom was growing, even in monarchies or other totalitarian systems. WW2 was, imo, the pinnacle of that direction. Since then, we have slowly been heading AWAY from human freedom, & toward statist control. Rights are devolving, & the individual is considered no more than an animal to be managed by a ruling elite, who want these same animals to work & support them. Civilization is now going downhill.. not in technology, but in human freedom.
This is my analysis of western civilization. I see these things in the signs of the times, as well as the repetition of history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)