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?
Philosophical Musings
Sunday, June 14, 2015
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.
Wednesday, May 6, 2015
Roots: Racism for Dummies
Racism has been a major part of human interaction for all of human history. Ever since the first differences among us were noted, they have been used as indicators of something ominous. Those differences were & are the justification for wars, genocide, slavery, & countless other examples of man's inhumanity to man.
As Western civilization expanded in Europe, the roots of racism were found in the institutions of the day: The Religious hierarchy & the ruling class. The belief that God burdened the white race with 'managing' the heathen was the majority opinion. It was called 'Manifest Destiny' in America. Most of the institutions taught & believed that God created all things. But they believed in a hierarchy, with the 'civilized' white man at the top. That was the justification of European imperialism for centuries, as they sought to bring order to the world, through their world view. Christianity had brought order & Law to Europe, & the ruling elite saw themselves as tools of God bringing structure, order, & enlightenment to inferior societies. 'Might makes right' has always been the final arbiter of truth in human disputes, & the European conquests proved to them that they were right.
Slavery was not always about race. It was (and still is, in some places) a normal part of human existence. Both Plato & Aristotle saw slavery as a natural part of human culture. Some early Christian theologians saw slavery as a necessary evil.
And indeed the use made of slaves and of tame animals is not very different; for both with their bodies minister to the needs of life. Aristotle
The prime cause, then, of slavery is sin, which brings man under the dominion of his fellow -- that which does not happen save by the judgment of God, with whom is no unrighteousness, and who knows how to award fit punishments to every variety of offense. Augustine
But as the influence of Christianity, & especially reformation theology grew, slavery became a great evil in mankind. Even in the American declaration of independence, the roots of human equality & dignity were laid out as a basis for the new nation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
The new nation was unable to implement these revolutionary concepts completely, due to the old vestiges of imperialism & human domination that was still the status quo of the day. But the debate raged on, & within a fairly short time, a national civil war was fought to settle the issue.
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. ~Abraham Lincoln
But the abolition of slavery was not about racism. Lincoln was a racist, by today's standards. He did not believe in the 'equality of man' that some of the abolitionists preached.
I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people.. ~Abraham Lincoln
Abolitionists held to the more 'enlightened' view, but they were a minority.
"The slave-holder's rule contradicts this fundamental truth of God's word, that 'God has made of one blood all the nations of men,' and if of one blood, they are of equal blood." ~Jonathan Blanchard
Ultimately, the minority opinion of the abolitionists became the mainstream view. Human equality was an act of the Creator. All men are equal, stated the philosophical standard of the day: The Bible. That & reformation theology brought this sense of enlightened civilization. Of course, not everyone acted upon the teachings, & many of the old vestiges of the 'white man's burden' carried over into the 20th century.
But then a new ideology began to gain momentum, based on the writings of a naturalist. It was not really new, but it provided a logical sounding basis for the intelligentsia to escape the shackles of morality that the concept of a Creator brought. Darwin's 'Origin of Species' brought a new possibility to the view of origins. Perhaps man was not created in the image of God, but was an accident of nature, & was merely evolving along with all the other animals. This was the basis for a great many ideologies, that saw social engineering as a tool for the advanced ruling elite. There was an actual justification now, to BE the elite. They were further along on the evolutionary scale, & felt a duty to promote the 'best' traits for humanity. That was the basis for National Socialism in Germany, which was one expression of the eugenics movement. This movement was very popular early in the 20th century, & was mandated into policy in many western nations. It was an attempt to build a better Man, through controlled breeding. Its goal was the concept of a perfect, evolving man, who could be engineered by the ruling elite.
'The term eugenics and its modern field of study were first formulated by Francis Galton in 1883, drawing on the recent work of his half-cousin Charles Darwin. Galton published his observations and conclusions in his book Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development.' (wikipedia)
But the major institutions of the day, at least in America, were not immediately impressed by this new 'theory'. There was a gradual embracing of this concept of origins, illustrated by the 'Scopes Monkey trial' of 1925, when a public school teacher was put on trial for teaching something contrary to the status quo: evolution From this point, evolution grew to become the mainstream view of origins, until today it is almost universally taught as fact in every human institution.
Unfortunately, along with this new found liberty from a pesky God, the unruly companion of this ideology is a naturalistic view of man as merely an evolving animal. If superior animals can eat, domesticate, & own inferior animals, where does one draw the line? Perhaps some people are also inferior. Perhaps those 'less advanced' should not be afforded the same rights & privileges as the superior specimens.
I see 2 examples of this ideology today.
1. Overt white supremacists.
2. Liberal welfare state proponents.
The rest of the western world is functioning in a post christian moral memory. Their morality no longer has a basis in their beliefs, but they keep going out of habit.
The white supremacists see the 'lower' races as inferior, & not as advanced on the evolutionary scale. The liberal nanny staters see the 'lower' races as inferior, too, & unable to cope in the world without their assistance. They have built a 'democratic plantation'.. a gulag of welfare dependency, where the soft bigotry of low expectations dominates their view of the inferior classes. They see themselves as champions of the downtrodden, in much the same way the ruling elite in times past saw themselves as bringing civilization & enlightenment to the heathen, as part of the 'white mans' burden'. They do not build human dignity, self respect, or equality, but grievance & division. They trap people in the same ideology that the white supremacists have for their basis, which is the spring from which their world view originates: Darwinian evolution. They either reject God completely, or minimize Him as a distant, uninvolved Watcher, with evolution as the real god.. the 'system' that actually formed us. Every American institution indoctrinates the citizens into this world view from an early age. The further you advance in the education system, the more intense the indoctrination, but it is hammered hard early on. Evolution has become the new religion, flavoring our world views, & providing the basis for our policies, justice systems, & culture. What about the 'subjects' of this indoctrinated world view? Just as the morals of the nation are being torn down, so has crime, lies, hatred, & racism increased. It is a logical consequence to the root ideology.
The core ideology is the basis from which the rest of a world view emanates. The dignity of man, equality, morality, & natural rights are based in the concept of a Divine Creator, attributing those conditions to mankind. The view of man as an animal; insignificant, immoral, & pointless comes from the naturalistic view. He has no soul, no purpose, & is merely an accident of nature. Those who gain power rule by their own authority, & mandate whatever rules they wish.. they do not answer to a Higher Power.
America was founded in the first world view.. that we are endowed by our CREATOR with unalienable rights.. that ALL men are CREATED equal. But as the basis has been undermined, so have the moral outworkings. We are in a post christian culture, driven by naturalistic views, with only the memory & slowing momentum of morality providing the ever dwindling stability that the nation of self rule once had. Unless there is an awakening, all vestiges of morality will be completely forgotten, all basis lost, we will be unable to live among ourselves, & we will require (and deserve) despotism.
As Western civilization expanded in Europe, the roots of racism were found in the institutions of the day: The Religious hierarchy & the ruling class. The belief that God burdened the white race with 'managing' the heathen was the majority opinion. It was called 'Manifest Destiny' in America. Most of the institutions taught & believed that God created all things. But they believed in a hierarchy, with the 'civilized' white man at the top. That was the justification of European imperialism for centuries, as they sought to bring order to the world, through their world view. Christianity had brought order & Law to Europe, & the ruling elite saw themselves as tools of God bringing structure, order, & enlightenment to inferior societies. 'Might makes right' has always been the final arbiter of truth in human disputes, & the European conquests proved to them that they were right.
Slavery was not always about race. It was (and still is, in some places) a normal part of human existence. Both Plato & Aristotle saw slavery as a natural part of human culture. Some early Christian theologians saw slavery as a necessary evil.
And indeed the use made of slaves and of tame animals is not very different; for both with their bodies minister to the needs of life. Aristotle
The prime cause, then, of slavery is sin, which brings man under the dominion of his fellow -- that which does not happen save by the judgment of God, with whom is no unrighteousness, and who knows how to award fit punishments to every variety of offense. Augustine
But as the influence of Christianity, & especially reformation theology grew, slavery became a great evil in mankind. Even in the American declaration of independence, the roots of human equality & dignity were laid out as a basis for the new nation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
The new nation was unable to implement these revolutionary concepts completely, due to the old vestiges of imperialism & human domination that was still the status quo of the day. But the debate raged on, & within a fairly short time, a national civil war was fought to settle the issue.
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal. ~Abraham Lincoln
But the abolition of slavery was not about racism. Lincoln was a racist, by today's standards. He did not believe in the 'equality of man' that some of the abolitionists preached.
I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races – that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people.. ~Abraham Lincoln
Abolitionists held to the more 'enlightened' view, but they were a minority.
"The slave-holder's rule contradicts this fundamental truth of God's word, that 'God has made of one blood all the nations of men,' and if of one blood, they are of equal blood." ~Jonathan Blanchard
Ultimately, the minority opinion of the abolitionists became the mainstream view. Human equality was an act of the Creator. All men are equal, stated the philosophical standard of the day: The Bible. That & reformation theology brought this sense of enlightened civilization. Of course, not everyone acted upon the teachings, & many of the old vestiges of the 'white man's burden' carried over into the 20th century.
But then a new ideology began to gain momentum, based on the writings of a naturalist. It was not really new, but it provided a logical sounding basis for the intelligentsia to escape the shackles of morality that the concept of a Creator brought. Darwin's 'Origin of Species' brought a new possibility to the view of origins. Perhaps man was not created in the image of God, but was an accident of nature, & was merely evolving along with all the other animals. This was the basis for a great many ideologies, that saw social engineering as a tool for the advanced ruling elite. There was an actual justification now, to BE the elite. They were further along on the evolutionary scale, & felt a duty to promote the 'best' traits for humanity. That was the basis for National Socialism in Germany, which was one expression of the eugenics movement. This movement was very popular early in the 20th century, & was mandated into policy in many western nations. It was an attempt to build a better Man, through controlled breeding. Its goal was the concept of a perfect, evolving man, who could be engineered by the ruling elite.
'The term eugenics and its modern field of study were first formulated by Francis Galton in 1883, drawing on the recent work of his half-cousin Charles Darwin. Galton published his observations and conclusions in his book Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development.' (wikipedia)
But the major institutions of the day, at least in America, were not immediately impressed by this new 'theory'. There was a gradual embracing of this concept of origins, illustrated by the 'Scopes Monkey trial' of 1925, when a public school teacher was put on trial for teaching something contrary to the status quo: evolution From this point, evolution grew to become the mainstream view of origins, until today it is almost universally taught as fact in every human institution.
Unfortunately, along with this new found liberty from a pesky God, the unruly companion of this ideology is a naturalistic view of man as merely an evolving animal. If superior animals can eat, domesticate, & own inferior animals, where does one draw the line? Perhaps some people are also inferior. Perhaps those 'less advanced' should not be afforded the same rights & privileges as the superior specimens.
I see 2 examples of this ideology today.
1. Overt white supremacists.
2. Liberal welfare state proponents.
The rest of the western world is functioning in a post christian moral memory. Their morality no longer has a basis in their beliefs, but they keep going out of habit.
The white supremacists see the 'lower' races as inferior, & not as advanced on the evolutionary scale. The liberal nanny staters see the 'lower' races as inferior, too, & unable to cope in the world without their assistance. They have built a 'democratic plantation'.. a gulag of welfare dependency, where the soft bigotry of low expectations dominates their view of the inferior classes. They see themselves as champions of the downtrodden, in much the same way the ruling elite in times past saw themselves as bringing civilization & enlightenment to the heathen, as part of the 'white mans' burden'. They do not build human dignity, self respect, or equality, but grievance & division. They trap people in the same ideology that the white supremacists have for their basis, which is the spring from which their world view originates: Darwinian evolution. They either reject God completely, or minimize Him as a distant, uninvolved Watcher, with evolution as the real god.. the 'system' that actually formed us. Every American institution indoctrinates the citizens into this world view from an early age. The further you advance in the education system, the more intense the indoctrination, but it is hammered hard early on. Evolution has become the new religion, flavoring our world views, & providing the basis for our policies, justice systems, & culture. What about the 'subjects' of this indoctrinated world view? Just as the morals of the nation are being torn down, so has crime, lies, hatred, & racism increased. It is a logical consequence to the root ideology.
The core ideology is the basis from which the rest of a world view emanates. The dignity of man, equality, morality, & natural rights are based in the concept of a Divine Creator, attributing those conditions to mankind. The view of man as an animal; insignificant, immoral, & pointless comes from the naturalistic view. He has no soul, no purpose, & is merely an accident of nature. Those who gain power rule by their own authority, & mandate whatever rules they wish.. they do not answer to a Higher Power.
America was founded in the first world view.. that we are endowed by our CREATOR with unalienable rights.. that ALL men are CREATED equal. But as the basis has been undermined, so have the moral outworkings. We are in a post christian culture, driven by naturalistic views, with only the memory & slowing momentum of morality providing the ever dwindling stability that the nation of self rule once had. Unless there is an awakening, all vestiges of morality will be completely forgotten, all basis lost, we will be unable to live among ourselves, & we will require (and deserve) despotism.
Saturday, May 2, 2015
Heredity! Environment!
The beliefs about origins of man are at the root of ideology about race. There are those who claim that behavioral differences in humans are based on genetics. Others say they are all learned. The only 'evidence' for differences in people is in cultural studies, where a false dichotomy is made in the cause & effect. One of the most basic tools of science is this:
'Correlation does not imply causation'.
Some correlate violence in black inner city ghettos to race, when it is culture. Mexican barrios have the same tendency toward crime & violence, as well as Pakistanis in London, Turks in Germany, & Vietnamese in San Diego. The common denominator is NOT RACE. It is culture. It is nanny state policies that create a breeding ground of irresponsible, fatherless thugs. THAT is the source of the violence, not race. Hard working, family centered black people live as responsible citizens in every nation of the world. They are not any more prone to violence or stupidity than any other race. The premise that this kind of behavior is genetic is based on false assumptions, junk science, & superstition.
ANY HUMANS, if you put them in state run ghettos, where values are broken down, & there is no accountability or responsibility for the people act the exact same way.
ANY HUMANS, if they are raised with core values of family, work ethic, & civilized socialization tend to be productive members of society. These obvious facts point to the exact cause of the problems: The welfare state. The source of the problem is cultural.
There is no 'gene' that promotes violence. People have been asserting that for a century or more. Humans are naturally violent, brutal beasts. Civilization, Law, morality, and religion are the means that we as a species have managed ourselves, so we can live among each other in relative peace. We have esteemed reason over brute force, even if we use brute force to impose our reason.
For this debate to go any further, we would have to dig deeper to the core differences in the views on origins, or the evolution of human behavior.. whether it is inherent or learned. It is the age old Pygmalion story.. 'My Fair Lady'.. 'Hoi Polloi'. Is it heredity, or environment? There is some of each in every human behavioral action, but there is not a difference, genetically, to make these kinds of race centered conclusions. It is very ironic to me, that those who are the most fixed upon race have at their core beliefs the same opinion about human evolution. Both the liberal academian & the Aryan supremacist believe that humans have evolved from lower life forms, & are still evolving. Both the black race baiters & the white supremacists agree, in their basic ideology about origins. That was the source of the eugenics movement, as well as the Nazi ideology. This ideology is at the root of the modern progressivism, as well.
To summarize: The central support for the claim of genetic differences is flawed science. There is NO evidence for a genetic tendency to violence. That is a learned, or cultural factor. Civilization, morality, & religion are the central factors in taming the human animal. ANYWHERE those factors are esteemed & valued by a society, a stable, healthy society is built. Anywhere these factors are scorned, the society suffers. Antisocial behaviors are learned, as well as civilized ones. If there is a natural tendency of man, it is to violence & brutality. That seems to be our core nature, that civilization tames.
I see little hope for a resolution of such basic differences in worldviews. With the indoctrination of junk science so rampant in our culture, it is no wonder that our view of man is so dark & hopeless. Generations of breeders in the ghetto are taught that they are mere beasts, accidents of nature, with no purpose for their existence. They are bred for crime, by the plantation owners, & have no basis for any sense of human dignity or equality. They are treated as progressive pets, & kept in the liberal zoos of inner city squalor. Rich, preppy whites are taught the same thing, except that they can see themselves as superior.. morally, intellectually, & culturally. But don't fool yourselves.. the same root ideology that is destroying the inner cities is at work destroying the whole nation. Morality, civilization, & religion are being smashed in favor of the naturalistic view of man as a cosmic accident, with no purpose or meaning for his life.
All of this has its root in origins. It makes a world of difference what you believe.
'Correlation does not imply causation'.
Some correlate violence in black inner city ghettos to race, when it is culture. Mexican barrios have the same tendency toward crime & violence, as well as Pakistanis in London, Turks in Germany, & Vietnamese in San Diego. The common denominator is NOT RACE. It is culture. It is nanny state policies that create a breeding ground of irresponsible, fatherless thugs. THAT is the source of the violence, not race. Hard working, family centered black people live as responsible citizens in every nation of the world. They are not any more prone to violence or stupidity than any other race. The premise that this kind of behavior is genetic is based on false assumptions, junk science, & superstition.
ANY HUMANS, if you put them in state run ghettos, where values are broken down, & there is no accountability or responsibility for the people act the exact same way.
ANY HUMANS, if they are raised with core values of family, work ethic, & civilized socialization tend to be productive members of society. These obvious facts point to the exact cause of the problems: The welfare state. The source of the problem is cultural.
There is no 'gene' that promotes violence. People have been asserting that for a century or more. Humans are naturally violent, brutal beasts. Civilization, Law, morality, and religion are the means that we as a species have managed ourselves, so we can live among each other in relative peace. We have esteemed reason over brute force, even if we use brute force to impose our reason.
For this debate to go any further, we would have to dig deeper to the core differences in the views on origins, or the evolution of human behavior.. whether it is inherent or learned. It is the age old Pygmalion story.. 'My Fair Lady'.. 'Hoi Polloi'. Is it heredity, or environment? There is some of each in every human behavioral action, but there is not a difference, genetically, to make these kinds of race centered conclusions. It is very ironic to me, that those who are the most fixed upon race have at their core beliefs the same opinion about human evolution. Both the liberal academian & the Aryan supremacist believe that humans have evolved from lower life forms, & are still evolving. Both the black race baiters & the white supremacists agree, in their basic ideology about origins. That was the source of the eugenics movement, as well as the Nazi ideology. This ideology is at the root of the modern progressivism, as well.
To summarize: The central support for the claim of genetic differences is flawed science. There is NO evidence for a genetic tendency to violence. That is a learned, or cultural factor. Civilization, morality, & religion are the central factors in taming the human animal. ANYWHERE those factors are esteemed & valued by a society, a stable, healthy society is built. Anywhere these factors are scorned, the society suffers. Antisocial behaviors are learned, as well as civilized ones. If there is a natural tendency of man, it is to violence & brutality. That seems to be our core nature, that civilization tames.
I see little hope for a resolution of such basic differences in worldviews. With the indoctrination of junk science so rampant in our culture, it is no wonder that our view of man is so dark & hopeless. Generations of breeders in the ghetto are taught that they are mere beasts, accidents of nature, with no purpose for their existence. They are bred for crime, by the plantation owners, & have no basis for any sense of human dignity or equality. They are treated as progressive pets, & kept in the liberal zoos of inner city squalor. Rich, preppy whites are taught the same thing, except that they can see themselves as superior.. morally, intellectually, & culturally. But don't fool yourselves.. the same root ideology that is destroying the inner cities is at work destroying the whole nation. Morality, civilization, & religion are being smashed in favor of the naturalistic view of man as a cosmic accident, with no purpose or meaning for his life.
All of this has its root in origins. It makes a world of difference what you believe.
Sunday, April 26, 2015
The Ultimate Answer to Life
In a fictional novel of the last century, pan-dimensional mice created a supercomputer, called Deep Thought. They asked it The Question:
'What is the ultimate answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything?'
The computer said it would think about it.. for 7 1/2 Million years, then finally returned The Answer:
42
This is the absurdist's view of philosophy. It is funny as a bit of self deprecating humor directed at philosophers who take themselves too seriously. but it implies there is NO answer, really, & that life has no meaning or purpose.
But other philosophers throughout the millennia have approached the subject with more reverence. They have boiled down the Fundamental Questions of Life into 4 basic queries: Origins, Meaning, Morality, Destiny. These are The Big Ones. How, Why, What, & When. They are questions of matter, purpose, law, & time.
HOW did i (and everybody else) get here?
WHY are we here? Is there a purpose to our existence?
WHAT do we do? Are there rules for our existence?
WHEN we die, what happens? Is there a soul?
..there are four fundamental questions of life.. They boil down to this; origin, meaning, morality and destiny. 'How did I come into being? What brings life meaning? How do I know right from wrong? Where am I headed after I die?' ~Ravi Zacharias
Some philosophers have felt it necessary to prove we exist, first, before the other questions can be tackled. Descartes was one of those with his 'cogito ergo sum' conclusion. 'I think, therefore i am'. But since he settled the matter of our existence, we can now get on to the more basic task of answering the fundamental questions.
Personally, while i think '42' is a fine answer, it does a bit of a disservice to the philosophical community. It is ridiculing the question as irrelevant, which it certainly is not. Every human being that thinks has pondered these questions, or variations of them, at some point in their life, even if they avoid them most of the time.
I see 2 basic options for Origins:
1. All matter & life was created by an unknown being or beings: Supernatural Design.
2. All matter & life happened by accident, via an unknown natural processes: Natural Accident.
We try to use science & logic to decide which of these is the more likely, or what the evidence suggests, but nothing really works. Science cannot answer this. We cannot see or define any natural process that could have done it, so we are left ONLY with belief in either theory. Neither are subject to the scientific method.. they can't be repeated or observed. Oh, i know that there are many people who believe very strongly in a particular theory. They claim science & truth. They dogmatically assert that a divine Being created everything from nothing, or they dogmatically assert that everything arranged itself by accident, through unknown processes. But neither has any provable evidence. Both theories are logically impossible. LIFE is impossible. The entire universe is impossible, yet here we are.
The naturalists like to ridicule the supernaturalists for believing in a 'sky fairy' or other unseen beings as the source of all things. But the naturalist's theory is equally absurd. Someone once summarized their hypothesis like this:
'The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs.'
Of the fundamental questions listed, Origins is the MOST BASIC of the questions, & the answer to this one affects all the others.
IF we are here by an accident of nature:
1. There is no purpose to our existence. 'Why' is meaningless.
2. There are no rules. Morality & law are inventions of our own minds.
3. There is no destiny. You die & cease to exist. As you were for eternity past, so you will be for eternity future.
IF we are here by Supernatural Design:
1. There might be a purpose. Why would such a Being do this?
2. There might be rules, from the Creator's view. Perhaps there are consequences to our words & deeds.
3. There might be life after death. We may have souls, & live beyond what we see here.
As you can see, there are completely different answers to the other fundamental questions, depending on the answer to the very first one: How.
That is why a person's view of Origins is the foundation upon which their entire world view is built upon. Most people are content to have a disjointed, hodge podge of irrational thought, faulty assumptions, and wrong answers to base their philosophy of life upon. But that is because the MOST BASIC QUESTION, our origins, is unknown by any of our natural senses. We have to start with a belief, & go from there. There are other factors: mental, emotional, or spiritual that are not part of our natural sensory perceptions that figure in.
There is no empirical answer to our origins. There are no natural laws, or scientific explanations that can even make a decent guess as to HOW we came about. We are here. Descartes settled that for us. But HOW we came about remains a mystery, unanswerable by human reason & senses. If there is an answer to this question, reason & science cannot answer it.
Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods. ~Albert Einstein
'What is the ultimate answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything?'
The computer said it would think about it.. for 7 1/2 Million years, then finally returned The Answer:
42
This is the absurdist's view of philosophy. It is funny as a bit of self deprecating humor directed at philosophers who take themselves too seriously. but it implies there is NO answer, really, & that life has no meaning or purpose.
But other philosophers throughout the millennia have approached the subject with more reverence. They have boiled down the Fundamental Questions of Life into 4 basic queries: Origins, Meaning, Morality, Destiny. These are The Big Ones. How, Why, What, & When. They are questions of matter, purpose, law, & time.
HOW did i (and everybody else) get here?
WHY are we here? Is there a purpose to our existence?
WHAT do we do? Are there rules for our existence?
WHEN we die, what happens? Is there a soul?
..there are four fundamental questions of life.. They boil down to this; origin, meaning, morality and destiny. 'How did I come into being? What brings life meaning? How do I know right from wrong? Where am I headed after I die?' ~Ravi Zacharias
Some philosophers have felt it necessary to prove we exist, first, before the other questions can be tackled. Descartes was one of those with his 'cogito ergo sum' conclusion. 'I think, therefore i am'. But since he settled the matter of our existence, we can now get on to the more basic task of answering the fundamental questions.
Personally, while i think '42' is a fine answer, it does a bit of a disservice to the philosophical community. It is ridiculing the question as irrelevant, which it certainly is not. Every human being that thinks has pondered these questions, or variations of them, at some point in their life, even if they avoid them most of the time.
I see 2 basic options for Origins:
1. All matter & life was created by an unknown being or beings: Supernatural Design.
2. All matter & life happened by accident, via an unknown natural processes: Natural Accident.
We try to use science & logic to decide which of these is the more likely, or what the evidence suggests, but nothing really works. Science cannot answer this. We cannot see or define any natural process that could have done it, so we are left ONLY with belief in either theory. Neither are subject to the scientific method.. they can't be repeated or observed. Oh, i know that there are many people who believe very strongly in a particular theory. They claim science & truth. They dogmatically assert that a divine Being created everything from nothing, or they dogmatically assert that everything arranged itself by accident, through unknown processes. But neither has any provable evidence. Both theories are logically impossible. LIFE is impossible. The entire universe is impossible, yet here we are.
The naturalists like to ridicule the supernaturalists for believing in a 'sky fairy' or other unseen beings as the source of all things. But the naturalist's theory is equally absurd. Someone once summarized their hypothesis like this:
'The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason what so ever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs.'
Of the fundamental questions listed, Origins is the MOST BASIC of the questions, & the answer to this one affects all the others.
IF we are here by an accident of nature:
1. There is no purpose to our existence. 'Why' is meaningless.
2. There are no rules. Morality & law are inventions of our own minds.
3. There is no destiny. You die & cease to exist. As you were for eternity past, so you will be for eternity future.
IF we are here by Supernatural Design:
1. There might be a purpose. Why would such a Being do this?
2. There might be rules, from the Creator's view. Perhaps there are consequences to our words & deeds.
3. There might be life after death. We may have souls, & live beyond what we see here.
As you can see, there are completely different answers to the other fundamental questions, depending on the answer to the very first one: How.
That is why a person's view of Origins is the foundation upon which their entire world view is built upon. Most people are content to have a disjointed, hodge podge of irrational thought, faulty assumptions, and wrong answers to base their philosophy of life upon. But that is because the MOST BASIC QUESTION, our origins, is unknown by any of our natural senses. We have to start with a belief, & go from there. There are other factors: mental, emotional, or spiritual that are not part of our natural sensory perceptions that figure in.
There is no empirical answer to our origins. There are no natural laws, or scientific explanations that can even make a decent guess as to HOW we came about. We are here. Descartes settled that for us. But HOW we came about remains a mystery, unanswerable by human reason & senses. If there is an answer to this question, reason & science cannot answer it.
Whoever undertakes to set himself up as a judge of Truth and Knowledge is shipwrecked by the laughter of the gods. ~Albert Einstein
Monday, April 20, 2015
The Ideal Society: Moral Values 2
A strong sense of morality is not necessarily dependent on religious values. There are many atheists among us who hold to strong moral views in society, and many religious theists who are immoral. IMO, that has more to do with upbringing. People who are raised with a strong sense of moral values tend to keep them, even if they lose the basis for it later in life. Some people will remember the proverb:
pr.22: 6 Train up a child in the way he should go, Even when he is old he will not depart from it.
Morality seems to be instilled in people from an early age, even if they reject the values later on. Many sociopaths were raised with strong moral values, & just rejected them. But their lives are in conflict, as interviews with them have shown. They may reason themselves into an amoral mindset, but there is something that nags them from within, that does not approve of their actions. Continued violation of this inner compass leads people down a dark path of anti-social behavior.
There also seems to be a common sense of 'right & wrong' throughout human culture & history. I have said before, that especially in matters of justice & interpersonal relationships, the rights to life & property are the 2 most basic rights of man, & are consistently valued in every culture. Societies & systems of governance that do not value the individual's life & property do not last long. The USSR is a recent example of that. On a global scale, nazi germany & imperial japan are others.
There are some common denominators of values that seem to be in the more successful cultures.
1. right to life (thou shalt not kill)
2. right to property (thou shalt not steal)
3. respect for honesty & trustworthy dealings with others
4. respect for elders & responsibility for family
5. sympathy for those less fortunate
6. fidelity in marriage
7. responsibility & accountability for actions
8. respect for sobriety, disdain for drunkenness
Some of these things are allowed 'indulgences' in some cultural lists. But the basic view is still negative. For example, if someone goes on a drunken binge, it is forgiven by society as long as they keep to the other morals, like responsibility & honesty. but if multiple transgressions are made, that person becomes a pariah, & is looked down upon by society. If the specific moral value is codified into law, the immoral person goes through the justice system.
When a culture is in decline, you see a slow eroding of these moral values. They are redefined as minor slip ups, or even completely changed to virtues. Orwellian language is used to revise morality into blatant immorality. The last ones to go are the first 2: Life & Property. They are the core values of a society, without which no society can function. Cultures centered around murder & thievery never last long, & are generally held in contempt by everyone. We do not see the pol pot regime as a role model for society, or other systems & movements that violate the Big Two.
In America, many of us have seen the slow deterioration of moral values. It became a social movement in the 60s, which sought to redefine & even eliminate any moral compass. God was rejected, & archaic religious views held in contempt. But the result has not been a positive for the culture. Instead of peace, love, & harmony, we have increased crime, bigotry, & hatred. Anti social behavior has increased steadily. The divorce rate has skyrocketed, & what was once considered taboo sexually is embraced as 'normal'. Lying & deception are accepted methods of communication, permeating our highest levels of bureaucracy. Elderly parents, & even children are tossed aside as wards of the state, instead of the personal responsibility of the individual. Sympathy for your fellow man is squelched, & 'the govt' has become the salve for conscience. Drunkenness & substance abuse is rampant, incapacitating many & adding to the state dependency rolls.
Even the Big Two, life & property are fading as esteemed values. Murder & theft are rampant, especially in the most amoral sectors of society: The welfare gulags. There the state & the state's religious values have permeated the culture, & even life & property are not respected.
Morality is the foundation upon which ALL our individual philosophy of life is built. It flavors ALL our actions, words, & interpersonal relationships. It is the basis for humanity. Without a clear sense of morality, no society can function.
We are locked in a downward spiral, & the corruption in govt is just a symptom. Unless there is a major awakening of the basic human values of morality, we will crash as a culture, & our legacy will be our own immorality. We will be just another failed society in human history. Prosperity & production cannot grow in moral anarchy. Those who will not or cannot see the correlation are deceived, & are complicit in the destruction of the culture.
pr.22: 6 Train up a child in the way he should go, Even when he is old he will not depart from it.
Morality seems to be instilled in people from an early age, even if they reject the values later on. Many sociopaths were raised with strong moral values, & just rejected them. But their lives are in conflict, as interviews with them have shown. They may reason themselves into an amoral mindset, but there is something that nags them from within, that does not approve of their actions. Continued violation of this inner compass leads people down a dark path of anti-social behavior.
There also seems to be a common sense of 'right & wrong' throughout human culture & history. I have said before, that especially in matters of justice & interpersonal relationships, the rights to life & property are the 2 most basic rights of man, & are consistently valued in every culture. Societies & systems of governance that do not value the individual's life & property do not last long. The USSR is a recent example of that. On a global scale, nazi germany & imperial japan are others.
There are some common denominators of values that seem to be in the more successful cultures.
1. right to life (thou shalt not kill)
2. right to property (thou shalt not steal)
3. respect for honesty & trustworthy dealings with others
4. respect for elders & responsibility for family
5. sympathy for those less fortunate
6. fidelity in marriage
7. responsibility & accountability for actions
8. respect for sobriety, disdain for drunkenness
Some of these things are allowed 'indulgences' in some cultural lists. But the basic view is still negative. For example, if someone goes on a drunken binge, it is forgiven by society as long as they keep to the other morals, like responsibility & honesty. but if multiple transgressions are made, that person becomes a pariah, & is looked down upon by society. If the specific moral value is codified into law, the immoral person goes through the justice system.
When a culture is in decline, you see a slow eroding of these moral values. They are redefined as minor slip ups, or even completely changed to virtues. Orwellian language is used to revise morality into blatant immorality. The last ones to go are the first 2: Life & Property. They are the core values of a society, without which no society can function. Cultures centered around murder & thievery never last long, & are generally held in contempt by everyone. We do not see the pol pot regime as a role model for society, or other systems & movements that violate the Big Two.
In America, many of us have seen the slow deterioration of moral values. It became a social movement in the 60s, which sought to redefine & even eliminate any moral compass. God was rejected, & archaic religious views held in contempt. But the result has not been a positive for the culture. Instead of peace, love, & harmony, we have increased crime, bigotry, & hatred. Anti social behavior has increased steadily. The divorce rate has skyrocketed, & what was once considered taboo sexually is embraced as 'normal'. Lying & deception are accepted methods of communication, permeating our highest levels of bureaucracy. Elderly parents, & even children are tossed aside as wards of the state, instead of the personal responsibility of the individual. Sympathy for your fellow man is squelched, & 'the govt' has become the salve for conscience. Drunkenness & substance abuse is rampant, incapacitating many & adding to the state dependency rolls.
Even the Big Two, life & property are fading as esteemed values. Murder & theft are rampant, especially in the most amoral sectors of society: The welfare gulags. There the state & the state's religious values have permeated the culture, & even life & property are not respected.
Morality is the foundation upon which ALL our individual philosophy of life is built. It flavors ALL our actions, words, & interpersonal relationships. It is the basis for humanity. Without a clear sense of morality, no society can function.
We are locked in a downward spiral, & the corruption in govt is just a symptom. Unless there is a major awakening of the basic human values of morality, we will crash as a culture, & our legacy will be our own immorality. We will be just another failed society in human history. Prosperity & production cannot grow in moral anarchy. Those who will not or cannot see the correlation are deceived, & are complicit in the destruction of the culture.
Sunday, April 19, 2015
The Ideal Society: Work Ethic
“Nothing in the world can take the place of persistence. Talent will not: nothing is more common than unsuccessful men with talent. Genius will not; unrewarded genius is almost a proverb. Education alone will not; the world is full of educated derelicts. Persistence and determination alone are omnipotent.” ~Calvin Coolidge
This is closely related to Morality, & cultures that have a strong work ethic view sloth as a 'sin'. Hard work & industry is considered a moral virtue. It also relates to other factors, especially relating to governance. Cultures that esteem industry & hard work also value efficiency, honesty, & community involvement. They tend to care for the weak or disabled, & have a strong sense of the collective.
A strong work ethic seems to be a trait that is brought out by natural selection. Cultures in temperate regions seem to have more industry & a stronger work ethic than those in tropical regions. It has been hypothesized that those in temperate climates have to work harder in the summer months to provide for themselves during the winter, so they develop this industrious work ethic as a method of survival. Or, you could say that any humans that were naturally idle were weeded out as unfit to survive in the rigors of a colder climate. But regardless of the 'how' a society becomes industrious, the end result seems to be that they value hard work as a virtue, & the cause & effect of it are clearly seen.
"Upon this subject, the habits of our whole species fall into three great classes---useful labour, useless labour and idleness. Of these the first only is meritorious; and to it all the products of labour rightfully belong; but the two latter, while they exist, are heavy pensioners upon the first, robbing it of a large portion of it's just rights. The only remedy for this is to, as far as possible, drive useless labour and idleness out of existence." ~Abraham Lincoln
One of the qualities of an industrious society is the disdain that the culture has for sloth & grifting as an avocation. Even public servants & bureaucrats in societies with strong work ethics tend to be harder working than their counterparts in cultures with weaker work ethics. The citizens who work hard to earn a living are less tolerant of moochers & con men who would exploit them. These people tend to organize govts that reflect their work ethic. If a people are industrious, they tend to get more efficient public servants. If a people are more laid back, the public servants tend to be more corrupt or lazy.
And inasmuch as most good things are produced by labour, it follows that all such things of right belong to those whose labour has produced them. But it has so happened in all ages of the world, that some have labored, and others have, without labour, enjoyed a large proportion of the fruits. This is wrong, and should not continue. To secure to each laborer the whole product of his labour, or as nearly as possible, is a most worthy object of any good government. ~Abraham Lincoln
How can you build a strong work ethic in a society? Some of it seems to be genetic.. some people are born with more drive to work than others. But there are things a culture can do to encourage industry:
1. Reward labor, punish sloth. Do not make life 'easy' for anyone, but let the reality of life drive people.
“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.” ~Benjamin Franklin
2. Require immigrants from tropical regions to adopt the industrious culture they wish to join. Minimize the welfare state so that sloth is not encouraged.
3. Have minimal taxation for collective actions, so the worker can keep more of his labors. People will see the correlation between hard work, success, & prosperity. 'Tax the rich!' is a recipe for a lazy culture.
4. Discourage & punish corruption & grifting as a means of living. A work ethic is discouraged if con men prosper & multiply.
These may seem like small details, or just different points of view for political ideology, but they have MAJOR effects on a culture. Rewarding & encouraging sloth at any level deals a death blow to a culture's work ethic. If it is allowed to continue, it will kill society. Every prosperous & successful culture has had a strong work ethic that drove them.
This is closely related to Morality, & cultures that have a strong work ethic view sloth as a 'sin'. Hard work & industry is considered a moral virtue. It also relates to other factors, especially relating to governance. Cultures that esteem industry & hard work also value efficiency, honesty, & community involvement. They tend to care for the weak or disabled, & have a strong sense of the collective.
A strong work ethic seems to be a trait that is brought out by natural selection. Cultures in temperate regions seem to have more industry & a stronger work ethic than those in tropical regions. It has been hypothesized that those in temperate climates have to work harder in the summer months to provide for themselves during the winter, so they develop this industrious work ethic as a method of survival. Or, you could say that any humans that were naturally idle were weeded out as unfit to survive in the rigors of a colder climate. But regardless of the 'how' a society becomes industrious, the end result seems to be that they value hard work as a virtue, & the cause & effect of it are clearly seen.
"Upon this subject, the habits of our whole species fall into three great classes---useful labour, useless labour and idleness. Of these the first only is meritorious; and to it all the products of labour rightfully belong; but the two latter, while they exist, are heavy pensioners upon the first, robbing it of a large portion of it's just rights. The only remedy for this is to, as far as possible, drive useless labour and idleness out of existence." ~Abraham Lincoln
One of the qualities of an industrious society is the disdain that the culture has for sloth & grifting as an avocation. Even public servants & bureaucrats in societies with strong work ethics tend to be harder working than their counterparts in cultures with weaker work ethics. The citizens who work hard to earn a living are less tolerant of moochers & con men who would exploit them. These people tend to organize govts that reflect their work ethic. If a people are industrious, they tend to get more efficient public servants. If a people are more laid back, the public servants tend to be more corrupt or lazy.
And inasmuch as most good things are produced by labour, it follows that all such things of right belong to those whose labour has produced them. But it has so happened in all ages of the world, that some have labored, and others have, without labour, enjoyed a large proportion of the fruits. This is wrong, and should not continue. To secure to each laborer the whole product of his labour, or as nearly as possible, is a most worthy object of any good government. ~Abraham Lincoln
How can you build a strong work ethic in a society? Some of it seems to be genetic.. some people are born with more drive to work than others. But there are things a culture can do to encourage industry:
1. Reward labor, punish sloth. Do not make life 'easy' for anyone, but let the reality of life drive people.
“I am for doing good to the poor, but...I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. I observed...that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.” ~Benjamin Franklin
2. Require immigrants from tropical regions to adopt the industrious culture they wish to join. Minimize the welfare state so that sloth is not encouraged.
3. Have minimal taxation for collective actions, so the worker can keep more of his labors. People will see the correlation between hard work, success, & prosperity. 'Tax the rich!' is a recipe for a lazy culture.
4. Discourage & punish corruption & grifting as a means of living. A work ethic is discouraged if con men prosper & multiply.
These may seem like small details, or just different points of view for political ideology, but they have MAJOR effects on a culture. Rewarding & encouraging sloth at any level deals a death blow to a culture's work ethic. If it is allowed to continue, it will kill society. Every prosperous & successful culture has had a strong work ethic that drove them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)