The fortunes of the world have waxed and waned with the passage of time and the rise and fall of tyrants and those with vision and true leadership abilities.
Currently, however, the United States, indeed the entire world, is currently on a path to a new dark age; a somber foreboding shadow that is spreading over the land blocking out the light of reason and sanity.
Many have already succumbed to this darkness and have been the instigators, if not indeed the creators, of a new order of chaos and confusion that is even now permeating the very fabric of our lives. As a result there is abroad in the land a feeling of fear and insecurity wrought by an authority that has openly demonstrated an alarming degree of incompetence, whether by design or actual fact.
Thus there is in the land a mood that is very unsettled. There as those who cling to the ideals fostered by those who originally designed a form of government then unknown on the planet. That form of government is now being severely tested and the outcome will determine if it indeed survives. The test is coming for a growing number of individuals who have been indoctrinated into believing that the socialist model is more beneficial to them than capitalism.
They have been subjected to an emotional argument that there is an inequity in the world, where "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer". They are told that it isn't right for the "rich" to cling to their "wealth" and not share it with others. Even now there is an organized movement in cities denouncing the behavior of Wall Street Banker fostered by the previously mentioned incompetent leadership who seeks to distract the nation from the fact that it has no solution to the problem other the same idea that has been constantly disproved by the passage of time and events of history.
The Occupy Wall Street is a sham and a diversion that Barack Obama hopes will be the means whereby the Democrats will maintain their control and hopefully make it a permanent one, thus sending this nation of ours on an inevitable path to socialism. However, that dream of a socialist utopia is foredoomed to become an untenable nightmare unsustainable under the conditions that constitute it's philosophy.
However, the damage that could result in the interim could indeed be disastrous for this nation and it's citizenry who are even now finding themselves assaulted on all side by increasing regulation and government control by executive fiat, in contravention of Congress and the very authority of the Constitution itself.
The darkness is coming. Only the voters can help clear it from the horizon by going to the polls on November 6, 2012 to send a clear message that Barack Obama and his ideological policies are nothing but the creation of disaster for this nation.
Showing posts with label constitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label constitution. Show all posts
Sunday, November 6, 2011
Sunday, August 7, 2011
Where Do We Go From Here?
Where is this nation of ours heading? In what direction is it going to ultimately find itself going? Will the noble experiment of our founding fathers continue on the same course or will it deviate from that path and go where it was not intended for it to go?
We've borne witness to an event never before experienced in this country but which was foretold with dire warnings. Warnings that were patently ignored by those it was directed at. Barack Obama is much more interested in remaining in office than in the fiscal solvency of this nation. He is irresponsibly spending funds, with the help of his Democrat allies and bureaucracies that are allied with his ideals and goals. Goals that have seriously hampered the economy of this nation like none has before.
It's quite obvious to many that Obama's aims are to create a large Federal Government which will control practically every aspect of life - the dread of George Orwell's seminal novel 1984. Big Brother and a permanent Democrat majority is only a eye blink away from becoming reality.
Destiny has not always been kind to this nation but in the long scheme of things it has remained basically true to the ideals of those men who framed it's founding documents - the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. These were men who placed their faith in Divine Providence and a belief in the contemporary Enlightenment ideas of nature and reason, of progress and the rights of man.
To these ends they they pledged "to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor". I point out the order of this pledge - lives then fortunes and finally their sacred honor. These men were willing to place their own lives on the line above all else to battle tyranny and establish a new paradigm in the world. An idea that quickly spread to France and other nations as revolution spread against the old order of Europe.
Yet even when the American Revolutionary War was brought to it's completion there remained many obstacles that had to be overcome by the North American Colonists as they stumbled in establishing a central government. The Articles of Confederation created a very weak central government with no ability to tax the member states and so it was destined to be replaced because this did not satisfy the so-called Federalists who insisted on a more powerful federal government. Thus was born the assembly that would frame the new Constitution for the United States of America.
Since it's ratification and implementation this country continued to face obstacles, the War of 1812 followed by the War Between the States, The Mexican War, the Indian Wars, the Spanish-American War, two World Wars and so on through Korea, Vietnam, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Iran and who knows where else.
Generations of young men have gone off to war to fight for a belief that free men must make their own way and elect those who will lead over them instead of being at the whim of tyrants, no matter what name they may give to themselves. Such tyrants will continue to exist as long as people continue to be swayed by promises of a better future they extoll in the hopes of gaining a toehold of authority over them.
Yet, things took a turn away from ethics and personal responsibility when Supreme Court decisions created a world were the label Civil Rights were plastered on things that had absolutely nothing to do with the original concept of the rights of man. Why was this so? What was the reason behind this enormous fraud perpetrated on society?
Simply put it was because lawyers virtually took over and pushed social programs that stressed avoiding error and removing fear and failure from society. Their actions through court decisions solved nothing and only created the chaotic mess that prevails today. Fear and failure cannot be removed from the equation. The events of the past fifty years have shown that the attempt has only lead to the innocent suffering even more and the guilty not being punished at all.
A pendulum swings from one side to another in a mathematically calculated period. The pendulum of common sense is long overdue swinging back to the side of reason and sanity. To put it succinctly the law needs to be removed from the hands of politicians & lawyers and placed back into the hands of the people; and error must not be made on the side of caution but on the side of survival.
Radical? Maybe. Conservative? Some would think so. Does it lead to survival? Only the passage of time will tell but those who are faced with a crisis of any kind must take radical measure to insure survival. This is a solution that may not be satisfactory to everyone but it is a solution and so far there are no other viable ones on the table. Where do we go from here? There are only two roads - one leads to survival - the other leads to destruction. History has shown that large governments invariably lead to destruction.
We've borne witness to an event never before experienced in this country but which was foretold with dire warnings. Warnings that were patently ignored by those it was directed at. Barack Obama is much more interested in remaining in office than in the fiscal solvency of this nation. He is irresponsibly spending funds, with the help of his Democrat allies and bureaucracies that are allied with his ideals and goals. Goals that have seriously hampered the economy of this nation like none has before.
It's quite obvious to many that Obama's aims are to create a large Federal Government which will control practically every aspect of life - the dread of George Orwell's seminal novel 1984. Big Brother and a permanent Democrat majority is only a eye blink away from becoming reality.
Destiny has not always been kind to this nation but in the long scheme of things it has remained basically true to the ideals of those men who framed it's founding documents - the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. These were men who placed their faith in Divine Providence and a belief in the contemporary Enlightenment ideas of nature and reason, of progress and the rights of man.
To these ends they they pledged "to each other our lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor". I point out the order of this pledge - lives then fortunes and finally their sacred honor. These men were willing to place their own lives on the line above all else to battle tyranny and establish a new paradigm in the world. An idea that quickly spread to France and other nations as revolution spread against the old order of Europe.
Yet even when the American Revolutionary War was brought to it's completion there remained many obstacles that had to be overcome by the North American Colonists as they stumbled in establishing a central government. The Articles of Confederation created a very weak central government with no ability to tax the member states and so it was destined to be replaced because this did not satisfy the so-called Federalists who insisted on a more powerful federal government. Thus was born the assembly that would frame the new Constitution for the United States of America.
Since it's ratification and implementation this country continued to face obstacles, the War of 1812 followed by the War Between the States, The Mexican War, the Indian Wars, the Spanish-American War, two World Wars and so on through Korea, Vietnam, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Iran and who knows where else.
Generations of young men have gone off to war to fight for a belief that free men must make their own way and elect those who will lead over them instead of being at the whim of tyrants, no matter what name they may give to themselves. Such tyrants will continue to exist as long as people continue to be swayed by promises of a better future they extoll in the hopes of gaining a toehold of authority over them.
Yet, things took a turn away from ethics and personal responsibility when Supreme Court decisions created a world were the label Civil Rights were plastered on things that had absolutely nothing to do with the original concept of the rights of man. Why was this so? What was the reason behind this enormous fraud perpetrated on society?
Simply put it was because lawyers virtually took over and pushed social programs that stressed avoiding error and removing fear and failure from society. Their actions through court decisions solved nothing and only created the chaotic mess that prevails today. Fear and failure cannot be removed from the equation. The events of the past fifty years have shown that the attempt has only lead to the innocent suffering even more and the guilty not being punished at all.
A pendulum swings from one side to another in a mathematically calculated period. The pendulum of common sense is long overdue swinging back to the side of reason and sanity. To put it succinctly the law needs to be removed from the hands of politicians & lawyers and placed back into the hands of the people; and error must not be made on the side of caution but on the side of survival.
Radical? Maybe. Conservative? Some would think so. Does it lead to survival? Only the passage of time will tell but those who are faced with a crisis of any kind must take radical measure to insure survival. This is a solution that may not be satisfactory to everyone but it is a solution and so far there are no other viable ones on the table. Where do we go from here? There are only two roads - one leads to survival - the other leads to destruction. History has shown that large governments invariably lead to destruction.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
TINSTAAFL - History & Moral Philosophy Part III
Rather than delve at length in what can be a very daunting subject that is entirely too large for this essay, suffice it to say that moral philosophy (or ethics) has played a leading role in the history of the world – both in the East and the West. From the early Greek philosophies of Aristotle and Plato to the modern philosophies of Aquinas, Kant and Rousseau, among others, history has shown that nations and religions rise and fall around certain philosophical teachings.
In the late eighteenth century the hypothetical state of nature became the philosophy du-jure. One of its chief proponents was the French philosopher Jean-Jaques Rousseau. It was from Rousseau that Thomas Jefferson borrowed heavily when he framed the Declaration of Independence with that immortal declaration of the rights of man – to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. There is so much more to be divined, however, from that most precious of all American documents next to the Constitution itself.
One of the problems that has arisen in the nation over the past two hundred plus years is the attempt by many to judge the Declaration, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights based on contemporary philosophy that has ‘devolved’ politically over the years. From a strictly general semantic point of view these documents can only be truthfully analyzed and interpreted in the light of the prevailing moral philosophy and popular culture that existed at the time of their framing.
This is why there has been such a bone of contention over the ‘true’ meanings of the first and second amendments; why those who ascribe to a modern philosophy read it one way and fail to account for the precedents and history that lie behind them. This is true of any document or literary work. One cannot truly understand a novel, short story or other work of literature without knowing, at length, the history of the era in which they occur or were penned. It is also true of any legal document. These must be viewed in the light of the prevailing ordinances, resolutions or other rules and regulations that are labeled laws.
This is nothing new. Authors have used this device ad nauseum. Mark Twain wrote two novels transporting 19 century morality into Arthurian and Tudorian England. It is a flaw of thinking that must be understood to be merely a literary device only. History is what it is and any attempt to deconstruct it to suit a political agenda is tantamount to tyranny over the minds of all humanity.
Now, to return to the Declaration of Independence and that immortal verbiage, this was nothing more than a rationalization for the secession of the North American Colonies from the British Empire.
We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal and that they are endowed with certain unalienable rights…
We hold… that all men are created equal. Why that phraseology? Why not, We hold … that we are created equal… that we are endowed … This verbiage has always bothered me. At this point he changed from the first person to the third person. Why? What was he really trying to say?
Next is the statement, that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just authority from the consent of the governed.
Consent of the governed. That they are endowed. Their creator, not our creator. The only possible conclusion I can come to is an old Latin adage that states quite succinctly Vox Populi, Vox Dei. This transliterates into English as the voice of the populace is the voice of the deity, or more plainly the voice of the people is the voice of God.
So, in essence Thomas Jefferson was saying that it was the voice of the American People who decided that their desires to separate from the tyranny of England would become a reality with the assurance that it was spoken as though it were the voice of God.
This phraseology, however has taken on epic proportions with the false assumption that the rights enumerated were granted by an omniscient being when in reality these rights were granted to the people by themselves.
In the next installment I will delve further into the reasons why this is so.
In the late eighteenth century the hypothetical state of nature became the philosophy du-jure. One of its chief proponents was the French philosopher Jean-Jaques Rousseau. It was from Rousseau that Thomas Jefferson borrowed heavily when he framed the Declaration of Independence with that immortal declaration of the rights of man – to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. There is so much more to be divined, however, from that most precious of all American documents next to the Constitution itself.
One of the problems that has arisen in the nation over the past two hundred plus years is the attempt by many to judge the Declaration, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights based on contemporary philosophy that has ‘devolved’ politically over the years. From a strictly general semantic point of view these documents can only be truthfully analyzed and interpreted in the light of the prevailing moral philosophy and popular culture that existed at the time of their framing.
This is why there has been such a bone of contention over the ‘true’ meanings of the first and second amendments; why those who ascribe to a modern philosophy read it one way and fail to account for the precedents and history that lie behind them. This is true of any document or literary work. One cannot truly understand a novel, short story or other work of literature without knowing, at length, the history of the era in which they occur or were penned. It is also true of any legal document. These must be viewed in the light of the prevailing ordinances, resolutions or other rules and regulations that are labeled laws.
This is nothing new. Authors have used this device ad nauseum. Mark Twain wrote two novels transporting 19 century morality into Arthurian and Tudorian England. It is a flaw of thinking that must be understood to be merely a literary device only. History is what it is and any attempt to deconstruct it to suit a political agenda is tantamount to tyranny over the minds of all humanity.
Now, to return to the Declaration of Independence and that immortal verbiage, this was nothing more than a rationalization for the secession of the North American Colonies from the British Empire.
We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal and that they are endowed with certain unalienable rights…
We hold… that all men are created equal. Why that phraseology? Why not, We hold … that we are created equal… that we are endowed … This verbiage has always bothered me. At this point he changed from the first person to the third person. Why? What was he really trying to say?
Next is the statement, that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just authority from the consent of the governed.
Consent of the governed. That they are endowed. Their creator, not our creator. The only possible conclusion I can come to is an old Latin adage that states quite succinctly Vox Populi, Vox Dei. This transliterates into English as the voice of the populace is the voice of the deity, or more plainly the voice of the people is the voice of God.
So, in essence Thomas Jefferson was saying that it was the voice of the American People who decided that their desires to separate from the tyranny of England would become a reality with the assurance that it was spoken as though it were the voice of God.
This phraseology, however has taken on epic proportions with the false assumption that the rights enumerated were granted by an omniscient being when in reality these rights were granted to the people by themselves.
In the next installment I will delve further into the reasons why this is so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)