I had to stop writing blogs for awhile. Focusing on the idiocy of the political and the educational world in particular left me depressed and drained. There are real problems. None of them are incapable of being solved. But no one wants to eliminate them unless they can garner some personal or ideological gain...and under no circumstances do they want to "fix" anything if it involves diminishing in any combination their power or wealth.
Today I read that the SAT scores hit a new low this past year. And the first comment by the testers was that no one should worry because it was due to more "students" (whatever that means these days) were taking the test than ever before and to the increased "diversity" of the pool taking the test. Huh? Right...and it don't rain in Indianapolis in the summertime.
Our Government is to blame for this idiocy. The entire Federal Government, including Congress, every President, and the Supreme Court. Because it all goes back to an unwillingness (or inability) to accurately evaluate and then design a way to correct the results of racial prejudice.
Rather than recognize that the in-equality of the past needed to be corrected substantively, the Government forces determined instead to institute the appearance of equality, rather than make it a fact.
For the most part, life has consequences...at least it used to. It was results that counted, not excuses. If you failed a test, you flunked. If you did that enough, you got "left back a grade" and some actually left school at the earliest permissible age because they just didn't want to study...or couldn't. Schools were for learning. So were Colleges and Universities. Your performance got you entrance and progress and a degree. The degree meant something...it vouched for your achievement.
But, instead of focusing on the opportunity for all to learn and thus achieve according to that achievement, the Government dictated that minorities were now to be granted entrance, and degrees because of their minority status rather than their competitive achievement. The decision was to make the world look as if all was well and, in fact, guarantee that minorities would have the appearance of success whether it was earned...or not.
This has had enormous consequences to our nation...well, actually, no longer a nation but a country. Because the damage is multifaceted. First, minorities have not been helped by the program. Everyone, including the minorities, knows that the "achievements" are bogus...or at the very least, are suspect...regardless of the piece of paper. The same goes for hiring, due to Federal requirements that once again throw out achievement in favor of appearances. If people want all to strive for knowledge and achievement, you must make the opportunity equal...but you must require the equal achievement of learning and ability on an equal basis as well. To act as the Government has done is to subtly (well, maybe not so much) suggest that minorities actually cannot compete...at least not on an equal basis. How totally insulting, demeaning...and stupid.
But that is only the start of the damage. All who have grown up in this atmosphere of selective granting of artificial status see that it ISN'T achievement that is rewarded...and hard work and study is not the key to a better life. They have watched as consequences of non-performance or under-performance have been either eliminated or lowered. So...they demand the same. And, in the prevailing sense of "equality" they have been granted the same "pass" to avoid being left back in school, or denied admission to college, or denied their diploma just because they didn't do the work.
Students today will, it appears, not have to learn how to write cursive because, I am told, they all use computers or "text" or some such. I have no idea what they will do if the power fails, or someone sets of a neutron bomb that takes out all the cell towers and crashes the power grid. I suppose it will inspire a whole new set of cave paintings. And I refuse to even consider how they will sign their names to any legal documents...I suppose there wont be any need for them, as no one will be held to whatever "thought" was a binding agreement.
Young people coming out of school at any level today already can't add or subtract without a calculator or some sort. If a scanner breakes in a store, the clerks cannot tell you what to pay if you are buying more than two items...and if the scanner malfunctions, have no concept from the illogic of the inaccurate total that it is, in fact, inaccurate. No wonder people find it hard to get jobs...they think their piece of paper means something while they are functionally both illiterate and untrainable except for the most mundane of tasks. Yet they insist on benefits, pay, and treatment as "entitled."
So of course the SAT scores are down. Why bother to work to learn all those things that get you higher scores; they don't matter. These poor disillusioned souls have been led, trained and indoctrinated to expect that achievement not only doesn't matter...it isn't even to be considered.
The Government, the Educational (so-called) community, and all forms of authority have determined that thou shall not say "no" to anyone...even parents are prevented from requiring and enforcing their own children's upbringing.
No wonder the United States is populated in this century by narcissists. It is how they have been raised.
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Why do we need to only elect a Politician as President?
First of all, for anyone who bothers to read my ramblings, I apologize for not posting for awhile. The politics has been so overwhelmingly catastrophic that I just couldn't make myself start commenting on anything without feeling intense sorrow for the America that once was. But...as with all sad things...nothing changes and one has to get up and start putting one foot in front of the other and trust that there is something worthwhile somewhere down the path...
I was listening to Herman Cain the other day. He is a man who started with very little and made a success of himself and his business and seemingly helped a lot of people find work along the way while not being a crook, or a liar. And he cares enough about America to run for public office...the Presidency, to be precise. Now that might be the only obvious error in judgement that he has made...at least of which I am familiar.
But...then I am besieged by multiple comments by all of the "talking heads" in the media saying that he lacks political experience and thus cannot be elected.
Why? As he said months ago, when questioned about his lack of political experience, how has electing those with political experience been working out for us so far? How well have we been served by electing those practiced in the art of deception and feigning sincere concern for the electorate while pursuing the aggrandizement of power and protecting their own jobs? How well have the "governmentalists" (all those in public office who believe that government should be a major factor in defining and solving the challenges presented to the citizenry...without any proof of agreement of the populace with this premise.) done in such a simple thing as openly admitting that (mostly) previous office holders have promised free lunches of various types that just didn't, and don't, exist and the bill is now due...that the government is now going to have to change the benefits for the future and cut back on current "free" lunches because we have run out of money? Neither the President nor Congress can even make that simple admission...they are liars by genetic disposition.
But that doesn't answer why no one in the media and very few among the public consider Mr. Cain a legitimate and worthy candidate. Again...why?
Sadly, I suspect that it is because we, as a people, have become comfortable with the lies our politicians tell us...we want to believe in a fairyland where all things are possible and no one ever gets the bill. We want to believe in a substitute "Big Daddy" who will take care of us, even as we refuse to remember the times when our original parent said "NO" or we suffered the consequence of some forbidden act or decision...indeed, we all have very convenient and selective memories. Apparently, we want to be conned. We are happy with it...and narcissistically only slightly discomforted by the thought that our children or grandchildren will have the fruits of our self-indulgence.
Devout Christians believe that Christ died for our sins. Apparently the people of today's America believe that their children and grandchildren should do the same.
Saturday, June 25, 2011
My Kingdom for a (real) Candidate...
Call me disillusioned. Call me disappointed. And...probably, call me an idiot for wishing for the impossible.
The elapse of time reveals "stuff" that books and articles almost never share. One of those is that both what are called "Left" and "Right" ideologies started out very close together at the beginning of the last century and have been moving farther to the left with every passing year. It was, among other motivations, the recognition of this that was behind Bill Buckley's efforts to enable the formation of a real Conservative movement in this country.
None of the governmentalists (as I call them) recognize, value or make of the highest priority the protection of the freedom of the individual, coupled with the resulting self-reliance and responsibility (which actually includes enduring the consequences of bad decisions as well as the rewards of good ones) and the corresponding requirement of Government to stick to the one reasonable activity of protecting our borders.
Ronald Reagan was the only President in my lifetime that seemed to recognize the danger of Government...yet he was unable to accomplish more than slow the tide of growth and power, while attempting to protect individual freedom, initiative and responsibility, of the Federal Government. It will take more than just finding the right President...it will require finding a new Congress. Sadly...that will probably never happen.
Sunday, June 5, 2011
The Argument is NOT about Entitlement Reduction...
Only in America is lying encouraged and actually protected by the Law of the Land...especially in politics. I have spent the better part of a month trying to analyze the arguments about what is falsely called "Entitlement" reform. Such a misnomer...everyone who has worked at all has had part of their pay confiscated to "fund" both Social Security and Medicare, but the politicians for some reason want to call paying back what we have paid for an "Entitlement." But that is a subject for still another day's discussion...or thought...or whatever...
Today I want to write out my understanding of the argument regarding Medicare. The so-called Republican plan is pretty easy to get. Ryan has written out his plan and taken whatever heat or praise that the facts of the plan elicit. It acknowledges that right now, payments taken in return for a promise to pay in the future are, in fact, a fraud and a crime...since the funds knowingly will not be available to provide the promised benefits in the future. So he proposes keeping the promises for those for whom it is too late to do anything themselves to cover for the fraud of the government. But, he openly changes the Medicare system to 1) bring it closer to the people by moving control away from Washington, D.C., and into the individual states, and 2) bringing it even more in tune with the people by making the amounts available to the individual available to that individual so that he or she may chose who or what supplier of Medical Coverage should bet their coverage.
But...and there is no suggestion that this is NOT true...the amount of money will not increase and there will be a possibility of financial burden that falls on individuals. Those who can afford it will pay toward Doctor's visits and will contribute toward services costs.
Here is the curious fact, though. The so-called Democrat solution has exactly the same results...at least as far as reducing the dollar value of benefits is concerned. Yes, indeed. Sure, I know you haven't seen any video of any Democrat pushing "granny" over a cliff...but everybody is sure going off of a cliff...sometime.
The only question...and the only difference between the ideological left and right...is when and who will be blamed. It is NOT a question of IF.
Here are the facts as I read and hear them:
1) Both sides actually agree that nothing will change for all current citizens and current recipients who are 55 years of age or older;
2) The Ryan plan puts funding policy directly into the hands of the individual state and individual funding decisions on provider and coverage selection directly into the hands of the individual who has paid into the system. He relies on competitive free-market competition to keep those premiums as low as possible and the benefits as inclusive as possible, but that is not controlled by government edict, but by the laws of supply and demand, which will presumably be intensified by eliminating the state laws limiting cross-state competition in the area of Health Insurance;
3) The Democrat plan (as explained by everyone who has spoken with any apparent intelligence and honesty on the subject, and as verified as much as possible by my reading of the Obamacare bill) is, of course, put into effect by Obamacare is claims to reduce costs. Actually, it doesn't...but, again, that particular element is for another discussion. What is important, and what Democrat spokesmen will NEVER admit, is that it also reduces benefits over time. Yep... somebody is going off the cliff. But no Democrat will ever have his or her direct fingerprints on the wheelchair. Why? Because they blame it on someone ... anyone...everyone...else.
"How can that be?" you ask. Simple. Obamacare over time required cost controls which effect payments to providers. And they set up bureaucratic committees that will determine what is "proper" treatment that will be covered...read, "paid for"...by reimbursement. It also reduces over time the amount paid to Doctors and Hospitals for specific types of care and treatment. Note, that they still argue that these payments...even as reduced...will be the "right" amount to ensure that the patient gets total care with now additional payment by them.
What does this mean? It means that as the payments that you were told were going to provide you with medical care get too small for Doctors and Hospitals to make a living and pay off their own huge debts, they will chose to not accept patients who are on Medicare. And Insurance Companies who you have paid for ancillary services to avoid any additional payments for gaps in coverage will adjust their coverages to match that which the government has dictated.
The result is that the Democrat plan will also have some people...maybe people who are not yet as old as granny...pushed off of the proverbial coverage cliff. The only difference is that Obamacare will blame the Insurance companies, the doctors and the hospitals and claim innocence of any contributory involvement.
This is very attractive to all politicians for whom results are not nearly as important as avoidance of blame. It is also attractive to a lot of voters who embrace the concept of victim-hood and also value the concept of taking a chance of failure if that failure will ultimately be able to be blamed on someone else.
The Ryan plan acknowledge that there is no certainty of total coverage, but insures that the value that you pay into the program will come back to you...and attempts to put into individuals' hands the power to maximize the economic power that those funds represent. Yes...it does put the responsibility of using those funds in an intelligent way on the States and the Individual. That means that you have the power of achieving great success or abysmal failure. Amazing concept, isn't it: Freedom of Choice is NOT Freedom from Consequences...good, ...or bad. But there is a certain rush of excitement there...or is it the breath of FREEDOM. You decide.
(Oh...and for you non-believers...currently, your Medicare premiums over the years total about $57,000 while the medical benefits that you use total in excess of $158,000. In a few years those numbers will be near or above $80,000 and $230,000 respectively. Medicare IS broke...and you need to accept that.)
Today I want to write out my understanding of the argument regarding Medicare. The so-called Republican plan is pretty easy to get. Ryan has written out his plan and taken whatever heat or praise that the facts of the plan elicit. It acknowledges that right now, payments taken in return for a promise to pay in the future are, in fact, a fraud and a crime...since the funds knowingly will not be available to provide the promised benefits in the future. So he proposes keeping the promises for those for whom it is too late to do anything themselves to cover for the fraud of the government. But, he openly changes the Medicare system to 1) bring it closer to the people by moving control away from Washington, D.C., and into the individual states, and 2) bringing it even more in tune with the people by making the amounts available to the individual available to that individual so that he or she may chose who or what supplier of Medical Coverage should bet their coverage.
But...and there is no suggestion that this is NOT true...the amount of money will not increase and there will be a possibility of financial burden that falls on individuals. Those who can afford it will pay toward Doctor's visits and will contribute toward services costs.
Here is the curious fact, though. The so-called Democrat solution has exactly the same results...at least as far as reducing the dollar value of benefits is concerned. Yes, indeed. Sure, I know you haven't seen any video of any Democrat pushing "granny" over a cliff...but everybody is sure going off of a cliff...sometime.
The only question...and the only difference between the ideological left and right...is when and who will be blamed. It is NOT a question of IF.
Here are the facts as I read and hear them:
1) Both sides actually agree that nothing will change for all current citizens and current recipients who are 55 years of age or older;
2) The Ryan plan puts funding policy directly into the hands of the individual state and individual funding decisions on provider and coverage selection directly into the hands of the individual who has paid into the system. He relies on competitive free-market competition to keep those premiums as low as possible and the benefits as inclusive as possible, but that is not controlled by government edict, but by the laws of supply and demand, which will presumably be intensified by eliminating the state laws limiting cross-state competition in the area of Health Insurance;
3) The Democrat plan (as explained by everyone who has spoken with any apparent intelligence and honesty on the subject, and as verified as much as possible by my reading of the Obamacare bill) is, of course, put into effect by Obamacare is claims to reduce costs. Actually, it doesn't...but, again, that particular element is for another discussion. What is important, and what Democrat spokesmen will NEVER admit, is that it also reduces benefits over time. Yep... somebody is going off the cliff. But no Democrat will ever have his or her direct fingerprints on the wheelchair. Why? Because they blame it on someone ... anyone...everyone...else.
"How can that be?" you ask. Simple. Obamacare over time required cost controls which effect payments to providers. And they set up bureaucratic committees that will determine what is "proper" treatment that will be covered...read, "paid for"...by reimbursement. It also reduces over time the amount paid to Doctors and Hospitals for specific types of care and treatment. Note, that they still argue that these payments...even as reduced...will be the "right" amount to ensure that the patient gets total care with now additional payment by them.
What does this mean? It means that as the payments that you were told were going to provide you with medical care get too small for Doctors and Hospitals to make a living and pay off their own huge debts, they will chose to not accept patients who are on Medicare. And Insurance Companies who you have paid for ancillary services to avoid any additional payments for gaps in coverage will adjust their coverages to match that which the government has dictated.
The result is that the Democrat plan will also have some people...maybe people who are not yet as old as granny...pushed off of the proverbial coverage cliff. The only difference is that Obamacare will blame the Insurance companies, the doctors and the hospitals and claim innocence of any contributory involvement.
This is very attractive to all politicians for whom results are not nearly as important as avoidance of blame. It is also attractive to a lot of voters who embrace the concept of victim-hood and also value the concept of taking a chance of failure if that failure will ultimately be able to be blamed on someone else.
The Ryan plan acknowledge that there is no certainty of total coverage, but insures that the value that you pay into the program will come back to you...and attempts to put into individuals' hands the power to maximize the economic power that those funds represent. Yes...it does put the responsibility of using those funds in an intelligent way on the States and the Individual. That means that you have the power of achieving great success or abysmal failure. Amazing concept, isn't it: Freedom of Choice is NOT Freedom from Consequences...good, ...or bad. But there is a certain rush of excitement there...or is it the breath of FREEDOM. You decide.
(Oh...and for you non-believers...currently, your Medicare premiums over the years total about $57,000 while the medical benefits that you use total in excess of $158,000. In a few years those numbers will be near or above $80,000 and $230,000 respectively. Medicare IS broke...and you need to accept that.)
Friday, May 6, 2011
California could become our Greece
It is both entertaining and hopeful to focus on the now open Presidential Political Season. We will, of course, tire of it in time and whine about just getting it over with, but for now it is a chance for renewed hope and optimism...for some of us,at least. But there is an ugly threat on the horizon that threatens to make the storms in the South seem minor by comparison and that we have been "helped" to ignore by both the media and the politicians: the failure of California to take any steps to solve their insolvency.
If we are not careful, California will become to America what Greece is about to become to the European Union...a death knell and cause of economic catastrophe...we won't have to wait for the deficit bills to overwhelm us, California's failure will kick us over the cliff way earlier than that.
We all should follow what is happening in and with Greece if we want to see our own future. The European Union (EU) has rules against bailouts and debt restructuring, but that is apparently going to happen shortly. They (the EU) have already done this with Portugal...against their own rules. What does this mean? Well, Germany has indicated that they, if the process continues, will abandon the EU. Whether that happens or not (and the odds are that the German Electorate will demand it), the value of the Euro will plummet.
Consider then our own beautiful state of California...
Known by some as "the land of fruits and nuts", they do not have a balanced budget. They have no (realistic) plan to balance their budget, and, if they were a public company, would no be rated as a penny stock with no value whatsoever. Yet they continue on unafraid and promising a continuation of the "free" lunch...oh, excuse me..."free" everything.
Guess who they will ultimately expect to pay for it? Yep You and Me! The rest of the United States. And we do not have the money to do it even if we decided it was right. But the worst thing (for California) is that we don't think it is the right thing to do. But...will Obama and the Congress declare that "California is TOO BIG TO FAIL." Where have we heard that one before.
Just think...a political decision that would accelerate our financial demise. Think it won't happen under President Obama? Really? What are you smoking...because I want some! And if you thing this can turn out well for the United States of America, just keep following the developments in the EU and Greece (and the other PIGS [Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain]).
It is absolutely as important to us as is the Presidential campaign.
If we are not careful, California will become to America what Greece is about to become to the European Union...a death knell and cause of economic catastrophe...we won't have to wait for the deficit bills to overwhelm us, California's failure will kick us over the cliff way earlier than that.
We all should follow what is happening in and with Greece if we want to see our own future. The European Union (EU) has rules against bailouts and debt restructuring, but that is apparently going to happen shortly. They (the EU) have already done this with Portugal...against their own rules. What does this mean? Well, Germany has indicated that they, if the process continues, will abandon the EU. Whether that happens or not (and the odds are that the German Electorate will demand it), the value of the Euro will plummet.
Consider then our own beautiful state of California...
Known by some as "the land of fruits and nuts", they do not have a balanced budget. They have no (realistic) plan to balance their budget, and, if they were a public company, would no be rated as a penny stock with no value whatsoever. Yet they continue on unafraid and promising a continuation of the "free" lunch...oh, excuse me..."free" everything.
Guess who they will ultimately expect to pay for it? Yep You and Me! The rest of the United States. And we do not have the money to do it even if we decided it was right. But the worst thing (for California) is that we don't think it is the right thing to do. But...will Obama and the Congress declare that "California is TOO BIG TO FAIL." Where have we heard that one before.
Just think...a political decision that would accelerate our financial demise. Think it won't happen under President Obama? Really? What are you smoking...because I want some! And if you thing this can turn out well for the United States of America, just keep following the developments in the EU and Greece (and the other PIGS [Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain]).
It is absolutely as important to us as is the Presidential campaign.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Happy Easter!...Thoughts and Ruminations...
It has been a long, long time since I was a "practicing" anything...so I guess for most people that would make me a CINO in current acronym parlance (Christian in name only). I am not sure if that is factual, but perceptually I cannot disagree with that moniker. I was raised in a fundamentalist Christian home, but the idealism of what was taught clashed with the apparent hypocrisy of how people actually lived their lives resulted in disillusionment. The resulting search and study of most of the known religions of the world for "the Truth" revealed scads of pretenders to that throne, not all of them religious. But there was one constant theme: do what we say and your life will be better, either here or in the hereafter. And Islam was downright threatening with it's instruction to convert or kill non-believers; there was no element of invitation or choice there.
This "obedience" thing was and is a non-starter for me. My mother named me for the eighth disciple of Jesus...Thomas...often known as "Doubting Thomas." I have no idea what moved my mother to that choice, but I have no question that it was accurate...and I have been both blessed and cursed with that attitude most of my life. Now I just embrace it as a characteristic like having blue eyes or black hair...neither good nor bad, but a fact.
But, returning to the point, this obedience thing usually involves money, and doing as I am told. It also involves not questioning either the ultimate destination of that money or the purpose behind the commands...at least not beyond getting generalities, like "helping the poor or deserving" or "to insure your being blessed by God" or the infamous "we know better than you" which occurs most often in political ideologies and is uttered by those in or vying for public office.
So I have turned my back on all organizations, both religious and secular, because when man gets involved in any group activity it inevitably becomes most concerned with controlling others for the benefit of the leadership, ultimately abandoning all but lip service to it's original reason for creation.
What does this have to do with Easter? Well, it gets back to the instincts within us that exist without indoctrination, training or learning; it involves that "gut" feeling that we all experience when coming across something or someone for the very first time. When that happens, I always get one of two feelings: either a "wow, that is great", or a "Whoa...I don't like that much." Of course, we then spend hours...or days, weeks or years...trying to get our brains to agree, or trying to convince our gut that it was wrong. But the end result most of the time is that if we follow our gut, we turn out OK. To me, that is God (or whatever higher power of any kind that you are comfortable with) trying to guide us.
And this morning, my gut turned my attention to the part of the scripture that dealt with God knocking on the door and waiting to be invited in. And the part of offering...but not ordering... needing to be invited, resonated within me. It was not obedience to commands as much as it was an offer to reveal choices from which I would have to select that was important...it was that I was also free to not "answer" the door.
That "aha moment" was, for me, the granting of the ultimate personal freedom simultaneously with the offer of knowledge and guidance beyond the scope of personal experience. No strings attached. No contract. No hypocrisy...well, except for my own.
I learned a lot of things during my search for the "truth" and I have been blessed with much because of it...but in terms of what I thought I was specifically looking for, I did waste a lot of effort and time. For me only (I am sharing, not proselytizing) the answer was within me, and the only requirement was that I stop and both "listen" and "feel" instead of being so "busy".
One final note on organizations. People should band together to accomplish certain things...but their "organizations" should disband once the initial need is achieved. If a secondary "need" is seen, form a new organization...do not continue the old one. Keeping "standing" anything...committees, governments, religions...leads to power struggles and loss of individual freedoms that have little or nothing to do with the original purpose.
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Slavery...are we slaves?
Slavery is a simple concept...I thought. The definitions are rather clear and seem easy to understand. Merriam-Webster says that a slave is one held in servitude as the chattel of another or that is completely subservient to a dominating influence. All that seems clear enough.
Can one be a slave if not owned by another? And, can you be a slave if you are not aware that you are one,i.e., either born or have become accustomed to being controlled by others or another? That is, is self-awareness of the condition a requisite for the classification. Apparently not, from the definitions...but more on that a bit later. Also...if you voluntarily give power over yourself to another, but then decide you wish to rescind it and find that you cannot, does that result in a condition of slavery.
These questions came about because of an article I read recently that suggested that living in America had become an existance subject to a "plantation mentality." The idea that we looked on the government much as slaves in the south had looked on their plantation farmer owners. Seemed ludicrous on it's face, but....
It is undeniable that slavery has existed in the world since recorded history began. Every one of the societies throughout the ages has employed the concept of slavery: the Romans, the Greeks, the Aztecs, the Muslims...all of them. But our history books suggest that WE are different. "Really?"...and, if so, "Why"?
In ancient times, slavery often had nothing to do with "ownership." True, the Romans and Greeks did transfer title, but neither the Aztecs nor African tribes have any formal title for their slaves...it just was a result of losing a battle or war. Losers became the slaves and winners became the owners or "masters." America codified ownership, with formal documentation...until they were emancipated. But...why did America and most of the western world do away with slavery. Did it really disappear? Or did it just morph into another form under a different name?
After all, how could a system that has existed for so many years suddenly become anathema to the human race? If it were a gradual thing, one could argue that it was a developing "something": perhaps moral awareness, perhaps a religious revelation, but whatever it was, it would logically be something that mankind came to over an extended period...but this apparent elimination of slavery has come upon us suddenly in less than a century, eliminating a pattern of behavior that has been consistent and constant for ages. Why now...and how?
I do not think it has disappeared at all. I think that it exists all around us and that in fact, we may all be not only complicit in its preservation but be slaves ourselves.
Remember the second side of the Merriam-Webster definition...",,,completely subservient to a dominating influence."? Let us try out some comparisons of the usual vision of slavery side-by-side with living in America today:
What happens when you disobey the orders of your slave master? Punishment of various degrees, depending on how severe and how many previous transgressions, right?
What happens when you disobey the orders of the government? Not much different, I would suggest.
You may argue that you get a jury trial. Sometimes...but not as often as you think. Most transgressions against government are punished by taking your "stuff," usually in the form of money but sometimes they just take you property...especially if they want it and you think you own it. How, indeed, is it different?
You say "...but my elected officials made the decisions, and I agreed by electing them." Oh, really? Was that your intention...or is that just a mantra that the government throws back at you to explain that it is really either your fault or that you agreed to allow this control and this "taking" of your stuff or your freedom? Isn't the "election" thing something that you have been indoctrinated into believing actually protects your freedoms" I mean, how many of your freedoms have disappeared in your lifetime without your specific approval? Remember that unfortunate "property rights" thing that has been taken? How about wiretaps without a judicial warrant? How about the right to have the implements necessary to defend yourself? Think about it. How has that "our elections protect our freedoms" mantra been working...other than to lower your blood pressure?
Some people that lived centuries ago made an agreement to be governed by others. We were born into it and raised to see it as a good thing...something to cherish and not to question. Did we choose it? Did YOU choose it? If we are really created with unalienable rights from God, why does the government have such absolute control over our lives? Why does not every generation have to pass again, ab initio, and approve, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights? Why are we encouraged to suffer indignities that our founding fathers saw fit to revolt against? Sort of a loss of logic here, it seems.
Is there some fear on the part of those in power that some or all of the provisions might be seen by the majority of "citizens" as objectionable and the results as being enslaving? You think?
Slavery is alive an well throughout the world. In fact it is more extensive than ever before in human history. And it is a natural existence, as proven by the history of the world...it has always been and it will always be, albeit defined differently for the exigencies of the moment. Today, most of the "Slave Masters" have simply morphed into "Elected Officials" and "Government Representatives." They have refined themselves into a multi-headed hydra that cannot be clearly identified, and thus not ever truly defeated or removed, so the slavery continues.
Those who are poor cannot chose to remove the power that feeds them, while those who's earned wealth is taken by the government are too few to be able to fight the taking. It is the perfect form of slavery where, for the sake of narcissistic ego, the enslaved cannot even countenance the idea that they are, indeed, slaves in fact if not in name. And so it is.
Can one be a slave if not owned by another? And, can you be a slave if you are not aware that you are one,i.e., either born or have become accustomed to being controlled by others or another? That is, is self-awareness of the condition a requisite for the classification. Apparently not, from the definitions...but more on that a bit later. Also...if you voluntarily give power over yourself to another, but then decide you wish to rescind it and find that you cannot, does that result in a condition of slavery.
These questions came about because of an article I read recently that suggested that living in America had become an existance subject to a "plantation mentality." The idea that we looked on the government much as slaves in the south had looked on their plantation farmer owners. Seemed ludicrous on it's face, but....
It is undeniable that slavery has existed in the world since recorded history began. Every one of the societies throughout the ages has employed the concept of slavery: the Romans, the Greeks, the Aztecs, the Muslims...all of them. But our history books suggest that WE are different. "Really?"...and, if so, "Why"?
In ancient times, slavery often had nothing to do with "ownership." True, the Romans and Greeks did transfer title, but neither the Aztecs nor African tribes have any formal title for their slaves...it just was a result of losing a battle or war. Losers became the slaves and winners became the owners or "masters." America codified ownership, with formal documentation...until they were emancipated. But...why did America and most of the western world do away with slavery. Did it really disappear? Or did it just morph into another form under a different name?
After all, how could a system that has existed for so many years suddenly become anathema to the human race? If it were a gradual thing, one could argue that it was a developing "something": perhaps moral awareness, perhaps a religious revelation, but whatever it was, it would logically be something that mankind came to over an extended period...but this apparent elimination of slavery has come upon us suddenly in less than a century, eliminating a pattern of behavior that has been consistent and constant for ages. Why now...and how?
I do not think it has disappeared at all. I think that it exists all around us and that in fact, we may all be not only complicit in its preservation but be slaves ourselves.
Remember the second side of the Merriam-Webster definition...",,,completely subservient to a dominating influence."? Let us try out some comparisons of the usual vision of slavery side-by-side with living in America today:
What happens when you disobey the orders of your slave master? Punishment of various degrees, depending on how severe and how many previous transgressions, right?
What happens when you disobey the orders of the government? Not much different, I would suggest.
You may argue that you get a jury trial. Sometimes...but not as often as you think. Most transgressions against government are punished by taking your "stuff," usually in the form of money but sometimes they just take you property...especially if they want it and you think you own it. How, indeed, is it different?
You say "...but my elected officials made the decisions, and I agreed by electing them." Oh, really? Was that your intention...or is that just a mantra that the government throws back at you to explain that it is really either your fault or that you agreed to allow this control and this "taking" of your stuff or your freedom? Isn't the "election" thing something that you have been indoctrinated into believing actually protects your freedoms" I mean, how many of your freedoms have disappeared in your lifetime without your specific approval? Remember that unfortunate "property rights" thing that has been taken? How about wiretaps without a judicial warrant? How about the right to have the implements necessary to defend yourself? Think about it. How has that "our elections protect our freedoms" mantra been working...other than to lower your blood pressure?
Some people that lived centuries ago made an agreement to be governed by others. We were born into it and raised to see it as a good thing...something to cherish and not to question. Did we choose it? Did YOU choose it? If we are really created with unalienable rights from God, why does the government have such absolute control over our lives? Why does not every generation have to pass again, ab initio, and approve, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights? Why are we encouraged to suffer indignities that our founding fathers saw fit to revolt against? Sort of a loss of logic here, it seems.
Is there some fear on the part of those in power that some or all of the provisions might be seen by the majority of "citizens" as objectionable and the results as being enslaving? You think?
Slavery is alive an well throughout the world. In fact it is more extensive than ever before in human history. And it is a natural existence, as proven by the history of the world...it has always been and it will always be, albeit defined differently for the exigencies of the moment. Today, most of the "Slave Masters" have simply morphed into "Elected Officials" and "Government Representatives." They have refined themselves into a multi-headed hydra that cannot be clearly identified, and thus not ever truly defeated or removed, so the slavery continues.
Those who are poor cannot chose to remove the power that feeds them, while those who's earned wealth is taken by the government are too few to be able to fight the taking. It is the perfect form of slavery where, for the sake of narcissistic ego, the enslaved cannot even countenance the idea that they are, indeed, slaves in fact if not in name. And so it is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)