Is the demise of America as simple as Americans refuse to think?
In this nation today there are so many things wrong—especially in our government, our theology, or as Montesquieu would identify in our mores, morals, and religion—it is difficult to identify where to even consider or comprehend where to begin even understanding the reasons why.
Before we can even begin the process should we not first at least understand man? Should we also not at least have some reference to the universe we live in? Or shall we as a…civilized…society continues on this uncharted course lacking any reference to anything?
How can we even begin any evaluation of anything without first having an understanding of man? Where do we begin? What we know of man is that there has never been a man born, if left to his own device that has ever survived. Should not that be about as baseline to even begin the discussion of man and his very existence? Think of that little reality. In the world of all living things there is one species man; that if not supported, cultivated, and protected had zero possibility of survival. Man is the most helpless of all living creatures we know of in the historical annals, the written history, of our literacy. There is not one example, one hypothetical incident that refutes this conformation. In the existence of mankind it is as constant as the known reality that man when born is the ultimate in being completely helpless. The only instinct known, the desire to suckle the breast to feed for sustenance…there is no other.
Compare that to any of all the other species be they mammal, reptile, or snake or any of the other estimated 8 million some species cohabiting this planet. None of them, not one, requires that they are helpless. While man is helpless longer than many species lifetimes. Yet even in this strange reality man has one thing that all other species lack. For it is man and man alone that though requiring such a lengthy maturation before having any productivity a possibility exist no others have. For it is in man, and only man that—the possibilities—of each and every person are endless.
What are the examples? Let’s begin with one individual who used the simple ability that man has we find in no other species. That simple ability known only in man, abstract thought. Of all men who could think, the example that seems so remarkable is Einstein’s hypothesis of E=MC2.
What is a more remarkable hypothesis of man’s abstract ability of imagination? Think of the concept, that energy and mass have a relationship, and can be then engineered to construct results from this very idea. The result, man in his technological advancement proved this very fact. Man created the acknowledgement of what we identify as fission, and in doing so designed two ways to do the same thing, with completely different results. On one case, the fission reaction of all the fuel available instantaneous, resulting in the birth of the most known destructive force known to man, the splitting of atoms making bombs. The other is the same process, only this time under controlled conditions using the same technology of possibilities creating the energy source of a nuclear reactor. Each begun and each created by man from the hypothesis of a relationship envisioned abstractly in the mind of man’s abstract thought. What a remarkable example of man’s possibilities that can be.
Yet in reality to understand event the abstract thought of man do we not also have to begin at the beginning? Do we not also have to back up one large step before even the society of man? Should we not be required to step back to the beginning of our very existence in order to start the journey at that beginning?
The hypothesis of our universe’s beginning is an interesting example of the possibilities of man abstract reasoning. While at the same time a perfect example of the irrationality of what men can hypothesize. There are two explanations of our universes beginnings. One is the ‘hypotheses’ of the ‘big bang theory.’ The other is the theology of a creator, and that only from something can something come.
What are interesting are the examples of each. IN the theorem of the ‘big bang theory’ we find the foundation of other theorems. Theorems we identify as such; ‘perpetual motion machine,’ the idea that something can come from nothing and in mathematics the equation of (0=1) an unproven concept with no examples. While the concept in theology of from something—a creator—came something…a universe. This is as everything known to man, for in our knowledge of the universe everything we know has a reason for beginning. Nothing we have ever known just became without initiation. Montesquieu’s identification of the universe is the most concise I known; ‘in a universe where every law of nature, and natures God is constant; to imagine this is not of intelligent design is unimaginable.’ There is not one example, even in the illusion of the Democrats Communist ideology that something comes from nothing that exists. IN fact the constants of the second law of thermodynamics, Newton’s second law of motion, and any other physical measurement, theological evaluations, philosophical contemplations, or any other known example requiring mental ‘thinking’ are confirmed.
Yet in our society, a majority would rather accept the ideology of (0=1) the concept of ‘something can come from nothing’ that even consider the reality that there is no example, no proof, of even something to even speculate it is possible. Yet, as Keynesian communist monetary and physical policy, something else without one example of success, is what so many accepted as ‘what do we call this?’ it surely can’t be called facts.
It introduces the danger of ideology, an acceptance of belief lacking facts, lacking example, lacking any reason to even acknowledge such—except the lack of mental reason, the lack of thought, and the complete removal of the simple act of thinking. The environment of I believe without reason, and will stand by my decision.
Just this simple declaration removes their possibility of salvation. Who among us can make a presentation of reason to any who reject that simple reality of fact? It is impossible, and it explains why those of dementias of ideology are so dangerous. The examples of such exist with example after example in our world today. Think of the two ideologies that in our current scenario of existence threaten the very existence of man and his wonder of ‘free choice.’ Can you identify them? Have you even thought about what are the greatest dangers to the society of mankind? If not, can you answer that question to yourself why you have not?
There are many more than the two I identify as the most dangerous. For the obvious that society if they engage mental thought, if they think, and if they take the examples using reason will conclude are the most dangerous to man’s very existence as man was ordained to be. Both are in the political environment and nowhere else. For each is nourished and advocated not by the acceptance of man, but by the dictates of domination of man to conform to their relativism, their dictate of ideology. The first obvious is communism. Sadly this nation is getting a dose of experience in communism beyond anything any free American even envisioned as possible. For communism is based on the fallacy of something comes from nothing. Advocated to those who are perfectly willing to participate in theft, the stealing from others—the absolute debauchery of any mores, morals or any acceptance of man’s rights of individual endowments, labor, ownership, or anything else that is the possibilities of man. Montesquieu included religion in his evaluation. Today we cannot for we have by example, their doctrine, today watching the papist of this nation, and the world advance not theology, but theocracy—that it is the role of government, interestingly not the church, to provide the equality of all men; forgetting the concept of man’s right that all are equal.
There is another theocracy; an ideology that is so contorted and rejects the freewill of man in the world of rational reasoning has been rejected by civilized society. Yet today, by some ordainment of conformation unidentifiable—some acceptance without experiment, without judgment, without any known measurement—has been allowed to permeate the society of men. Those who have philosophical ideals and foundations…in some incomprehensible decisions…are now accepting that which was never accepted, always rejected; the dementia of islamism. Accepting something that is, and always has been, unacceptable; as something comparative to the foundations of civilized society that the society of man with free will—free man with the endowed rights, the natural rights of the laws of nature—takes for granted in the civilized world of the western society.
There is no equivalency to measure any comparative between the theology of Christianity, and the dementia of islamism. For the concepts are diametrically opposite. In the theology of man, man is the determinate, the free choice of acceptance, and allowed free choice of rejecting the foundations, the philosophy of Christian mores, morals, and the religious foundations. In the dementia of the ideologies—both islamism and communism—it is not man who has choice. It is not man who has free will. It is not man who has any participation in the rights that in the theocracy of Christianity are endowed on all men by their creator. For in their ideologies, in their relative dementia of dictates, man is but a vassal, a slave, a nonentity, sub-human, chattel that exists only for the appetite and the dictates of the state. They reduce the very essence of mankind from human to subservient. Creating a society where man has no rights, nothing that is his. For all men, are nothing but pawns, the pieces of representation as in a game, where man is but the projection of the theocracy, or the state in which they reside! It is the god little (g) of the state that is their creator, not any power of intelligent design. Refuting and replacing man’s liberty, condemning his freedom, replacing it with the simple reality man’s life is condemned to the dictates of the ‘totalitarian sovereignty’ of the power of government.
Our plight is something new, something original. As a nation many dangers have assaulted our sovereignty. Wars have been fought, revolutions have occurred, and even the basic foundations, the cornerstone of our nation’s design changed in our history. Yet one thing has remained constant. This nation, this wonder, this exceptional miracle is a nation with the genesis of ideals. A nation at its beginning based on a design of simple purity unknown, nor attempted by any other. That simple philosophy, that man and his preservation of free will, and endowed rights are and always will be the only duty of government.
Many men have understood this miracle. IN such they have provided to our history the anthology—those who by their writing and reason reflect this nation’s design—providing us foundations becoming part of our nation’s culture.
One simple concept, a pledge to this nation, says so much and is so precise most citizens today know nothing of its wonder. One such anthology is this simple refrain:
I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
What a simple refrain. That as citizens of this nation we pledge our allegiance, not to the flag as some tell us, but to the representation of what that wondrous flag represents. For in that flag there are the stripes, each one representing the original thirteen colonies, the states that by their own ratification accepted and chose union with this nation’s design.
In the blue of the representation of those who joined and each in their own ratification became one with the nation. Each sparkling star is a representation of that state, a member of the union.
To the Republic for which it stands! How in a nation with the design of understanding, knowledge, and experience of the dangers of democracy, choosing a republic have those in our nation today advance the hypocrisy of we are a democracy. When it is the idealism of a republic and the dementia of the mob, a democracy are diametrically opposed.
Is there any more important foundation than the addition of the refrain; ‘One nation under God?’ For what in this nation is not of the theocracy of Christianity? For it is the reality that man is but what he is—man—that is the acknowledgement of the Christian religion, and it is the acknowledgement of man—the human characteristics of man’s history, and his actions—that are the foundation of our form of…enumerations…the understanding of man’s relationship with government power.
Many mistake the word as used of indivisible. Many advance it implies it means that our nation’s states would, submit, and comply with the dictates of the federal sovereignty, the totalitarianism of a centralized government. This is fallacious as many of the lies those who destroy this nation advance. For it means it is a covenant between the federal government, and those same states. As such there is responsibility of each. The states by this design are to government themselves, without the intrusion of federal intervention. The national government equally restricted, the power of centralized government enumerated and restricted by the design of our contract of agreement. If as in any contract, each party upholds their part of the bargain, the contract is valid and indivisible. This is agreed to by all of the participating parties, a valid contract.
That final little explanative, in such few words says so much of this nation’s foundations; ‘with liberty and justice for all.’
If there are two words requiring mutual inclusive use together, I can’t think of any greater than liberty, and justice. For in our society, it is liberty of all men, and the rights of all men that is the foundation, the cornerstone, the philosophy of our society. As such, knowing the nature of man—the characteristics that makes man, man—two realities have been confirmed. First that man advances the same tendencies as the ‘law of the jungle’ where might is right. Secondly that as fearful as man is, there is one greater danger which makes the danger of man but insignificant, government. For it is government and government alone possessing the power and the capacity to create legislation, develop laws, and dictate even the demise of their own citizens—nothing else.
Our nation’s design—that government is compelled to protect and preserve the natural rights—and the liberties of man. Understanding that it is only through using a system of laws, and the application of a court—the English concept—that this can be accomplished. It is the basis of who we are. That we as a Republic, use the laws to preserve our nation, as we also use that same vehicle to preserve the individual liberties, protect man’s freedom from the intrusion of government, or even fellow men.
Key among that simple philosophy is that all men must be equal. All men in the eyes of the laws, in the application of the courts must be equal. It also is the basis of our society. For in our society the ‘possibilities’ of all men, to be equal—must by definition, accept that the results of the efforts of men will not result in equality—a fact as constant as any law of nature known in the universe.
It is not our problem in knowing what a miraculous nation, a nation of a miracle of design, a philosophical nation of ideals and principles never know in mankind’s history. We are the result of man’s advancement, his achievement, and his reasoning—and thinking—of the western cannon known since the literacy of man.
Yet today we do not as a citizenry think. For we as a nation do not know who we are. We also do not know the reality of our foundations, our concepts, or our very essence.
In this nation today we have kicked the religion of our society out of our academic environment; and wonder why we have no morals, no mores, and certainly no religion in our society. Today we have more people, who have smoked marijuana retarding their minds ability to think, that those who have read the Bible forcing the mind to do just that…think.
Today we have those who are no more American than any alien from a terrestrial environment of another world, lying and swearing allegiance to this nation with no more conviction that spitting on the sidewalk. While us as the citizens of this nation allow them to vote and effect our nation direction.
Problems can only be solves with solutions. Solutions only occur when the problems are identified. In a nation where even the fundamental process of reason, the ability to think, has been so retarded, where is our beginning—but to engage our minds and reason—in order to right the ship and correct this nation’s path!
Is the demise of America as simple as Americans refuse to think?