Our quest for self-esteem

Most of us desire to have positive self-esteem, and because this is true, we find that when our self-esteem has been hurt or damaged, we endeavor to try to fix it, so that we can feel better about ourselves and our situation.  Therefore, when we have done wrong to someone and internally recognize that wrong, but are unable to receive from the person that we have hurt, that they subsequently forgive us, or are willing to work with us to correct such so as to work things out, this damages our self-esteem because we often feel that we cannot get back our self-respect, if the other person doesn’t value or respect us enough, to give us the fair opportunity to return to the level that we had previously been accustomed to with them.  This is why it is essential in any interaction, that has gone wrong, of which, we recognize that we are the ones primarily in error, that we are to a large extent, at the mercy of the other, for we seek their forgiveness and acceptance, that when received, will thus reinvigorate our self-esteem and get us back to the place that we desire to be.  Indeed, this is why it has been said, “to err is human, to forgive divine,” which represents the seminal fact that we yearn for acceptance from our peers, especially when we have let them down, and desire greatly to be accepted again, to be therefore back in their good graces, as if no wrong had been committed.

So too, there are those times when we do not receive forgiveness or pardon for the errors and wrongs that we have done, and when we believe that it does not seem possible that we will ever get that forgiveness so that we can re-obtain that self-esteem -- a part of us will often wish to avenge this loss, by striking out therefore against society in a way and manner, in which we can re-validate ourselves so as to get our self-esteem back.  In other words, when we have done something wrong, and get no sympathy or forgiveness in return, there is a tendency for some of us, to only mope about for a finite amount of time, before determining that because society is so unforgiving, that we may as well do what we have to do, to make our mark upon that society, to our satisfaction.

To believe that somehow self-esteem isn’t all that important is to misunderstand human nature.  Because we are social creatures it is vital for just about all of us, to be approved by the society that we are a member of, and in consideration that all of us are imperfect and that learning is a process, that can easily entail missteps and mistakes, we yearn to be a member of a society, that will take into consideration that though we may have done wrong, that we are not always in the wrong, but have within us, the capability of doing things right, and when we receive encouragement to do the right thing and are not judged too harshly when in error, this thereby provides us with the room to grow, and the opportunity then to reclaim our self-esteem for our benefit, as well as this being of benefit to society, at large.

“No right is held more sacred…”

The following quotation comes from the Supreme Court ruling of 1891, of Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Botsford, of which, the opinion of the Supreme Court stated the following: “No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law.”  That is to say, each one of us who lives in America, is in control of their own personhood and therefore has the right to be left alone, subject to no interference from others, unless so superseded by that which represents the clear and unquestionable authority of law.

Yet, somehow we live in a day and age, in which our right to privacy and to be left alone seems to be assailed by not only secretive and not-so-secretive governmental agencies but also by invasive private enterprise corporations, as well.  Therefore, this signifies that the belief that a man’s home is their castle, or that an individual should simply be permitted to be about their business without having to justify or explain such, and to thereby not be monitored, nor to be regulated, seems to no longer be part and parcel of the American experience, whatsoever.

Indeed, those who do not seemingly have the right to their own sovereignty, are by definition, not free.  While it is true that people can relinquish whatever freedoms that are theirs to other parties, this though needs to be done without coercion and voluntarily; for it is always true that our freedom to our own personhood, is our unalienable right, that should not be assailed by any other entity or governmental agency, except under the exigencies of the law, properly applied.

We live in a day and age in which the people are constantly ceding ground of that which is unalienable, through the invasive ability of high-technology monitoring to know just about everything about us, either unwittingly or wittingly.  While it is bad enough, that this information is being stored and perused, it is even worse when such information is interfering with our privacy in a way and manner that we are compromised or exposed or coerced so as to be possibly placed in the unenviable position to conform with whatever governmental agencies or other enterprises desire from us or suffer the ill consequences, so of.

To be free from interference from others, and to go about our business as our personal business, without meddling from outside agencies, should be our protected right, as American citizens, and further to the point this right is unalienable, for if we do not have the right to be left alone, or to have our privacy, and to thereby own our thoughts, then we are certainly not free.  This is why it is important that appropriate legislation be passed that protects the general public from governmental agencies of all sorts, as well as from private enterprise, so that in its effect, we, as a people, remain the unquestionable masters of our identity, and that all those who interfere in such or intend to interfere, are thereby held accountable, for the lasting protection of our own personhood.

"My body, my choice"

When it comes to pro-choice slogans, we find that “my body, my choice,” is mainly known for women believing wholeheartedly that they are the masters of their own bodies and therefore, the choice of abortion is theirs to make, and should not be precluded by governmental interference, whatsoever.  It should be added, that for all those who truly believe that their body, therefore provides them with the choice to do with their body what they so desire, that this then would obviously encompass many more choices than just abortion.  For instance, those who claim self-ownership of their body would logically believe then that what we so choose to ingest into our body, that is either licit or illicit is our choice as well.  So too, for those who determine that they no longer desire to be in this world, that choice would be theirs to own.  Also, for those desiring to monetize their body by the presentation of such, or in consensual engagements with another for a monetary price or its equivalency, would own that right, too.

In other words, my body being my choice, must include the complete autonomy of that body, and the decisions that we make, good or bad, wise or unwise, that we thereupon decide to do with the body that we own is at our discretion.  While society certainly has its role to play, and whereas that society is definitely entitled to weigh in as to what it believes is the best usage of our body, it does not though, trump our own individual decision-making as an adult, because as long as what we do with our body does not clearly interfere with or supersede another person’s unalienable right, then our ownership of our body trumps whatever society may seemingly prefer for us to do with it.

Indeed, this world would be better off if more people actually believed that their body was their choice, for to believe that it is not, reflects that our body is subservient to some other entity, such as the government or society, and therefore it is up to these entities to determine what we may or may not do with our body, which should clearly be seen as an infringement upon our sovereignty.  That is to say, either we are the masters of our own bodies or else we are not, for there cannot be any in-between or equivocation upon this important issue.

It is vital to remember, that our existence did not come forth from our government, nor did it come forth from society, but rather all of us were created by the very same Creator, of which, that Creator has gifted each and every one of us with the free-will to be about our business, and therefore what we decide to do with our body, and the decisions that we make, is entirely within our domain and remains our lifetime responsibility. In life, people and societies are entitled to have their say, but at the end of the day, it is our body, and therefore our choice, what we will or will not do with such, and those that recognize this are the very same that understand that with this awesome freedom, comes consequences, that we are therefore the accountable owners of.

Carried interest is not taxed appropriately

When it comes to our progressive income tax structure and taxation, it must be said that our tax system is fundamentally failing the American public, for the very wealthy entities that should be paying a much higher percentage of their monies into our tax system, are the very same, that are quite gifted at avoiding paying their full freight.  What is especially annoying and very telling, is that a tiny portion of Americans are able to take advantage of the carried interest loophole to pay thereby not even close to what they should be paying in regards to a fair and appropriate tax. The entities taking advantage of this carried interest, are private equity associations, venture capital groups, and hedge funds – which represent not only people and entities that the vast majority of Americans are not intimately familiar with but also represent the very institutions that could readily pay their fair share in taxes but do not, because of this carried interest exception.

The long and short of carried interest is that the compensation that these hedge fund members get, is somehow re-categorized into representing long-term capital gains as compared to ordinary income, of which, ordinary income for hi-income people is at a substantially higher tax rate than capital gains.  So, because the maximum long-term capital gain is a mere 20%, whereas ordinary income is taxed as high as 37%, those that are in the hedge fund business are somehow permitted to have their income categorized as a capital gain, which thereupon provides them with the savings in aggregate, of billions of tax dollars.

The crux of the problem with carried interest and why it needs to be eliminated posthaste is that the percentage of Americans that are able to take advantage of carried interest is minuscule, but the fact that these institutions are able to utilize carried interest to substantially reduce their taxes, represents as reported by ourfinancialsecurity.org, “between $1.4 billion and $18 billion annually,” of savings in taxes -- that private equity companies, venture capitalists, and hedge funds are able to circumvent, to the ultimate unfairness of ordinary Americans.

Indeed, for all those who want to know as to whether or not our tax system is fair, look no further than to the carried interest loophole, in which the very few are the beneficiaries at the expense of the people and this government of, for, and by the people.  The fact that this is so, clearly represents that those who have lots of money and influence are able to get their way, again and again; whereas, those who play by the rules are burdened ever more with taxes, and the deficits that this government consistently runs, are placed upon the shoulders of the current generation, as well as generations, yet unborn.  In truth, when it comes to tax reform, it is an absolute certainty, that if the carried interest exception cannot be eliminated from our tax code, then a tax code that is fair and progressive does not truly exist, for in this nation, because of all the tax exceptions so made on behalf of the biggest and most powerful corporations, as well as to individuals of massive wealth, these privileged entities do not pay their fair taxation share.

Should Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) at .08% be per se DUI?

In October of 2000, President Clinton signed into law that the new limit of .08% BAC would be considered to be per se impairment with significant penalties for all drivers that were at this limit or exceeding such.  The first thing to be noted is that because the law states that .08% is impairment, it does not matter, nor is it relevant, how well that a given person conducts themselves, or demonstrates their control of their faculties because per se means “the thing speaks for itself.”  So then, drivers who have a blood alcohol level of .08% or higher are Driving Under the Influence (DUI).  The second thing to note is that back in the 1970s, the BAC rate for impairment was .15%, which bespeaks the question as to how did it come to this current point of a DUI being considerably lower.

When it comes to per se impairment, the very first thing that needs to be determined through scientific tests that accurately measure such is whether or not, .08% is actually impairment, or whether or not that number should be adjusted either higher or lower.  That is to say, as it currently stands, impairment is .08% BAC but since this law was passed in 2000, and scientists and institutions are always in the process of improvement and advancement, it would certainly seem to be high time to determine or re-determine what is or is not impairment because the legal definition of alcoholic impairment should be accurate and without equivocation.

It could be said and it should be said that alcohol is going to affect different people in different ways, but ignoring that, for the simplicity of a blood alcohol test, is perhaps fine, as long as there has been a series of tests, consisting of a control group who have had no alcohol as compared to the test group who have achieved a specific amount of a certain blood alcohol level, of which, this testing measures specifically that which is pertinent to the nature of driving.  That is to say, if we conclude that the scientists or legislators back in the 1970s were clearly unqualified or unscientific or just plain wrong on what actual driver impairment was -- which is why .15% was considered at that time to be impairment, as contrasted to something considerably lower, then it has to be taken into account, that the current limit of .08% may not itself, be any more true or accurate.

Indeed, the way that the DUI law seems to work, is that there has clearly been a concerted effort to lower the DUI rate to .08% not so much because the roads will be safer, but as a means for those who believe that drinking a little alcohol and then getting behind a wheel, should not be permitted and that the punishment for those doing so, should be significant – when, in fact, when it comes to impairment of any sort, the very first thing to figure out, is the true dividing line between impairment and non-impairment and to believe that the line is .08% should be scientifically proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and not presumed.

“Safety is our number one priority” and other lies

We are told through media of all types from some of the biggest for-profit corporations that, for instance, our safety is their number one concern, or that protecting our credit is their highest priority, or that their care for the environment is their priority number one, and so on and so forth.  Yet, as sweet as those words may sound, they are fundamentally not in accordance with the reality of the situation, especially in consideration, that the largest corporations in America, have not only a Board of Directors to answer to, but also the stockholders that collectively care a heck of a lot more about profits and growth, and not so much are concerned about safety or any other activities that would seem to take away from that profit and growth.

In a capitalistic society, the tradeoff between money and safety typically leans heavily to the profit side. Therefore, those in management want only to do what they have to do, to maintain some semblance of being safe in their activities. Though they may well have a department that addresses such, that department does not run the company but must itself toe the line within the company or else its funding or relevancy will be compromised.  Indeed, the call for safety as being the number one priority is often no more than public relations, in which, the hope is that by saying the right words, or in being apologetic, or in promising to do better in the future, that this will make what has occurred, to be perceived as nothing much more than a one-time thing or considered then to be a tempest within a teapot.

It is vital that companies have values, and that these values have a necessary balance between the lust for profits and doing the right thing by society, and thereby protecting the general public, as well as the employees of a given corporation from undue harm.  However, when it comes to gross margins, bonuses, stock options, and the focus of a company’s energy and effort, we find that again and again, that which could be done to bring forth more safety, safer products, or greater concern for environmental hazards created by corporations, and so forth, that doing the right thing, almost always takes a back seat to profit.  This thus signifies that governmental agencies as well as journalists have a responsibility to hold to account these mighty corporations, for when they do not, all we get are apologies, and seldom do we get, the changes that are required for these corporations to actually be a good member in standing for society, at large.

Indeed, the more that we hear about how safety is the number one priority of a corporation, the more that we should demand of that company the proof that this is not only the actual mindset of such, but also all the evidence that would substantiate such, for when this is lacking, it is only fair to state that the words so being spoken, are empty and devoid of substance, and therefore these words are no more than misdirection and in their effect, an insult to the general public.

The desire for security often comes at the expense of liberty

The most common way for any governmental institution to aggrandize onto itself ever more power is to convince the general public that such power is necessary in order to best protect them – therefore, the people must relinquish some of their liberty for the security which the government thus provides for them.  Oftentimes, this is structured in a way and manner in which the government sells the story that these liberties so being sacrificed are not only for the greater good but that such a sacrifice is only for a finite amount of time; however, experience tells us that liberties that have been forfeited seldom come back to the fore, and even when they do, those liberties have effectively been hollowed out.  This thus signifies that there must be a reasonable balance between security and liberty, for that government that has the power to provide lock-tight safety, is the very same government that has then in its hands firm control of our most precious liberties.

There needs to be a fair balance between security and liberty, for governments have a habit of enacting more and more measures that are meant to be for the citizen’s safety, of which, those measures so taken are in many a case, far more intrusive, than what reasonableness requires.  After all, when the powers that be are above the law, it doesn’t matter much to them, how much liberty is thereupon left to the general public, for those who are the power brokers, have what they desire to have, typically at the expense of the people.  Further to the point, to have strong security in place necessitates, therefore, the people being monitored and those that are in power, decide then what is best to activate that security, per what they envision, which probably will not be in harmonic conformance with enumerated Constitutional powers.

The crux of the problem with sacrificing some degree of liberty for security is that this often becomes a slippery slope, of which, in the beginning, such sacrifice doesn’t appear to be any real big deal, but as time goes on, the erosion of liberties gets even worse, and slowly those that are the people, that are supposed to have a government, of, for, and by the people, find themselves no longer being governed by the consent of the governed, but rather are perceived as nothing much more than subjects, for the government to thereby do with them, as that unanswerable government best sees fit.

So too, when the government knows everything about us, but that same government is opaque to the general public, then the balance between the government and the people is out of whack; thereupon leading to all sorts of abuses, for by the lack of liberty, the people no longer have recourse to justice, for that has essentially been sacrificed to safety, of which, that security having been unequally applied, benefits not really the people, but rather benefits those that are its actuators, so that these elite entities, have gained the security to know that they cannot be successfully assailed, and the people have not the liberty anymore to prevent such.

“Laws against freedom and dignity”

The esteemed thinker and author Thomas Szasz believes that laws that protect an individual from their self, should be called “laws against freedom and dignity”  -- which whenever enacted by legislators thereby creates victims without any real crime.  While the government can legislate all sorts of laws on behalf of public safety and order, it has to be acknowledged, that if we are indeed sovereign within our own personhood, that we therefore should have the right to do with our personhood whatever that it is that we so desire, as long as it not harming other societal members.  In other words, those who are inclined to recreational drug use, or are in possession of illicit drugs, or are gambling at unsanctioned venues, or have engaged with consensual sex with another individual for a monetary price or its equivalency, aren’t actually hurting the public by that behavior, and therefore should not be recognized as lawbreakers.

There are indeed lots of decisions that people make every day, that are not seemingly of benefit to that person, yet, these same people have or should have the volition to still make those decisions.  Further to the point, things that certain people do, may not meet with our individual approval, but the freedom that each of us has to conduct our business in the way and manner that we best see fit, should and ought to be ours to own.  That is to say, what we say and do, is our freedom; whereas, those who desire to conform to the prevailing norms of the day, are entitled to do so, but should not have the right to coerce others to conform to those societal norms.

To live in a “Nanny state” is to live in a state, in which it is the government’s business what we do in private, in addition to what we do in public, and the more laws that are legislated and pass, that infringe upon our individual sovereignty, the more freedom that we have sacrificed to the state.   Those things that are currently classified as “victimless crimes,” which thereby means that those committing those crimes, will duly suffer the penalty for doing so, need to be revoked or overturned, because all crimes so classified against one’s self, or regarding voluntary actions between two or more adults, should not be seen as criminal behavior, whatsoever.

To believe that we need the state to protect us from possibly harming ourselves, may be in its intent, a good thing, but it should be admitted, that adults need to have the agency to make their own decisions, to which, they are entitled to make decisions that may or may not meet with orthodox societal approval.  To believe somehow that this nation would be better off if we all thought and behaved the same is thereby a belief that conformity is the highest order and therefore the most desirable of things; whereas, the truth of the matter is that those that actually utilize their brains to think, recognize that free will is a gift to us by our Creator,  and to exercise such, is our unalienable right.

Censorship online and our freedom of speech

Somehow, our government seems slow in understanding that just because something is written or shown as a post or video online, that this is considered to be different than our First Amendment right to free speech.  In other words, those who use social media or things of that general ilk, have in recent times been subject to having their free speech removed from the public square, such as we have seen done with Facebook posts, (Twitter)X, and also with Google products.  The government has taken the attitude that those, for example, that have a different theory of the origin of COVID-19, or in regards to “stop the steal,” or other areas of import to the general public, have the right to determine what is or isn’t legitimate, and therefore that government through the pressure that it exerts on corporate entities, or in conjunction to a quid pro quo, censor certain posts on the internet, which is a violation of free speech.

We read at ncsu.edu that “Freedom of speech is the right of a person to articulate opinions and ideas without interference, retaliation or punishment from the government.” Yet, this government has shown in recent years that it will interfere, it will retaliate, and it will punish those exercising their free speech through the Internet, again and again.  Look, it has to be recognized that those who desire to express their opinion or have the belief that the origin of COVID-19 actually came from a “gain of function” laboratory in Wuhan, China, that accidentally or irresponsibly released the coronavirus are permitted to express that in conversations with one another but have been subject to that viewpoint being censored when doing so on social media.

All those who believe that for the good of this nation, we need to censor more words and videos that some people find to be uncomfortable or the orthodox government finds to be an inconvenience, or that are considered to be outside the narrative that mass media wishes to propagate -- is thereby a form of censorship and should be clearly seen as a violation of the First Amendment of our freedom of speech.  The fact that some of the biggest and most powerful social media companies routinely kowtow to the government is a reflection that their pursuit of profit is their main concern, and when the government makes it clear to these companies that their disobedience to their dictates or preferences has not been taken seriously, these corporations are quick to recognize that their bottom line may well be negatively impacted, which would come to the dismay of their principal stockholders and corporate executives.

We live in a hi-technology age, in which the immediacy of social media posts or videos posted online, is a preferred method of getting across to one’s followers, what is desired to be expressed, per a given entity’s wishes, and to have that suppressed and censored by the government is a disservice to what this nation is supposed to represent, because posts online that do not violate any of the narrow conditions of our First Amendment Rights, should not ever be censored and the fact that they are being censored reflects that this government has aggrandized onto itself, powers that are not legitimately theirs at the expense of the people and their freedom of speech.

Humankind’s biggest loss

There are many things that humankind could do to help make this world a better place but somehow they fail to do so, time and time again.  The proximate reason why this is so is basically that often those who are in the most influential and powerful positions in society, are the very same, who consistently ignore that small, still voice within, and instead believe and thereby behave in a manner that all that really matters, is this material existence, and therefore have just an ordinary consciousness, and thereby ignore or put to the side, that their real origin is divine.

Indeed, either we have been created as spiritual beings by our Creator, temporarily housed within a physical body, to thereby allow us to prove our loyalty and wisdom to that which created us by doing good one to another; or we can fundamentally ignore that, and pretty much see this world any way that we so see fit, because as free-will beings we are permitted to do that very thing.  However, those who turn away or turn off the voice of God, and therefore exist solely upon their own consciousness, have made a decision that could have serious consequences for them and those that they interact with.

Certainly, one of the main objectives that we should have here on earth is to search for truth, and in that search, we need to thus honor that truth, and by doing this diligently, we will re-open the door that permits us to comprehend that our true existence should strive to be in harmony with that which created us, thereby signifying that all that we say and do that’s in conformance with our Creator, is good, and that which is not, is going to be primarily in error and will present us with troubles, that must at some point, be successfully dealt with.

There are far too many people that are enamored of this world, but spend little time, contemplating the Creator of such, and thereby the purpose of such.  In this world, we will be tested, and tested thoroughly, and those that are cognizant of this and wish to pass such a test will thereby conduct themselves in a way and manner that will be beneficial to not only their own self but to society, at large.  On the other hand, those that consistently ignore this, or prefer to not pay close attention are going to be prone to making the types of errors, which will be of consequence to them, which is their loss, for the avenue of enlightenment is freely available to all.

We live in a world, in which, those who overly identify with the physical and the enticements that gravitate them to certain behaviors, are going to lose, because they are concentrating on the wrong thing, for humankind, too often, has through their own volition or ignorance, chosen to fall into ordinary consciousness, and thereby have forsaken that which is eternal, in preference to that which is temporal, and many of those, will only recognize their error near the end of their earthly existence or not at all.  It is to our lasting loss when we don’t recognize who and what we really are, for that of which we are made, is eternal and has an everlasting innate desire to re-align itself consciously with its immaculate Creator.

The continued exploitation of humankind

The world is often an unfair and unequal place, of which, there are some that proselytize that this is the way that it has to be, especially in consideration that what we get out of life, is not only what we put into life, but also that in capitalistic societies that there are going to always be unequal outcomes, for such is necessary in order to incentivize those that are the innovators and entrepreneurial, over those that do not have the same sort of mindset, or are content with their basic lot in life or just don’t have the right stuff.

In actuality, few would quibble with some getting more and others getting less, if the overall societal pie, was constantly growing, and the table that humankind thereby eats at, was basically inclusive, and not exclusive.  Yet, when we take a good look at society, we readily comprehend that the fairness, and equality expected under the law as well as opportunity, does not, in the biggest matters of importance, actually exist.

We find that there are those who are quite adept at exploiting humankind, and apparently have no real issue in doing so, despite the fact that all of us are equally created by the very same Creator, and therefore one would think, deserving therefore of our fair consideration.  Rather, the exploitation that goes on, starts firstly, by what humankind has relied upon, again and again, which is not great ideas who time has come, but rather force, done through the state or corporate interests of such, through the aegis of the military, the police, private security, and things of that general ilk.  In other words, when the people are rising up in protest against, for example, their work conditions, or overall fairness, the response far too often is not really to listen to their complaints and thereby come to some reasonable accommodation, but the preference is to sustain the exploitation and force those that will not conform to conform.

Additionally, we live in a day and time in which the coin of the realm, is money, as issued by the government, and those who have fair access to such, are best able to live decent lives; whereas, those who do not have fair access to such, or are constantly short, are left in a highly vulnerable position, which makes them much easier to exploit and to take advantage of, because half a loaf, is always going to be better than no loaf at all.

Finally, humankind suffers from all sorts of foibles, of which, those who through the modern-day usage of social surveillance or who just pay close attention to the habits of others, are best able to exploit those weaknesses, so that if distraction is the preferred method of disengaging someone from complaining or protesting, then mindless entertainment of all sorts is provided to them, at a very cheap price.  When that isn’t enough then governance makes sure that licit and illicit substances are readily available that will capably addle the mind, thereby providing those that are weak with that which will, placate or neutralize them and therefore preclude them from rising up.

Indeed, until the exploitation of the other is legislated out of existence, or reduced considerably, those seeking life, liberty, and happiness, will invariably come up short, again and again.

“It is an old strategy of tyrants to delude their victims into fighting their battles for them”

The above quotation comes not from some revolutionary radical but rather is part of the address so made by President Roosevelt at Madison Square Garden on October 31, 1936.  The reason why FDR said what he said, was because of the pushback that he was getting from certain segments of corporate interests in regards to the Social Security payroll plan, so formulated to support workers in their retirement years, and of which, the employers of those workers were thus obligated by federal law to pay their monetary payroll portion to the Social Security Administration.

Indeed, a significant amount of working people, in general, don’t really know their rights or understand necessarily the legislative laws so proposed and passed, therefore signifying that those corporate interests that could proselytize that monies being withheld from an employee’s paycheck were actually detrimental to that employee, could thus get that employee to help fight their battle.  So too, employers that could convince their workers that Social Security was un-American in the sense that it seems to reflect some degree of socialism within this nation, would also help to sell the narrative that the employers desired to push.

Anytime there is something new and innovative, that hasn’t previously been part and parcel of the employees' positive experience, it is vital that this government provide the necessary information so that those that would benefit the most from having a robust Social Security, would understand that the benefits of such, would far outweigh its negatives. This means that as the President and in considering that it was the administration policy to see that legislation so passed and subsequently enacted, should not, therefore, be undermined or counteracted by corporate agitators, that it would behoove that President to have his say, so that those that would be the intended beneficiaries, would subsequently understand the importance of reaping the security of having monies provided to them, calculated on their work history, which would serve to support them in their retirement years.

It has to be admitted that in a capitalistic system, that those with the capital have an immense advantage over those who are employed to work for the capital holders, so that it is this government’s obligation to help level the playing field by supporting the working people of this nation, for the greater good of this nation -- which signifies that it is in the best interests of this country to see that those that are gainfully employed are entitled to a wage of substance, and further to the point, for their years of labor, are entitled to Social Security benefits, to be of material aid to them in their retirement years.

Those then that are fixated upon profit above all else, are the very same, who are not only reluctant to fairly share the spoils of success, but regrettably have the attitude that once a worker’s utility has been used up, they don’t have a real interest in seeing that they contribute to their welfare.  FDR recognized this sentiment for what it was and made it his point, then, to fight for the common man in the sure knowledge that wealth concentrated solely in the hands of the few, leads to the tyranny of those few, at the expense of the workers that they so employ.

“Justice being taken away, then, what are kingdoms but great robberies?”

The above quotation comes to us by the incomparable Saint Augustine, and the meaning behind these sage words, is that when principalities and kingdoms conduct their business without justice, that because of their scale and size, these should be seen as great robberies upon the people, of which, further compounding this injustice, that principality or kingdom typically does such, with total impunity.

A given nation is only as good as its governance and when that governance is consistently unfair, unequal, unjust, and discriminatory, in which certain peoples and personages are the favored few -- as contrasted to the majority of the people who are the unfavored many, then this is in its effect, a great robbery on the people, made worse by the fact that those who are persecuted and subsequently incarcerated or punished, are seldom the biggest robbers, but rather are robbers on a much lesser scale.

No country deserves the moniker of being great if it is not fair, just, and equal to those who are the citizens of that nation.  Indeed, whenever our government lies to us, deceives, us, keeps unnecessary secrets, and hides what it is doing supposedly on behalf of the people, by saying that it cannot disclose necessary information to the general public or an independent agency, because of its need to protect the national security and therefore is not forthcoming to its citizens, this then is a country that is operating not under the consent of the governed, but rather is operative under the consent of those that are its true actuators -- typically accomplished for the benefit of well-connected individuals, entities, agencies, and corporations.

That nation that truly desires to be great, must recognize intuitively that it needs to be a nation of justice, and when it is clear to the citizenry that there is no justice for them, there will not be any lasting peace, because when a people know that not all is right, they will chafe at the chains that have been unjustly foisted upon them.

The more unjust a nation is the more dissent, disunion, and incivility there will be, and no matter how disciplinary that nation’s governance is, we find that a people who are oppressed, cannot rest until they see that there will be justice.  So too, the hypocrisy of “don’t do the crime, if you can’t do the time” is demonstrated by governments that commit injustices upon the people, again and again, but hold themselves above the law; whereas, the people are left to feel the full fury of that same law upon them.

That government that governs best, is that government that is most just and most transparent in the words and actions so taken on behalf of the people, that they are meant to dutifully serve.  Those who are good stewards of the people’s needs are the foundation of what a proper government should be, for in actuality a nation is only as good as those who are its leaders, who are first and foremost, diligent in their duty to do right by those that they serve, by being just, by being fair, and by being accountable and open to the people.

James Madison on the “loss of liberty at home”

The future 4th President of the United States wrote to the future 3rd President of the United States that “Perhaps it is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to provisions against. danger real or pretended from abroad.”  Indeed, our founding fathers of this nation were incredibly prescient and knew not only human nature, but also understood the inner workings of the national governance and did not wish to see the United States of America devolve into being an oppressor of the people, but rather desired to see that this nation was in fair conformance to being a nation of, for, and by the people, so as to protect best the citizen’s unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

We live in a day and age, in which, those who are our leaders, are far too prone to sell to us the same tired story again and again, that there are enemies abroad that are so dangerous to our way of life and democracy, that we need to address them forthrightly in their foreign lands through sanctions or war, or both; and in order to best protect our citizenry at home, our government needs more and more robust governmental powers, thereby signifying that the people need to sacrifice some of their liberties for the security of this nation as well as for the protection of their own personhood.

We are told by our government that we should trust that they always have the peoples’ best interests in mind, and therefore the legislative laws and Executive Orders that are actuated, are prudent and for our own good, as well as necessary for our security, of which, some of these laws are subsequently sold to the general public as being for a finite amount of time, or until the crisis has passed, but often are re-purposed in a way and manner, that these laws and Executive Orders are never repealed or to suffer expiration, at all.

We want to believe that our government has our best interests in mind, but because so much of what the government does is secretive and therefore not for purview or review to the general public, it is therefore impossible to know as whether or not our government is being forthright and honest with us;  because as it stands this type of governance lends itself to the people sacrificing more and more of their liberties and freedom, under the guise that this is necessary for homeland security, without the people knowing how true or untrue that this actually is.

To place trust in any government or any personage in which that trust is not warranted is the same as giving up some portion of our freedom, and the more that we cede what has been gifted to us by our Creator to that which deserves it not, the more that we become less citizens with a democratic vote, with fair representation, and more that we devolve into becoming subjects, that are meant to serve the interests of those that are in authority, with the attendant sacrifice of our Constitutional liberty

The necessary takedown of the dominant culture

There are plenty of people who clamor for change, but despite all their hue and cry, we do so find that change is not only slow in coming but that to a large extent, those agitating the most for change, somehow end up becoming compromised by the dominant culture of the day or subsumed by such or just ignored.  Indeed, the bottom line is clear that for change to happen, the dominant culture must either itself be replaced or modified, and if this does not occur, the changes desired will likely be few and far between.

So then, those who are on the margins of society need to recognize that what keeps them marginalized more than anything, is the fact that because they are not part of the dominant culture, they are effectively without a voice, and because they have no voice, the changes that they so richly desire are not going to materialize.  This thus signifies that to make progress in society for the members of such, it has to first be recognized that having a justified cause and believing in that cause is only going to get a collective voice so far, because what has to occur is that to make progress one needs to have a true seat at the table of that which faces off against the effective leaders of society, especially including those that are the power behind the throne.

The fact that in society after society, we see that it is consistently a minority that rules over the majority, seems perplexing, especially in those nations that are democratic in nature, with an equal vote for all.  It doesn’t seem to make sense, that despite democracy, necessary change for the good of that society seems to move at a glacier pace, even when judicial decisions and legislation have been passed, that should bring change, but still, that change does not come, which reflects that those that are the dominant players in society, are expertly adept at navigating and accomplishing what they need to do, so as to maintain their control over the population to their benefit.

It has been said that “Nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come,” but that sentiment is contradicted by the fact that there are plenty of really good ideas that are most definitely timely, but their time never seems to come, because those that are the dominant culture do their level best to counteract these ideas, or dilute them, or delay them.  This means that those who desire change have got to be more targeted in their approach in which they have to be relentless in dealing with the dominant culture, by utilizing all of their various means, so as to exert pressure on those who are the dominant players in order then to have any hope of accomplishing necessary change.  Indeed, those who have power are the very same who are absolutely reluctant to give up any of it, which is why until that power is compromised or negated or negotiated with, change comes very slowly, and the only way to speed up that process is to successfully undermine or overcome that dominant culture.

The government as guardian of our unalienable rights

It has to be said, that disappointingly, many Americans are pretty much clueless about where their unalienable rights originate from, and if put to the test, many of them would indicate that these rights come from their government.  Not only is this answer fundamentally wrong, but such a viewpoint as that is dangerous, because if indeed our unalienable rights came from our governance, then those very same rights, could be taken away from us, by that government, at their whim.  In truth, unalienable rights are indicative that we as human beings are born with those rights. Fortunately, we have a Constitutional government whose primary function is to be the upholder and thereby the guardian of our unalienable rights, and to the degree, that it is not, then such a government as that has betrayed its purpose to the detriment of the people, in whole.

It is important for people to comprehend, that the best government, isn’t necessarily that government that governs least, or that government that desires to be all things to all people, but rather that the best government is one that concentrates upon seeing that its citizenry has its unalienable rights secure and not subject to being infringed upon.  That indeed, is the very purpose of our Constitutional government, to see that we as a people, are free, at liberty, and that the playing field that we thus operate upon, is fair and equally applied to all.

Indeed, it would be far better for the people to understand and to thereby acknowledge that this government is supposed to operate under the consent of the governed, and therefore the people should not be in the thrall of a government that violates their rights, but rather it is up to the people to remind its government and their representatives, that is their duty to act on behalf of the people, so as keep their unalienable rights, secure, no more and no less.  So too, that government of the people, by the people, and for the people, must in its operation therefore be mindful that to lose focus of its purpose, or to aggrandize onto itself powers that are not enumerated for that government, is a betrayal of that Constitution.

Unfortunately, there is the Constitution as written, and then there is the application of those powers in actuality, of which, as time has gone on, more and more power has been ceded by the people, for whatever reasons, wittingly or unwittingly, to that government, which is less and less answerable to the people, and further compounds its legitimacy by acting on its own, far too often without appropriate oversight, without transparency, and without accountability to the people.  Therefore, it is critical for the people to remember, that its government is not supposed to be a power onto itself, but rather it is supposed to be the guardian and thereby the protector of our unalienable rights, which when done correctly permits us to have quality lives of purpose and happiness.  Instead, we live in a day and age, in which, many see their government as a force that talks a good game, but cares not a whit about being the guardian of the people’s rights, but rather prefers to do whatever it pleases, while desiring only that the people be obedient, and to not worry so much about their supposed unalienable rights.

The undercount of those who are in poverty in America

The one thing about governments that can be said for a certainty is that they absolutely love statistics and therefore they keep track of all sorts of stats, not so much to do something constructive about such, where this is most needed, but rather as simply a means to keep a good tally of how that society is doing.  Regarding poverty in America, census.gov tells us that 37.9 million people in America were part of the official poverty rate in 2022.  However, that number of people does not count any of the estimated 1.23 million people who were incarcerated in prisons, of which, the overwhelming majority of those prisoners were either in poverty before their incarceration or because there is typically no reasonable means to make a decent wage in prison, they are in poverty while in prison, signifying that an additional 1.23 million peoples are effectively in poverty as well, though not counted as such, by the United States Census Bureau.

It doesn’t take a sagacious person to understand that to a meaningful extent, those who are in poverty are the very same who are going to have a strong inclination to commit crimes, because those who are without fair opportunity and hope, aren’t going to be vested into being a good citizen. This would seem to strongly imply that a reduction in those who are currently in poverty, would help to reduce the number of people committing crimes and therefore would diminish the number of people being incarcerated, which a sensible person, would surely be in favor of supporting.

Indeed, to somehow believe that crime is arbitrary and that those who are locked up consist of a fair reflection of the income and assets categories of this nation, is woefully inaccurate.  In fact, it is those who are the least amongst us, in the sense of having fair access to the desired accouterments that help make life good, who are overrepresented in our prison population, because they do not have, what they so desire to have, and because they do not believe that there is a legit way to gain access to such, take it upon themselves, to take shortcuts to get what they so desire, which is bad for society, and when violence or coercion is used, even worse.

So too, as they say, idle hands are the devil’s workshop, which reflects that because incarceration is not cost-free in America, and thus costs the American people a considerable sum of money, for the expressed purpose of getting certain people off of the streets, that it would therefore behoove this nation, to come up with sensible work programs, that would not only provide income to those that most need it, but also would permit this nation to do something constructive about the infrastructure which is in disrepair all over this country.  After all, the fact of the matter is that those who work, especially at a living wage, are always going to be less inclined to commit crime, because they are busy and occupied with the work that they are so doing and getting paid for, of which, the more that any segment of this population can buy into the belief that America is truly the land of the free, the brave, and of hope, the better it will be for society, at large.

Hopelessness leads to the destruction of self

When a person has lost hope, for whatever reason or reasoning, that person has placed themselves into a position that is almost for a certainty not going to produce good results; for those without hope, are the very same, that have given up on their own self because believing their situation appears hopeless to them, aren’t going to be engaged to do much of anything that would truly alleviate their hopelessness, and are thereby prone to indulging in whatever substances that they can obtain that relieves them, at least for a while, from that feeling of hopelessness, through drugs of all types, or mindless entertainment.  Those without hope, are therefore not really living, but are, at best, just existing, for they often have no purpose, no drive, and no realistic goals.

The main crux of the problem with hopelessness is that those who are without hope, are typically unable to obtain or to generate the escape velocity to jettison themselves away from hopelessness into actually having hope, and because they cannot accomplish this, there are in what appears to be a never-ending cycle of despair, lack of self-esteem, lack of self-respect, and lack of purpose.  Further to the point, those who are without hope, are going to be prone to indulging in those types of activities that are harmful to their development of a sound mind along with a sound body, for because they cannot conceive of a bright future, they are intent thereupon embracing the darkness, instead.

All of the above, basically means that the best thing and the most important thing that society can do for those who are without hope is to help construct the environment that will bring hope, to those most needing such, for we do so find, that those that are with hope are those that will usually buy into their fair obligation to that society, recognizing the fact that a healthy society consists of a reasonable degree of give and take, which thereby helps one another to achieve goals and purposes so desired or envisioned.

The reason that we find so many that are without hope here in America is because America has too many enclaves of poverty and neglect that have very little of the accouterments and opportunities for those that reside there so as to develop hope, and without that hope, they readily fall into hopelessness.  This indicates that the government needs to do more to involve those that are its most disadvantaged in a way and manner that replaces that hopelessness with hope, which necessitates a driven purpose by governance to concentrate upon that very thing, by suitably investing in the people and areas of this nation, that most need that type of investment, for the problem with capitalism run amok, is that the successful get ever more selfishly successful; whereas, the poor and neglected fall ever further behind.

It is indeed in America’s best interest to do what it best can do to provide hope to those who are currently without hope, for those who are hopeless, will continue to be prone to engage in the self-destructive behavior of substance abuse, incivility, and a general feeling that nothing that they do really matters, because in their perception nothing ever changes, and never will.

Physicians, COVID-19, and who lives and who dies

Those who are medical doctors are the very ones who inform us as to how healthy or unhealthy our body actually is, while also typically providing us with options to deal with what we have to deal with, of which, most patients of doctors assume that the information that they are receiving from their physician has been conveyed to them in an honest, transparent, and open manner.  The problem, though, when it comes to our health, is that when a given community is suffering a health crisis, from something such as COVID-19 or in dangerous war zones or other areas in which resources, time, and options are severely reduced is that physicians, for better or for worse, are going to have to make decisions that definitely affect as to who lives, or has a better chance of living, as compared to those that have essentially been left behind.  This thus indicates that as it presently stands, there are those times when physicians and the decisions that they make, are going to be the difference between life and death, which signifies that somewhere along the line, there needs to be not only an independent agency that supervises all this but also, ultimately, there needs to be accountability -- unless American citizens believe that doctors and doctors alone, should make those decisions, based upon the physician’s perception as to the “utilitarian value” of a patient or dealing with such from the perspective of the number of years saved or some other factor(s).

When it comes to physicians it has to be recognized that those who are in ill health, are dependent upon those physicians making decisions that are in their best interests, but when that is compromised by the fact that equipment is in short supply, or medicine, or myriad other factors, then what is occurring is that somebody or some agency has to make a decision as who gets or does not get the necessary medicine or aid, which is something that should be as transparent as possible to the public, at large.  Additionally, there needs to be some monitoring agency that has no profit motive, that is truly independent, to determine whether decisions being made are in accordance with what we owe one another, in a society, of people, all deserving to have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  So too, there needs to be an open debate as to how the decisions that are made, are arrived at, so as to understand better as to whether or not, such is reasonable and in accordance with societal norms.

So then, when it comes to COVID-19, there needs to be an inquiry, because the crisis has passed, as to the decisions made at hospitals by physicians or the administration, as to who did or did not get priority when it came to necessary treatment from those suffering the debilitating effects of COVID-19, so that this government can ascertain as to whether or not what they have currently in place is considered to be, for instance, haphazard, good, arbitrary, or whatever, because it could be said that to leave the decision as to who is prioritized or not in the sole hands of physicians or of an agency that answers to nobody, is probably not going to be the best decision that could or should be made, especially for those that are our most vulnerable and deserving of fair consideration.

Knowledge needs to become insight

There are plenty of people who know a whole lot about many things, but aren’t though gifted with the insight that such knowledge should present to them, mainly because they have not deeply thought through the point of that knowledge, or because they do not care to continue down the path that will bring them the necessary insight that they really need to know and therefore is of value not only to their own self, but to society, at large.

There are indeed many people who know the literal meaning of many things, but do not care to understand the inner meaning of what those things really represent and how important they are for our continual advancement and enlightenment.  In life, there are many steps to take to get to the destination that we are supposed to reach, of which, that destination does not ever change in any way, form, or manner, but even though this destination is within fair reach for anyone so desiring to put forth the consistent effort to get there, we find that to our dismay, few can break through to that ultimate insight, which therefore means that humankind suffers through the same sorts of mistakes and errors, generation after generation, without change.

Indeed, while humankind understands that we are all created by the same hand of God and that therefore we are created equally in the image of God, surprisingly few, though, are subsequently interested in knowing what this truly means, but rather prefer to spend inordinate amounts of time in divisiveness, arguments, selfishness, and other bad traits which serve to divide us as a people, and therefore precludes us from reaching forth to that which will bring us everlasting peace and sanctuary.

While it is good to have strong knowledge about many things, for it helps us to better understand the world as it is, we have got to recognize that such knowledge always has an end-game, of which, that end-game is for us to know that the purpose of our life here, so as to ascertain the full measure of what we are not only supposed to know but the application of such, for the betterment of the society that we are an integral part of.

It is wise to remember that as children, there is only so much knowledge that we can absorb, for we have not yet developed the capacity to absorb and to understand all that we need to comprehend so as to obtain that higher awareness.  Yet, the steps that we take as children help us to build the foundation so necessary to climb ever higher into the awareness that this world has definite meaning and purpose, of which, that meaning is for us, to be in harmony with our Creator, by behaving in a manner in accordance with God’s good attributes, and that by doing so, we will understand that our essence is eternal in nature, which signifies that those that are incapable of seeing beyond the physicality of humanness to our ultimate spirituality and soul, are missing the forest for the trees.  We are meant thus to be paragons of virtue, helping to bring out the good in the other, in the sure recognition, that by this insight, we bring light to where there was formerly darkness.