Beyond the Cusp

August 13, 2016

Ecology the Economy and Global Pollution

 

There are so many arguments where it is apparent that much of the ecology demands are in direct conflict of interest with the state of the economy. Of course it does not need to be this way or even an actual issue for the Western and post-industrial world. Technological advancements have even led to coal powered plants in the advanced world putting out next to nothing in emissions into the atmosphere compared to those same plants forty or fifty years ago. We can excuse many of the youthful ecology warriors as they did not live when smog was an actual problem and those days where one really needed that gas mask they are so anxious to claim will be necessary at today’s standards. There were days where visibility in Los Angeles was limited to half a block and days when a temperature inversion turned Denver, Colorado into a city under an orange bowl of trapped air. There were any numbers of times when the Cuyahoga River actually caught fire and Lake Erie could not support fish. All of these were the real ecological tragedies of the past and where we are today carries no measure of comparison. The air and water quality today is a taste of what we considered would be heaven on earth back in the fifties, sixties, seventies and early eighties though much had been gained by the mid-eighties. One cannot imagine what it was like in those rough and tumble days when the ecology movement started and great and close to unbelievable gains have been accomplished.

 

What was it like back in those dirty and horrific days, you ask. Well, allow us to try and explain. Air quality was very much like Beijing, Karachi or New Delhi and rivers were close to the conditions of the Ganges, Yellow and Buriganga Rivers (see images below). The greatest ecological problems facing humankind today are not the cities and rivers in much of the United States or Europe as much as they are in the developing world, particularly China, India and other nations almost always exempted from United Nations and other ecological requirements. Giving the worst polluting nations a pass on meeting standards and instead demonizing and requiring ever more difficult and approaching impossible standards of the advanced nations is ignoring the real problems that are damaging health and the state of the world. The United States and Europe could cut their air and water pollution by fifty percent or even seventy-five percent and it would not come close to improving world air and water quality as it would require the developing world to improve their air and water quality by a mere five to ten percent. Cleaning up the air and water in the developing world, especially the rising industrial nations like China and India could make huge strides. It is not as if what is being asked is all that impossible or even difficult to achieve as the science and industrial know-how already exist and much of it is off the shelf and install and you are good to go. If the financial burden was demanded almost exclusively from the developed world it would be an investment which would indirectly and directly affect the quality of life in the post-industrial world as the air and water of these developing nations does have an influence on the air and water quality worldwide. If the cost of installing and manufacturing the necessary pollution control systems for many of the industries which have been shifted from the developed world to the developing world, in some cases simply to avoid the ever more stringent pollution demands and requirements which the post-industrial world had challenged their industries to meet, there could readily be made improvements leading to decreasing pollution in these parts of the world easily attaining halving their pollution which would be a giant stride and would exceed any possible reductions quantitatively than anything possible in the rest of the advanced world. As stated, the required technology already exists and would simply require production and installation which in many cases would simply be an add-on system to already existing power plants and industrial facilities. One example would be the carbon scrubbers for coal fired electrical generation facilities which could cut CO2 easily by fifty percent and the costs would not be exorbitant making such one easy place to begin. Water filtration systems placed between factories and rivers could make a huge difference and finally using more advanced systems and procedures for handling recycling and sorting of trash could not only benefit air and water quality but also lead to reduced costs on the society into the future with the gains in health being just one benefit which should be an aim for all humankind.

 

Examples of Worst Air and Water Pollution Today

Examples of Worst Air and Water Pollution Today

 

The problem is one of numbers which is easily explained. Any pollution standards have thus far been coming from the United Nations and related NGOs and other agencies. Many of these have their leadership and decision making committees predominantly made up from the member nations. The United Nations lists the developed (post-industrial) nations as being North America, Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand. They list the developing nations as Africa, Central and South Americas plus Mexico, Caribbean, Asia (excluding Japan), Oceania excluding Australia and New Zealand. Of the nearly two-hundred nations in the United Nations there are approximately one-hundred-forty developing nations with only fifty-five post-industrial nations. It does not require a degree in higher mathematics to understand why almost all pollution requirements are placed on the fifty-five post-industrial nations while the one-hundred-forty developing nations are excluded from any and all pollution reduction or restrictive requirements. Until the developing world takes responsibility for the health and safety of their own citizens, this lopsided insanity of improving air quality and reducing water pollution in the post-industrial world manages to improve the measureable levels of pollution in the world by, at an estimated best case scenario, a mere five percent at the most generous of measurements, the most rudimentary and basic pollution controls put into use by the developing world would drop world pollution levels at near the exact same percentage as these nations would improve their air and water quality.

 

Let us assume the developing world installed the most rudimentary pollution controls equivalent to those installed by 1980 in the post-industrial world, with financial and production assistance from the post-industrial nations where the only investment these developing nations would provide was the manpower to install these devices and assure their working order, the world pollution levels would be reduced by approaching, if not exceeding, fifty percent. That is correct what you read, cut pollution worldwide in half or better. Imagine what a relief on the planet and that ever over-blown strawman of climate change. If the propaganda which claims that cutting pollution by fifty percent could save the planet, and then demand that the post-industrial world meet that challenge when their total pollution consists of less than ten percent of world pollution makes it impossible to clean the planet while granting the nations with the highest pollution contributions a complete pass, it makes no sense. If the United Nations Climate Control Agencies really want to protect the planet and truly reduce pollution levels, they will need to swallow hard and demand some accountability by those very same nations who exempt themselves despite contributing over ninety percent of the problem. It is not that they do not realize their double standard cheating makes cutting pollution impossible as they are adding to world pollution at many times the entire production of pollution in the post-industrial world’s yearly output monthly. Let us repeat that for clarity. The developing world’s monthly increase of pollution outweighs the entire pollution of the post-industrial world for the whole year. That is comparing increases against total output, a concept which is hard to get one’s arms around. Should the developing world simply hold the line on their levels of pollution, it would do over ten times the saving than if the post-industrial world somehow curtailed their entire pollution yearly output. That puts the entire problem into an easy context. Does the world think it could demand that the developing world at least improve the systems they are installing daily and have their pollution output reduced by a marginal amount which could do so much without even touching their precious systems already in place? Do you think you could be capable of doing that, please?

 

There has been a series of Olympics in recent years held in Beijing in 2008, London in 2012, and the current Olympics in Rio de Janeiro; all summer games where air and water quality and safety of athletes and tourists is more challenging as people will be outside in and around the Olympic Park making security a definite challenge. Air quality and especially water quality were particularly poor in both Rio de Janeiro and Beijing. In the Beijing Olympics China found it necessary to actually suspend all manufacturing and limited electricity usage for two weeks before the games and still the air quality, though better than normal for the city, left something to be desired. London, was a city with a history in the early days of the industrial revolution for having no direct sunlight hitting the streets and windows tinted with coal dust and smoke permeating into homes and stores interfering with every activity and worsening the health of all within its metropolitan area. The modern day London is literally a walk in the park with clear skies, clean water and no foul aromas as in London’s past. London could be used as a model for places such as Beijing and Rio de Janeiro as well as the rest of the emerging world. The modern nations could encourage such a cleaning up of the air and water of these emerging cities by providing even previously used and now retired scrubbers, reverse osmosis units and other technologies demanding only that the receiving country provide workers to install and trained in managing and upkeep and the entire world would benefit. Unfortunately there are too many who make their living complaining and this would place many of the ecology fanatics out of work and having to find something constructive to make their living; though we are sure they could find a new cause to make their living complaining and never lifting a finger to remedy the situation.

 

Beyond the Cusp 

 

August 12, 2016

Hillary Clinton; the Great Legacy Runs Aground

 

Let’s talk Clinton, Hillary that is. She was supposed to be The Candidate, the Unstoppable One, but nobody told Barack Obama and he spoke so much more eloquently and was smooth as a well-aged single malt scotch. He glistened and his words were lilt with a little jazz and simply reminded all of other great communicators, except Obama had magic that excited the youth, a group not normally excited by Presidential politics and thus they are a game changer. So the queen was put off for yet another eight years and she has reached the now or never point. Let’s face the truth, Hillary is well passed her sell-by date and only Bernie was more stale on the shelf, except he was so stale that it actually rang as new to those young idealists and he could have won had the decision already been made, Hillary or Bust. So the fix has been revealed, nobody was shocked, and nobody other than some still feeling the Bern even after the Bern, Bernie that is, had sold his soul and backed Hillary for a few slots on the Platform Committee which made the news as Cornel West, James Zogby, and Rep. Keith Ellison who demanded that the BDS and pro-Palestinian anti-Israel planks be part of the Democrat Platform but the fix was in and they had none of that. There was not going to be a repeat of voting down the mention of the Divine and recognizing Israel as an ally this time around as in 2012. The Convention was planned right down to the last snap shot and television camera angle, well, all except the one below which got by the planners somehow, or maybe it was photo-shopped (see image below). Even the demonstrations outside the convention were tame compared to what some expected. So, yes, they burned an Israeli flag and a Palestinian flag was presumably held up front and center and was caught by cameras (see image below). And then there was the demonstrations outside by largely Bernie Sanders supporters some of which chose to burn an Israeli flag while chanting “Intifada, Intifada” which is another way of chanting Murder Jews Murder Jews but even this was not condemned as far as we were able to confirm by anybody from the Democrat Party inside (see video below).

 

Hillary Liar Shot From Convention

Hillary Liar Shot From Convention

 

Palestinian Flag Waved Democrat Convention Floor

Palestinian Flag Waved Democrat Convention Floor

 

 

Enough though about the fixed, or apparently fixed primary as both parties had their preferred candidate list and one succeeded in procuring their candidate the nomination and the other failed miserably by, as some have claimed, nominating the biggest buffoon and clown from a field of seventeen, but enough about the Republicans as they were talked over yesterday. Back to the former First Lady from Arkansas, former Senator from New York, and former Secretary of State also from New York and now the Democrat Party candidate for President of the United States. So far her campaign has been seamless and smooth as long as one ignores the little glitch where an aged politician independent not even a Democrat but a self-proclaimed socialist almost pulled the rug from beneath the anointed one to once again spoil her coronation. But with that almost put behind her and soon to be forgotten, bigger challenges of the actual race for the White House now begins in earnest. The polls have been showing Hillary Clinton receiving a bounce from her convention while Trump’s polling has flattened as his bounce wore off and the Democrat Convention took all the air time out from under him. Hillary Clinton has what many are calling an unending cash flow to do any campaigning she desires and in as big and wide of markets as her campaign deems necessary. There are some who have claimed that Hillary Clinton could buy so much air time between now and the elections that the studios might have little if any prime time spots available should Trump ever decide to try and purchase ad time for his spots. There probably are rules concerning amounts of time which one candidate is permitted to take before scheduling begins to appear as solid wall to wall advertising for a single candidate for President with the other candidate basically out in the cold, which would be an interesting situation for research. There may be no limitations on advertising or requirements to make equal time available to the other candidates. The law may simply be the time must be available and for the candidates and first one buying gets the prime times and then the breaks. As near as we were able to research there are few limitations which would prevent one candidate from purchasing significantly greater broadcast time even to the point of nudging the other candidates from purchasing time if they were to put up the predominant amount of advertising time available though with the number of networks and with cable and satellite broadcasts that would be a very difficult and likely impossibility any longer. Still, one candidate could still purchase such a majority of the time that their advertisements would far outnumber the other candidates and that would apparently just be too bad. So, one has to wonder exactly how much television advertising time Hillary and associated interests will be able to purchase before anyone else gets started in thinking of their broadcast dollars and how best to use them. Even with the unusual manner and amounts of funds collected by the Clintons while she was Secretary of State which they knew they could use to finance a Presidential campaign, it is difficult to churn up any pity for Donald Trump on this front as, in his own words, he is rich, don’t you know.

 

The problem with trying to judge Hillary Clinton on many of what are often displayed as character faults is that it is next to impossible to honestly claim the high moral ground as how does one place themselves even theoretically in her place to claim they would have handled the position any more honorably. It is easy to claim that her lying to the families of those who died in Benghazi when we were not working for a President who was pushing hard to win reelection and who had demanded that nothing be permitted to counter the claims of ending terrorism in Libya and much of the world just a few weeks before that very election, a crucial point before the election bearing down on everybody pressing all the President’s people to follow the given script. How can any of us claim we know for certain that we would have done the noble and correct thing and turn against the orders of the President who had appointed us. The same is true in many of the instances where people have claimed that either or both of the Clintons, remember that they are a two for one deal, you vote for one and get both when they win, had acted immorally or even illegally. People get kind of weird when you start talking billions and possibly trillions of dollars sitting right there for the taking if only you commit this one little favor, tell this simple ‘white lie’ or even just look away for a moment when everything is on the line. Would we really act any differently knowing that if we can just hold everything together for a few more months, weeks, whatever and we could very well get ourselves a return trip all expenses paid return to the White House, the biggest prize we have always aspired to hold. Can any of us even begin to understand the temptations? We ran a unicorn’s dream of a campaign for simply a Congressional seat in the House of Representatives and you like to believe you ran a perfectly honorable campaign but even when in the thick of the race without a prayer’s chance of winning you still tell yourself that you could be the real Mr. Smith Goes to Washington if only the right opportunity presents itself and you get enough traction that all the voters get to hear you and really get to decide on some fair manner what you stand for. You know in the back of your mind that your fifty thousand dollar campaign cannot honestly compete against two candidates spending around five million dollars each on their campaign but when an interviewer asks you if you really and honestly think you have any hope of winning, you bet the answer is, “Yes, all I need is a fair chance and a moment of clearly stating my principles.” You know that is a dream and a step beyond reality, but you tell yourself that the possibility is out there, and maybe there really are such miracles. We look at the elections of 2010 and realize our shot was only a decade out of step with the right conditions and who knows, maybe our campaign was the flapping of the right butterfly’s wings that brought on the tsunami politically a decade later as in that election there were people rising from obscurity to win seats in the House of Representatives and even the Senate. But when being outspent two-hundred-times-over you honestly cannot hope but against hope and reality that you can come from nowhere and make it on the big stage. We should be honored that we even made it onto the ballot, and we are now, but then we hoped to dream the big dream, even if only for that moment. So, trust us when we claim that it starts with that little lie to yourself that you are the anointed one who will start the revolution and bring integrity into politics and afterwards realize that politics makes anything possible even if only in your own mind. The Clintons just happen to operate in a different world than the one we live in and they do dream and believe they will make it happen, and who knows, maybe they will be the first husband and wife team to have both spouses serve as President and maybe even Chelsea with make it a family trifecta some day. They do dream big and who knows how we ourselves would act in similar circumstances.

 

The Benghazi affair is but one of the misdeeds being leveled against Hillary and the Clintons. Then there are the e-mails where she used an unapproved server and mail system from which to operate her time as Secretary of State. There are claims that by doing so she endangered the United States and allowed sensitive, top secret information to be potentially leaked to America’s enemies. There may be validity to this charge but it also remains to be revealed if the servers utilized by the Clintons were any more or less secure than the servers at the State Department. The first admission that need be made is that there is no such thing as a secured computer or especially secured system. Hillary’s e-mails may have been more easily protected on her private server than they would have been if she had used the State Department servers and secured devices. Think Edward Snowden and the NSA files and other data he procured while in government service and how he is now safely ensconced in Russia and playing with American secured information and we must assume that he gave the Chinese and the Russians a copy of every bit of information he has. Were any of the government servers safe from his prying little keyboard? Obviously, they weren’t, not one iota. Further, many former Secretaries of State had also used their own private servers for their e-mails and their use of such was never called into doubt over their security, so why is Hillary Clinton’s use of the same type of systems becoming such a serious breach of protocols? Could it be because she is a serious candidate for the Presidency and this is just more political opportunism? Again, this is a difficult judgement call and many will make the call for or against the Clintons directly parallel to their political leanings. Can any of us honestly claim to be completely impartial when things concern the Clintons; the most powerful and strongly liked and hated couple on the planet? Are we really able to be that fair and just judge that even many of the Judges from Biblical times failed at being, can we claim to be any better than these? We are all playing politics to some degree.

 

Finally we get to the one item where we just might be capable of being that honorable judge, let’s get to the money collected by the Clinton Foundation whilst Hillary was Secretary of State and is now potentially the next President of the United States. Can we honestly hold to claim there is the stench of impropriety stemming from many of the donations which coincided with favorable decisions made by the State Department as well as others appearing right before, during or immediately after one or both Clintons visited certain Middle East oil sheikdoms? Obviously there is the smell wafting on the air that there is a good deal of smoke, but is there actual fire at the center of all the smoke? We will have to again admit that our politics plays a role in our suspicions and the degree to which we claim where there is smoke there is fire. We cannot honestly claim that there is no smoke, only that the amount is less than being touted by the Clinton’s adversaries. So a closer inspection of these fundings should be investigated and are being investigated by the FBI. Right, we hear you screaming that we cannot trust the same FBI which has found nothing more than potentially unprofessional and careless activity by Hillary Clinton during her time as Secretary of State concerning the e-mail scandal which was possibly nothing more than a partisan swipe throwing charges at the wall and none of them stuck. Perhaps it is time to move on to the next scandal de jure. Perhaps all of these charges are simply political maneuverings to discredit Hillary as a candidate for President and just a blatant use of the investigatory arms of the government to make so much noise it blots out the quiet whispers of truth floating innocently on the air hoping to be heard above the din of political maneuverings. Perhaps all of these charges are simple power politics with the media feeding on the juiciest tidbits found all over the ground around these charges. If there was impropriety and cash to play monies donated to the Clinton Foundation, one would be tempted to claim that such should be evidence comparing certain “favors” against the donations made to the foundation, a school child could determine such with even a cursory inspection. Either there are direct linking dates on deposits corresponding to immediately before or after State Department actions which are also easily traced back to the Secretary of State or there are none. That part of the investigation should have easily been determined and if there are then perhaps this is one which demands a Special Prosecutor to be appointed as there have been claims that the Justice Department has worked with the State Department to obscure misdeeds and clear the Clintons of any suspicious activities. Somebody somewhere has to have made a date chart showing the correlation of deposits to State Department interventions or decisions and show either the slight odor of impropriety or there is little if any real evidence that monies were spent to curry favor from the Clintons, really, somebody, a simple chart is all we need and let the people see what the evidence shows. We all know that there will likely never be a trial with Hillary and/or Bill being marched off in handcuffs.

 

Things in real life rarely echo movies that closely, and talking about movies, the release of the Dinesh D’Souza movie, some would claim hit piece containing more fancy than fact, titled, “Hillary’s America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party,” (it should be Democrat Party and not Democratic Party) sure was released at a time when it could peak right before Election Day. If nothing else, this was great market timing for maximum effect and highest possible cash for the making. I guess the Clintons are not the only capitalists capitalizing on political events. Perhaps they could hold movie night for Congress and have an official viewing and then get quotes the day after, it would make for a great review of the film just as unbiased as any other critique. Talk about movies reflecting reality or reality reflecting movies, it is difficult to judge here, but does not the descriptive title of this movie not but reflect a campaign piece produced for the Republican Party or is the movie more balanced than the title. There are numerous versions of this movie or book reading found on You Tube through a simple search of the title.

 

Finally we get to the central fact and the meat to the whole fiasco. We will not learn the truths about Hillary and William Clinton in our lifetimes as it will take at least a century to place sufficient distance between the politically driven legacy of this political couple and even then it will take either a saint or a truly disassociated individual to present just facts with proof and a detailed accounting of everything these two touched. Such a production should be interesting but what is required is something far less titillating, the real and honest truth. That is what at least a few of us would like to see but too many interested parties would preclude such an eventuality. Perhaps such an accounting will be made in the future but for the immediate, well, the coming election will be a huge indicator of how the average American voter feels about Hillary and trusting her with the power of the Presidency. If somebody as imperfect and flawed as Donald Trump who has thusfar yet to even pretend to run an national campaign and instead appears to be making cameo appearances around the country to raving fans where his appearances resemble more an AC/DC concert than political theater, or perhaps this is how elections will be run in the future or at least our immediate future. The Republicans are lamenting that if they had even a flawed politician facing off against Hillary there would be no contest and that Hillary Clinton presented the most easily defeated candidate the Democrat Party could have fielded and they may have missed the boat. Meanwhile, there have to be Democrats feeling the same about Donald Trump as the Republican standard bearer who could only win against a corruptively flawed candidate such as Hillary Clinton and that is whom they are stuck with representing them in what should have been the most lopsided victory in political history. The United States had both parties look through their rolodexes and seek out the least probably of candidates and they both found just what they were looking for, the most easily defeatable candidate from their stables and that was who they each chose. Both sides in the coming election for President will be running campaigns that basically say less about their candidate and stress more on would you really want their candidate in the White House? So what we have is the anti-Trump candidate against the anti-Hillary candidate, you choose. Sometimes it is less laughable to be an Israeli and we thought our election system was unacceptable, the Americans are making the case for monarchy; at least then you know who is coming next and how to prepare. How does one prepare for Hillary or The Donald? It really is not all that recommended to elect a President when they are running on their first name and that makes them identifiable by the majority of the world and well past the United States. Any combination of these two people’s names works to identify them. Remember when we were worried to death of having another Bush vs. Clinton race for the White House? How does that choice sound now? Right, not exactly better but far more predictable. Saddle up as we’re in for a wild ride to November and the real rough ride begins the third week of January 2017; prepare for the worst and what best can we expect?

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

July 28, 2016

The State Versus Religion and Family

Filed under: Administration,American People,American People Voice Opinion,Anti-Federalist Papers,Appeasement,Ba'al,Bible,Bill of Rights,Binding Resolution,Budget,Cass Sunstein,Catholic Churh,Checks and Balances,Church,Civilization,Class Warfare,Coalition,Code of Hammurabi,Commandments,Congress,Constitutional Government,Courts,Covenant,Definition of Marriage,Democracy,Deuteronomy,Ecology,Ecology Lobby,Economy,Education,Elections,Equal Opportunity,Equal Outcome,Eugenics,Extreme Leftist,Extreme Right,Five Books of Moses,Government,Green Economy,Health Care,Hillary Clinton,House of Representatives,Internal Pressures,International Politics,Jobs,Keynesian Economics,Leftist Pressures,Meaning of Peace,Media,Military,Nationalist Pressures,New Testament,Noahic Covenant,Old Testament,Politicized Findings,Politics,Pope,Private Schools,Public Schools,Religious Pressures,Republic,Sacrifice,Scientific Research,Secretary of State Clinton,Secular Interests,Senate,Seperation of Church and State,Standards,Talmud,Teachers Unions,Ten Commandments,Torah,Unemployment,Union Interests,United States,United States Constitution,Veto Power,Wealth,Western World — qwertster @ 1:13 AM
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

 

In the most recent times there has seemingly been a war waged over who is responsible for raising children. This battle was best epitomized when Hillary Clinton came out and stated at the 1996 Democrat National Convention as if it were established fact, “It takes a village to raise a child,” (Full Speech Below). The entire speech may have been her best presentation despite her almost Al Gore like metered cadence throughout the entire speech though once in a while she appeared almost attached to or excited by what she was proposing and her meter increased briefly. But the advice that the village, a euphemism for the government, is vitally interested in the raising of the child is a direct threat to the stability and autonomy of the family. This has become the watchword for the school teachers who receive additional training through approved courses which instruct that the teachers and school nurse or other medical officer and the principal are the first line of defense against improper ideas and concepts from being introduced to children because parents have been known to introduce archaic religious “indoctrination,” their phrasing, not ours, which must be instead replaced with the new age socialized concepts where the whole society teaches that which is beneficial to the society instead and above that which is beneficial to the family. The society is known by another name, another reference and that is government. But before we can even address the war against parents and government as the first parent of every child, we must first look back at an earlier conflict between science and religion which morphed into a battle between government and religion and has brought us to the world we have today.

 

 

The first concept required is to realize that all relationships whether private, public, familiar, governmental, religious and whatever; can be studied as living entities where the healthy and most adaptable grows in scope, influence and power and the lesser entities wither and eventually die. The earliest times in human existence, even before Homo Sapiens appeared, the basic unit was the family. This was because most of the groupings were clan based and one could tell your stature, standing, history and almost everything else about you by your name as it was an indicator of to what clan from which you arose. Different clans would have cooperative agreements often sealed with the exchange of women to show good faith and create and actual binding between the two families. This also served genetic diversity thus avoiding to some extent the genetic failings such as hemophilia and other disorders. With time clans merged to forge stronger and more capable collections which would supersede the family or clan unit. These groups were the first tribes which granted greater genetic diversity. All of this arose before the first modern man but was instrumental to development of complex society. The tribes grew to include numerous clans with some better at hunting and others at gathering knowing what was and was not edible while still others showed aptitude for healing and tending the young. In these more primitive conditions there were those whose task was the care of the youngest children but as they grew they would be trained in the skill they showed the best attributes by others such as a huntsman would train the young hunters, the gatherers would train the next generation of gatherers and so on. Tribes also began the concept of history, then simply known as the story. The story was one which was uplifting and always made the hunters as great warriors defending the tribe and the gatherer who risked life regularly trying new untested fruits and vegetables and if they survived and approved the tribe would add another plant to their diet which could have allowed the tribe to use previously unexplored lands. Such a person who would live to old age was likely rare but one who had along with the oldest hunters who reached an age where their use became telling of the stories. These positions evolved to become the job of an entire group who were to be the first priests who would eventually weave a set of codes which made the first religions.

 

With the onset of herding and farming, the time of city-states appeared and by now the tribal leaders were chosen by some method of testing or perhaps a single family’s eldest surviving son at the time of their father’s demise became the next ruler and the age of government had begun. It is important to note that the family was the initial and earliest defined obligation followed by clan and then tribe. With tribe we had the loosest governmental forms but religion grew into an actual class with priests who may have also been a warrior class which led the defense or assaults taken on by the tribe. Finally, about the time of the first cities, which would soon become city-states, did actual government take root amongst mankind. This was the first time that there would be actual laws enforced with proscribed punishment or at least delegating the one who proscribed the punishment for a particular crime. There came formalizations with religion already having led the way in this and they were followed by government. There came positions assigned with likely the first being the close guards who protected the ruling figure, then the ranking members of an enforcement group, the forerunners of modern police and judicial system. Often times the judicial system was also run by the clerical priest class as they were also the most learned class. This started the initial conflict between religion and government, even when a wise leader tied religion and government, blurring the difference and thus granting themselves the highest position in governance and religion. This was exactly what the Pharaohs of Egypt did when they proscribed for themselves a godly aura and was closely imitated by the Caesars of Rome.

 

There were a few exceptions to the basic complete authority of the governing leader or even the governing and clerical leaders which we have discussed a few times before, and that was the Torah which was the founding document for the Israelites who became over time today’s Jews. The rules given approximately three-thousand to three-thousand-five-hundred years ago were the framing of some of the ideas used by the Founding Fathers when drafting the United States Constitution leading to the proposed tight restraints on the Presidency. Such restrictions such as a President being withheld from granting themselves property or wealth derived from their knowledge of government workings nor could they simply invent and apply laws without the consent of Congress and were made answerable to both the Congress or the Supreme Court should they stray from the defined limitations of their office. These concepts along with the right of a state to leave the Union if they would so choose and do so in a prescribed manner and other limitations on a President were badly damaged or destroyed by Abraham Lincoln who basically became the government during the Civil War as he all but declared formally a State of Emergency permitting the President all but unopposable powers. Still, the limitations which were first set in Torah, the laws given at Mount Sinai in the book of Deuteronomy 17:14-17 which found their way even presumably to the present day in limits on the President of the United States and were placed as the very first laws limiting the powers and impositions of Kings where it read:

14  When you have come into the land that the Lord your God is giving you, and have taken possession of it and settled in it, and you say, “I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are around me,”
15  you may indeed set over you a king whom the Lord your God will choose. One of your own communities you may set as king over you; you are not permitted to put a foreigner over you, who are not of your own community.
16  Even so, he must not acquire many horses for himself, or return the people to Egypt in order to acquire more horses, since the Lord has said to you, “You must never return that way again.”
17  And he must not acquire many wives for himself, or else his heart will turn away; also silver and gold he must not acquire in great quantity for himself.

 

Meanwhile, somewhere between the gathering at Mount Sinai where the Israelites responded to the coming giving of “The Law” said, according to many translations, “We will obey and we will listen,” and today in much of Europe and the developed world where the people would not even listen to the religious codes and laws, let alone obey them as religion has been supplanted by government and the new priests are the lawyers who believe themselves the ultimate interpreters and applicators of the law twisting it to their will and whim. At some point around the rise of Persia and the rise of Rome religion and government became permanently separated in what would become Europe and much of the rest which came under either Greek or Roman rule. This began the contest between the two main centers of power outside the family unit. At that time the two still crossed boundaries with government infringing on religion for their advantage and religion infringing on government very much to their advantage. A sign of both comes as part of the Inquisition. Where it was an obvious usurpation of prosecutorial powers taken into the hand of the Church striping that power for the priest class who acted as judge, jury and often executioner, their prosecutions were also abused by government to destroy adversaries or other challenges to the throne or regional power structures. At the same time King Philip II of Spain used the purification edicts from the Church in Spain to raise and launch the famous invasion fleet of the Spanish Armada against England and Queen Elizabeth I which ran afoul of vicious storms and the fleet of English gunboats which were smaller, faster and more maneuverable capable of passing between the huge troop carrying Armada frigates who when firing at the English fleet had their shot pass over the top of the low slung English ships and simply blasted the other Armada ships in their own fleet. Almost all of the Spanish ships sunk and the remainder limped home and that ended this threat to England and its Church of England, a Protestant Church closely tied to the Tudors after being created by Henry VIII. The creation of the Church of England was another perfect example of religion out of the needs of the ruling monarch. Henry VIII needed a divorce which the Pope refused him; so he made his own Church after he went home.

 

Spanish Armada of Giant Frigates Holding Hundreds of Troops and Cannon Ports Only capable of Shooting Over the English Fleets Comprised of Sleeker and Low Slung Ships with Deck Cannons and by the Hand of G0d Seen as the Weather

Spanish Armada of Giant Frigates Holding Hundreds of Troops
and Cannon Ports Only capable of Shooting Over the English
Fleets Comprised of Sleeker and Low Slung Ships with
Deck Cannons and by the Hand of G0d Seen as the Weather

 

Over the ensuing years as science explains more and more of the unknowns and all appears to be explainable, the place of religion has diminished in the developed world. The need for religion to explain those things we did not understand had been greatly diminished but the final understanding is just as far out of the grasp of science now as it has ever been. The question surrounding the why, what and who caused the explosion which science has named the Big Bang is unknown and seemingly will remain unknown for the foreseeable future. Using Einstein’s equation of E=MC2 where ‘C’ is the speed of light which is times itself and multiplied just by the weight of the objects in our own little solar system and one gets a very large number and should that computation be done for all of the presumed objects just in our galaxy, the Milky Way, and that number almost becomes unimaginable and finally, if we add the viewable estimated number of Galaxies which the Ultra Deep Field Hubble Telescope took of a postage stamp piece of the sky thought to be virtually empty by all previous observations and that number is unimaginable by the average physicist, let alone the rest of us (see image below).

 

Ultra Deep Field Hubble Telescope Picture Each Smudge and Pinprick of Light is an Entire Galaxy

Ultra Deep Field Hubble Telescope Picture
Each Smudge and Pinprick of Light is an Entire Galaxy

 

Using science as a weapon of ultimate destruction, government in the developed world has assailed religion attempting to make any religious belief or system presumably archaic, its practices the equivalence of a rain dance, the prayers comparable to a voice at a séance, and its commandments, covenants, decrees or other rulings as the equivalence to Ouija board revelations. Concurrently government has replaced religion as the determiner of right and wrong, the provider of charity, the reason for a Sabbath renamed weekend, collector of alms as an integral portion of taxes and slowly rendered any expression of religious observance unacceptable in public. About the only suppressive action government has yet to take concerning religion has been to make religion illegal. The reason is likely because should they actually make religion illegal, religion would likely make a comeback just because it was outlawed. Especially any reference to Judaeo-Christian ethics,codes, holidays, prayer, deity, prophet or Bible passage, the government put the final clasp subduing even the slightest religious thought from the marketplace of ideas. Meanwhile, ignoring the dangers, those in governments are permitting Islamic religious teachings claiming that it is study of culture and comparison of governance and civics. This plus an extra-judicial importance placed on a statistically insignificant threat posed by anti-Islamic acts which have remained relatively constant since 2002 after a noticeable rise in the second half of 2001 while anti-Semitism acts are rising in some locations many folds but these acts are minimized or completely ignored. There have been those who have theorized the governments’ in the developed world preferences for Islam stem from the Islamic anti-Semitic and anti-Christian ethos and actions. This may also be behind the initial rush for European and developed nations taking in of “Syrian refugees” while not considering taking in Christian refugees facing persecutions in the Sudan and other nations in the Middle East and North Africa.

 

Finally we get to the family and the initial start of governmental infringements on the family unit. One of the initial assaults on the family used the equality for women fight to weaken any male claim of being better suited at any particular field of employment due to the differences which were previously thought to differentiate men and women. The most ridiculous of the denied differentiations was the strength requirement as it was agreed that strength requirements for men had to be restructured for women such that they required a similar percentile for women to be passed. One of the first to be altered was the strength testing to be a firefighter. The requirement for men to carry a full body double along with his fire suppression and breathing gear including wearing the mask down two flights of stairs and out of a building under fire simulated conditions had to be scalable. They had to take the weight of the dummy and scale it to meet the same percentile as women as it took for men to pass as well as scaled gear weight and so forth. This required new sized dummies and smaller breathing apparatus and other expenses just to train and test women applicants. The argument made by one Fire and Rescue company in court that in an actual fire the size of the person who may need be carried would not be scalable was rejected when they had a number of fire squad captains admit that they often set an order of people entering a building or if inside chose the largest and strongest to be tasked with such carries and thus the test really was not about actually carrying a real person from the building but actually a strength test and thus would meet those requirements for scalable testing. This argument was also the initial scaling of military combat arms testing including for Ranger, Green Beret, Seal and other special forces testing and training. The real aim was just as much blurring differences between men and women and removing any male dominated jobs from having such as their label. This blurring has continued that there exist work environments where the surname for all employees has been simplified to the unisex denotation using the letter ‘M’ for both genders. Then came the real punch to the gut, when some schools began to use a new picture book titled “Heather Has Two Mommies,” to depict that a family was not the conventional one of a Mom and one Dad. Such attacks were later continued with any combination which desired the status of a ‘family’ to be so denoted.

 

The gender wars and war on conventional definitions continued and we even saw women enter the military training at all levels until today women have been cleared to serve in any combat role even in actual combat condition, though this has not been tested to the best of our knowledge, not even in Europe where such equanimous ideas go to be tested. There was the court challenge against the classical definition of the family in a number of states establishing the right for other than heterosexual couples to adopt children. Eventually, we suspect, that multi-coupled relations will also seek equal rights in adoption as well as tax codes dealing with deductions for married couples where communal communities will be permitted treatment as what will likely be referred to as a ‘greater family’ or a ‘communal family’ and demand they receive treatment equal to a traditionally defined family. Eventually, through whatever means are required, the definition of what constitutes a family will be so weakened such that a person suffering from having multiple personalities will be able to be granted status as a family. Then, as with religion, the government will claim that they are the ultimate family and thus children will be raised by a licensed individual who will soon become a government employee much in the manner that teachers are now government employees. In an age gone-by, some name it the frontier age but really was anywhere a town was small enough and in an unpopulated area where there is no overseeing governance, when the citizens, particularly parents, desired a teacher who was knowledgeable in what was called the three ‘R’s (Reading, wRiting and aRithmatic, they were very adaptable) the wealthy peoples or person would hire a teacher and the one-room schoolhouse would be erected by the townsfolk and that was how early schooling was accomplished. Eventually the town would grow where grades by age groups, usually the young, middle and advanced groups, and multiple teachers were required, where in some fortunate places the wealthy people still provided the salary for the required teachers but eventually the entire community would jointly provide the teachers’ salaries with each parent paying their share according to the number of children they placed in school. This would eventually become some form of taxation collected by the governing body who also hired teachers and this will eventually become the department of child-rearing with the law eventually requiring all children to be raised from birth by the government.

 

Caring, educating and making every individual dependent on the state for everything from birth to death, cradle to grave care, thus makes everyone completely comfortable with doing exactly what the governing bodies demand. Just pray that by that time some overseeing the governing has been taken over by a self-repairing computer system and not by very fallible human politicians such as the wonderful and kind imbeciles who are elected or appointed in far too many societies for such to become all-powerful. Still, it is the nature of any organism, be it an individual organism, a collection of similar organisms, a collection of differing mutually beneficial organisms, a collection of balanced organisms, a collection of prey and hunter organisms, an organism composed of a collection of organ or any other imaginable system of organisms as such as today’s political class where they are dependent on others on which they prey (we are somewhat unsure which class they fall into to be honest) which exist in the many strata which we find defined in our modern society. The government grows by replacing existing and often very functional systems by meddling and regulating until they have subsumed the entire system and then they start to lower the expectations such that they are able to claim by the lowered standards how government run programs are superior. They will always point to the area where by their own defined criteria they prove to be superior. Often the criteria they point to first is inclusion as they will find groups which was at the margins or preferably outside the margins of the private run systems were capable of including and claim superiority due to the sheer numbers served. This has been evident most often with schooling where minorities of students are able to afford private school and the public education system serves all including those who would be unable to afford private school at the current cost. What they hide is that should they give parents a voucher which can only be used for attending private schools, that the very students they point to would easily be able to afford private school education. The truth is that there would be an entire market of schools which would educate children for less. The same would very likely be true in other government run institutions, but government has two basic advantages; first is they accomplish the assigned tasks with the minimal amount of effort from the people served and, even more importantly, they can make their providing of the assigned services required to be provided by government trained and licensed individuals thus making only government the sole provider by law/regulation.

 

The last thing which is an evil by which government grows and makes the government the beginning and the end in all places government desires to control is the power of laws made by fiat and without review by elected officials. The Federal Government is the most guilty of this intrusion and dictation over the people without review by the people’s elected representatives. This mechanism is known as regulations. The House of Representatives and the Senate will all too often pass legislation which sets goals and not mechanisms and then assign the flushing out of the how to accomplish these goals to a cabinet or department within the government to figure out who, what, where, when and how these goals will be defined and met. They do this without any input beyond the vague and often amorphous set of goals even leaving the final definitions of the goals and then formulate regulations. http://hls.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/10871/Sunstein/ target=blank>Cass Sunstein was appointed by President Obama to be his Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs Regulatory Affairs and assigned to review existing Federal Laws and find those laws which would allow for new and varied regulations to be fashioned in order to complete desired acts, actions, positions and requirements desired by President Obama and his team of Czars so that they could accomplish policy goals without involving Congress. Many of the regulations which Cass Sunstein wrote will lay waiting for complimenting laws and regulations to be passed or written and then they will also be applied. Very few if anyone other than the President and his former Administrator of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs actually know all of what was found, written and sitting waiting for the appropriate time that these regulations will be required for government to accomplish another expansion of its powers. The regulatory route is what is most vital for government to grow and expand into new and various areas.

 

Sometimes one is required to look back centuries and research deeply into cultures and societies in order to see that which has changed. One area where this is particularly true is printing. There have been some radical advances in printing made because of computers but that is more in preparation as when printing mass numbers of items such as newspapers and books, the methods used have remained very constant since the invention of moveable type which was where each letter of the alphabet and each number from 0 to 9 along with spacers and punctuation were made on individual pieces as blocks and thus could be arranged in any order. With enough of each particular block one could print many pages of the same letters very quickly. Before that invention printing was done by a specialist carving out a master copy reversed often in wood and it would be used but had a limit on how long they lasted. Additionally, the letters carved into the master were permanently in place and could not be used in another page. A whole new master would need to be made. Before this method, things were even slower as the only people making books were a few crafts-people known as calligraphers and specialist Monks trained in calligraphy. Books in these times as well as anything else we would print today and requiring more than one copy were all made each copy by hand individually. The Monks trained in calligraphy would spend their entire lives on one book if many, many copies were required and those who had the finest styling and abilities would be permitted to make copies of the Bible. Making a Bible was the highest form of calligraphy. There are still some who are studied in this art who are hired to make such books and these books are rare, often one of a kind, and are extremely expensive, some priceless. There are still books and scrolls made today by hand. Torah scrolls are one such example and are written by trained Rabbis who often spend years making a special Torah scroll and months making normal Torahs. Just for the record, the government used to hire private companies to make their respective printed material such as pamphlets, maps, tourist informational material, records of Congressional actions and other necessary items. Today most of these are printed by the government with a vast number done at their Pueblo, Colorado printing facility. Of course all money is printed by the government at the mint. Thus far, schoolbooks are written and printed by private companies often following set guidelines set by, you guessed it, regulations. These regulations are changed at intervals as the government, the Department of Education, change their requirements or decide to emphasize different concepts. From some of the most recent textbooks we have read, it appears that much of what we were required to learn in school has changed drastically and not necessarily for the better. Concepts such as whole word recognition which replaced phonics and sounding out worlds, new math or newer new math, and history as well as civics texts have changed drastically. There is a reason so many college educated students know so little about history and government which may make for great fun on the Lettermen Show but is less funny when these same people vote. The lack of making informed choices was made, if one follows the news, obvious to many ‘informed experts’ by the two choices made as the candidates for President by the two major parties. We believe it could have been worse, but it might have been better. Our closing remark is a quote from Thomas Jefferson. It may be a reference to Jefferson’s comment to his nephew Peter Carr, “State a moral case to a ploughman and a professor. The former will decide it as well, and often better than the latter, because he has not been led astray by artificial rules.” As noted in Jefferson to Peter Carr, Paris, August 10, 1787, in Papers of Thomas Jefferson, 12:15.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

« Previous PageNext Page »

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.