Beyond the Cusp

December 2, 2017

“Not My President” Stance Explained

 

We have all seen the posters by now, as we have had almost a full year of active demonstrations against the election of Donald Trump to the Presidency. We thought the time had come to try and explain what we have observed and the ruminations we have had over the broad spectrum of the “Not My President” movement and rallies, the “Revolution” as some have referred to these protests and oppositions to the President. The very first thing we have observed has been the majority of the mainstream media and the coverage. The “Not My President” rallies and proponents have been far more graciously received and have been given benefits and less critical oppositions than were those who opposed President Obama. Many will point to the “facts” that the anti-Obama people were racists with no real proof or actual accusations which withstood the investigative media while the investigative media has backed and verified every single accusation against President Trump. We would like to add one small observation, namely that the criticisms of President Trump have by and large been character assassinations with varying degrees of validity and the closest charge against the actual electing of President Trump has been the claim that he lost the popular vote by three-million plus votes.

 

That may be true but it is not valid as he won the Electoral College vote and that is what the Constitution states elects the President and as far as the Electoral College not representing accurately the popular vote, that is a problem which must be remedied state by state one at a time. The Constitution simply states that the Electoral College will give each state one elector for each house seat plus two, one for each Senator and that the District of Columbia gets three electors and that each state and the District of Columbia may designate any method they deem proper for selecting their electors. This permits the winner take all, state legislatures choosing electors, each district electing an elector with the two remaining going to the winner of the state or the candidate with the majority or minority of electors, whatever they decide is fair. As the Federal Government is precluded from selecting the method and it is assigned the states, the states individually must decide and that is where that fight must be fought. President Trump won the election fair and square, by the book, under the rules known ahead of time and just because California voted overwhelmingly for Hillary Clinton, that does not mean she should have won and may be part of why she lost, she won three or four states overwhelmingly but lost around a dozen states by a slim margin by comparison, and that is why Trump is President and Clinton is not. Now people can accuse the President of any of a multitude of character faults and flaws, that does not mean he cannot be President. Once he was sworn in the only means of removing him were wait for 2020 or impeachment with a guilty verdict from the Senate. The second option will remain unlikely unless something drastically changes even should the Democrats take the Senate as it takes more than a simple majority of the Senate for a guilty verdict. The other question for the “Not My President” crowd would be, who exactly do you believe would become President should Trump be removed? If you believe it would be Hillary Clinton, then you are horribly mistaken. The next in line would be Vice President Pence and on down the Line of Succession should Pence be removed before the Senate approved his choice for a new Vice President. If you research the Line of Succession, you will not find Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders or any other top Democrat and the first non-Republican is General Mattis, an Independent. Those are the hard factual truths.

 

Not My President Protests

Not My President Protests

 

The other thing we have noticed is while the people opposing President Obama were willing to work to reach agreements where such were possible such as in budgetary matters and numerous foreign policy points, the “Not My President” crowd demands that everything be opposed unless complete surrender to their ideas is accomplished. There can be no compromise or meeting the other side part way, it is their way or no way. This is not politics but the start of fascism as this has been the stand at the beginning of every fascist movement be they straight fascists or Communist, their first step is the closure of debate and a strict demand that their politics must be the only politics permitted to pass through the legislature and administrative branches of the government and if they hold power or even sufficient strength to prevent other ideas, then they will demand their people representing them stand as one against all other ideas. Thus far, this has been exactly how the Congress has been progressing. As there are a number of “Never Trump” Republicans willing to stand with the Democrats, and a few more Republicans, who more often than not stand with the Democrats and have chosen to join the “Never Trump” Republicans or some joined the “Not My President” Democrats, nothing is being accomplished.

 

Oh, perhaps we should give mention to the fact that the Democrat Party, especially in the Senate, had stood as a single entity with every member of the Party voting exactly as the Party leadership instructs them to vote. This is quite impressive as the Republicans only managed such unity against one piece of legislation during President Obama and his eight years in office, and that was his Patient Care and Affordable Healthcare Legislation, also called Obamacare. That passed with no Republican support, and was pushed through without allowing for debate or editing exactly as it was received from the White House. Some have pointed out that the legislation as it came from the White House had not followed through on all the concepts and was intended as a work in progress, not a final act and was roughed out for the Congress to write the minutia, something which was never accomplished and thus why many areas required clarification from the White House which was highly irregular and some points were technically illegal. Despite these modifications from the White House being factually illegal, they would never have cleared the Congress and the passed legislation did not give actual means for accomplishing many provisions in the legislation; there had to be operational and substantive modifications if Obamacare was to be usable. We are not realizing that even with these adaptive alterations that plan is failing and doing so very quickly as more and more items are discovered which have no means of being accomplished making the entirety unworkable as a result.

 

There will be nothing like that passing under President Trump as so far nothing is passing under President Trump. The only effect President Trump had managed, despite holding a Party advantage in both houses of Congress, has been to counter many of President Obama’s executive actions which President Trump has been methodically overwriting or simply making them void through cancellation. That has worked some miracles according to numerous leaders in manufacturing and may have saved the United States coal industry, for better or worse. Another area President Trump has afforded change have been at the Environmental Protection Agency and other regulatory Agencies where his directives have driven big government types insane of which the most obvious has been the requirement that for every new regulations written, two older regulations must be scrapped permanently. This has been intended to accomplish two objectives, clearing the rolls of obsolete and useless unworkable regulations and to lighten the burdensome tasks of following every regulation even including contradictory regulations where one is damned of they do and damned if they don’t. Talk of a no win situation, imagine being required to perform a task for the EPA which was forbidden by the BLM, which one do you please and which one do you risk alienation? Tough choice, isn’t it? So President Trump is having some effect in the tangled webs of regulation by cutting away many of the strands trying to clear a walkway where business can operate outside of government meddling. That would produce millions and allow for more start-ups and possibly allow the United States to retake the per-capita lead in start-up companies, a title currently held by Israel we believe. We understand that many people are anti-Trump simply because he is pro-business. We hope we can explain how being pro-business is also being pro-individual and pro-tax reduction.

 

Many people believe that corporations and businesses pay taxes. That is an incorrect assumption, as businesses do not pay taxes; they collect revenue at a cost for the government. Only people pay taxes and the only things which alters is in which way the people are made to pay taxes and for the costs of collecting these taxes. President Trump realizes that only people pay taxes, the tax on any producer, manufacturer, retailer, store, Mom & Pop storefront, major corporation or anything in between results on two things, higher process and loss of efficiency. At the very least, the purchaser will pay the tax, as whatever the seller must pay in tax will be added to the cost to the public. In most instances, whatever the total cost, including any taxes, is put through a cost formula which determines the final price thus whatever their markup on the base price is often also used on the taxes paid thus the tax actually leads to a greater profit in most cases. Stated simply, the taxes paid at any point in the process bringing any product to the public is passed along that line to the end product or service provided the public. That means only the public pays any and all taxes in the end result. This means that by lowering taxes on producers, corporations, companies, retailers and any other form of seller, the people will benefit and a general tax break is best possible means for lowering prices for the public. Tax breaks for the corporate sphere is actually a tax break for the people. This simple formula is refused by leftists, as they honestly believe that any tax placed on corporations is paid solely by those corporations and the price increase caused by any tax is not added to the price of the final product. That is Pollyannish thinking. No part of adding to the cost of a product will inevitably not add to the cost of the end product. This is part of why the price of the same item at the new, high price mall is more than the price of the same item bought at an older store in the low cost areas of downtown providing the taxes are equivalent. Further, the price of that same item is even lower way out in the country where there are lower taxes. That is simple economics.

 

The Democrats in Congress have decided that tax cuts for corporations, manufacturers and other businesses is simply giving tax cuts to the wealthy because ever business owner is, according to the Democrats, a multimillionaire and not in need of any tax reduction as they can afford to pay the extra taxes. This ignores the inconvenient fact that any taxes they pay is passed on to their customers who may or may not be millionaires. When asked if the people who buy these businesses’ products could use a tax break, the democrat response is that the best way to do this would be to increase the tax return given to people who do not pay any taxes to begin with. They demand that the federal earned income tax credit or earned income credit (EITC or EIC) be increased while taxes on businesses and people earning over $60,000 for individuals and $75,000 for couples should be increased as they are wealthy and can afford to pay more. To translate this to plain and simply English, those paying taxes should be made to pay more and those who do not pay taxes need a greater tax return. This is the Democrats means of increasing welfare payments through other means and finding their path to the perfect society where everyone is made even in wealth with one small exception, themselves. This is made simple by their exempting themselves and their selected sides and advisors from being charged with insider trading when it comes to stocks and other investments. This is the reason most in Congress enter office of moderate wealth and leave office a decade later as multi-millionaires and set-up for life. This is another way in which those who represent the public are not forced to play by the same rules as those who elected them. Why should we be surprised by such news, they have their own healthcare plans, play by their own rules in the stock market, have different rules when investing in the commodities exchanges, and exempt from parking and moving violations when driving if going to a vote or any other business, meetings or appearances. Their lives are made legally exempt from the rules you and we must live under. No wonder they lose the ability to identify with the lives of us normal people, no wonder.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Advertisements

September 2, 2017

Free Speech Has Real and Legal Limits

 

Most of us past the eighth grade understand that one cannot legally scream “Fire” in a crowded dark movie theater as doing so causes a threat to human life. Another example of restricted speech is one would be advised not to scream or even whisper in an audible voice “Kill the President,” even if it be the current President. Speech calling for the overthrow of the government or the Constitutional form of government would also get you placed before a judge rather quickly. One is not permitted speech which threatens to do physical bodily harm, cause irreparable harm to one’s personal property, to incite other forms of harm including financial, to make false accusations, make false crime report, make slanderous accusations or commentary, and a number of other forms of speech which have been specifically named as illegal due to damages or threats they relate. These are obvious forms of speech which are not permissible. But these are all spelled out in criminal and other codes and are not what all the screaming, yelling and protesting is all about now, is it. So, what idiocy can we add to these discussions? Well, let us see what we can come up with. Freedom of Speech is easily defined that universally, all sides and views will have equal access to the media and to all forms of communication with the same identical application of law prohibiting talk of revolution, violence, harm to any group, public safety and protection of the governing entities. That is the easy definition and it only gets complicated when a society passes from total free speech to limited free speech where they now disallow hate speech.

 

Our look into this phenomenon will use the United States as the basis for the attempt to use speech codes as a weapon. This has already been going on for quite some time but we will try and be brief. The attempt to use speech as a weapon has long been a known manner of taking over the political system. This type of takeover has been covered in science fiction with books such as 1984, where history and language were redefined in order to support the state and Fahrenheit 451 where all knowledge of books was banned and the title is the flash-point for paper where it will spontaneously combust. In both of these literary masterpieces, the governance was fascist though they would never admit it but were very happy to define their enemies as such. The limitations for the good of the people as to what speech is approved is a common thread in the imposition of a dictatorial fascist state upon the people and it almost always starts either with a military styled coup and the assassination or execution of all the political leadership which stood in opposition or with the takeover of the language and the history rewriting both to favor the new leadership and to exclude any and all other groups placing them beyond the protection of the language enforcers.

 

1984 and Fahrenheit 451

 

First, we will examine the wordsmith limitations where the dictatorial fascists start by defining terminology in order to limit and frame permissible debate. This is initially done once the elementary education has been placed in the control of the group initiating a political takeover. At this phase, the limitations on language are framed as making conversation polite and the removal of hate-filled words and terms. The teachers are taught a new and “better” teaching method which will make students learning ability improved and their education more productive. This new and better system replaces phonics where students are taught the sounds made by individual letters and then sound out the worlds using such sounds. The exceptions such as “enough” pronounced “ih-nuhf” are then taught by use of whole word recognition. This method the student learns to recognize certain exceptions and adds others as they are encountered and otherwise has a means to learn any word they see through the application of phonics. The new method is called Whole Word Recognition where every word is taught as a set of meaningless symbols randomly chosen to represent the word. Spelling is considered less important as it is only important that you have you own representation with which to identify each word taught. This method will limit the majority of students vocabularies to a large percentage of the words they are taught and they will have little if any ability to learn new words with any ease as they will be unable to sound out new words thus their spelling will have no real meaning or purpose other than to differentiate the word from other words. This limitation on vocabulary is the first and largest step to control of language as if certain words are not taught, they cease to be within the lexicon of the language and become unusable and, when used by more learned people, they are meaningless as either the spoken or written word.

 

A corollary to whole word recognition is that these words approved for teaching also will only have the definitions that are taught when the word is introduced. The use of these two simple steps accomplishes two of the goals of the language fascists, the debate can only be made with the terms taught if it is to make sense, and certain thoughts become obsolete if their terms are not introduced. How can one defend what many consider a simple and basic idea in governance, “liberty” if the word itself is never taught and no definition is given outside reference material? With the word not taught, as an example, then it will not find much use on social media, the place where the debates now are engaged. Once excluded from there the word “liberty” becomes a high word used only by the most erudite and educated amongst the population. When they use the word, they must then define the term if their readers are to understand what the term, a strange and foreign term, means for its use to make sense. Such a restriction on that one word will lead to even the educated avoiding its use because of the clumsiness its use entails. Thus, Whole Word Recognition has established a limitation on debate and a limit on knowledge. Now the rest of the debate and language modification can proceed.

 

Once the vocabulary has been modified and restricted comes the next step, a direct challenge to the definition of free speech. Now freedom of speech will be transformed into freedom from offence. This is where defining “hate speech” becomes the central field of battle in the war over language. With the usable words now limited, this debate will favor the leftist or fascist dumbing down of language, whichever group is committing this, in our minds, crime against the society. The initial entry into hate speech is usually initiated by those attempting to limit debate and redefine concepts making those they disapprove of forbidden or even made illegal for use. Initially they target obvious hate speech often going after supremacist groups, Nazis and known hate groups. They restrict terminology often defining terms using a single letter such as the n- word or the l-word. These words become unacceptable in society and with little fuss. Now that the easy to disallow words are ostracized and cut from acceptable use, they will go after other words and make them unacceptable until they reach a point where they have entire concepts refuted from use. Such terms today would include “Islamic terrorism” which must be removed, as it is Islamophobic and hateful to peaceful Muslims.

 

Why it is offensive to people ,as it is obviously not being applied, is never explained; the thought police simply make the claim and scream from the highest heights making any use of the term unacceptable even when it actually applies. This removes entire thoughts from acceptable debate. How does one debate even “radical and extremist Islamic terrorism” if the entire thought of Islamic terrorism is disallowed. If there is no such thing as Islamic terrorism, then there actually cannot be radical or extremist Islamic terrorism as that would be a form of Islamic terrorism. Now it must be considered to be radical extremist terrorism and no singular group is responsible, just radical extremists. The next step is to define those groups who are opposing the leftist ideas as radical and extremist such as has been done to religious Christians and evangelical Christians. Now when there is an act of terror, those making excuses for Islamic terrorism can shift the debate to which group is likely to have committed each individual act of terrorism? By the time an actual group has been identified, if it is not to the likings of the leftists, meaning it was committed by one of their protected groups, then that act of terror is old news and no longer needs to be discussed. If the terror was committed by one of their target groups then it remains news of the day for as long as humanly possible and is brought up then every time there is any reference to their protected group as proof that there exists other groups amongst the unprotected who do the same thing.

 

This type of debate framing and representative exacting is a form of deception that has long been used against Israel. There are, and we are not going to give them the dignity of reference, a relative few number of Israeli Jewish terror attacks which have been perpetrated over the years. Unlike the heroes martyrdom welcome that the Arab Islamic terrorists (we are anything but PC here at BTC) receive after their murder sprees, we do not name youth camps, streets, parks or soccer tournaments after these criminal elements, we try them and place them in prisons for extensive lengths of time. We disapprove of such acts and they are known to be an anathema to our society. Still, in any discussion with the protectors of the Arab murderers of Israelis, and not all their victims are Jews despite their care to make it such, these few exceptions are almost always waved as evidence that the Israelis, often simply referred to as the Jews, commit terror as well. These exceptions get so much play that they become well known acts while the terrorism against Israel becomes so common that it stops being news and is accepted by the left wing media as normal. That is how this part of one debate has been stretched into absurdity.

 

The next step is to control the media such that reporting is limited to the useable word list. What many do not know is that there is an actual word list of approved terminology for use by print media and is also applied often to spoken media. This list is compiled by our good friends at the New York Times and is utilized almost industry wide. With the media now toting the new speech codes which disallow hate speech, reporting becomes political. Now no terror attack can be considered to have been perpetrated by a Muslim but must be attributed to every other extremist group until proven to have been committed by a Muslim. So what if the assailant is seen on YouTube screaming “Allah Akbar” while stabbing people in a mall, this is not proof of anything as the perpetrator could be a fanatical Christian trying to make Islam appear violent. After all, we all know that Islam is the religion of peace and presumably, Christianity is the religion of violence, Crusades being the proof we hear incessantly. Once the media and entertainment have been brought on board with the new language, it is time for the final battle for speech regulation, forbidding hate speech.

 

Should hate speech be illegal? Well, actually it already is but the definition is to narrow for our friends on the left. It is against the law to threaten other groups with violence, damage to property or other extreme harms. Basically, one may not threaten an illegal act. There is your objective and straightforward definition of hate speech. But we can do better say the purveyors of approved language, we can make language so benign that it will never offend anyone, and there you have the switch from “Freedom of Speech” to “Freedom from Offense.” This is where things get tricky as now we need to define what exactly hate speech is. We soon learn that Islamic terrorism is hate speech and Jewish terrorism along with Christian, Buddhist, Hindu and virtually every other religious terrorism is not hate speech. That is an extreme example and of course should it be proven that an act of terror was committed by a Muslim, then the person will be described as mentally unstable and not representative of Islam. President Obama often explained that the Islamic State was not Islam. President George W. Bush initiated the widespread use of defining Islam as the religion of peace. Both of these instances were examples of how to frame speech to control thought. It is also an example that leftists come from both major political parties in the United States. One needs remember the political lines which can be used to represent political thought, the falsified “left vs. right” against the more honest “statist vs. individualist” as shown below. The formal name used by many Republicans is “Compassionate Conservative” which means Progressive individual or leftist.

 

Political Spectrum Taught Versus Actual

 

The problem with banning hate speech is, who gets to define what is and is not hate speech. The leftists tend to reserve that right to themselves and will suggest a panel of academics from respected English Studies departments. This is a fraud as these departments are almost without exception leftists themselves and has been proven in study after study that college and university professors contribute almost exclusively to the Democrat Party and not the Republican Party. The only exception is often in the hard sciences where occasionally balance can be found, if such actually does exist. The controversy in the United States only recently was brought to a head and by the person at the center of all the controversy, President Trump. The new President unlike anyone before him has torn the lid off of the partisan media and academia and thrown open the debate on whether or not these leanings are healthy for the United States in specific and the Western World as a whole. President Trump revealed how the news was massaged and often completely turned upon its head to support a leftist worldview and how the media would go so far as to invent stories to support their leftist politics. The problem is after President Trump this tear in the disguise will be sewn closed and made to appear that what occurred was but a hiccup, a blip in the reporting and the world will be lulled back to sleep. Well, that is what these leftist controlled groups are praying will happen, we will need wait to see.

 

In the end, once one side controls the media, entertainment, academia and social media then they have the youth and thus the future. There is a flaw in their plans and it hits every protected and coddled youth eventually, it is called life out in the real world. The initial shock to these coddled youths come when they find out their college degree will often only earn them a starting salary of $35,000 per year. Many were expecting a much larger payout as their professors painted for them a world where their special nature and specific wonderfulness would be treasured and their special nature would be seen by all and they would be lauded with money receiving a six or even seven figure income. What a shock, and then there is always that first paycheck where there are all these terms such as FICA and other taxes and healthcare deduction and the paycheck has a net salary which is quite distressing. This shock comes to those who did not hold summer jobs or need to work after school as many did from my not so exclusive neighborhood. We had seen our pay eaten up by government asides and taxes. These muggings can make one think that maybe there are other things the professors lied about. Life is a great wake-up call which eventually gets to most of us and makes some of us think, often for the first time.

 

Still, if the leftists can force making their definitions of hate speech stick and be illegal, which they are very close to succeeding, then the war will be almost lost. With limits on permissible speech placed by law, then conservative talking points will be defined as hate speech. This has already begun as we see every holiday season where it is not Christmas but the winter holiday and similarly it is not Easter but the spring holiday. St. Patrick’s Day has been made into a fun study of Irish history, and a pleasant glossing over of the reality behind the holiday which celebrates the bringing of Christianity (Catholicism) to Ireland and the presumed taming of the land and bringing forth from barbarism and paganism. Again, the presumed advancement of civilization by Christianity in Europe and Islam across the Middle East, North Africa and into Europe and Asia were both conducted by the definition of language to depict all who were not of the faith as evil, uncivilized and requiring saving by bringing them into the religion unquestioningly. From those times to the present both religions have attempted to frame the debate in their favor and with the current adoption of the Islamic line by the leftists, they are feeding their own destruction in this war of the words for eventually the words are dropped and the sword deployed.

 

St Patrick’s Day Montage

 

There is one final point which need be made. That is the definition of Fascist and Fascism. The first definition given in a dictionary was, Fascism: a governmental system led by a dictator having complete power, forcibly suppressing opposition and criticism, regimenting all industry, commerce, etc., and emphasizing an aggressive nationalism and often racism. The one addition we would add is that such a system can also have elections as long as the fascists control the vote counting, which they would in almost every case where they have gained power. Often the appearance of choice is required to enslave, North Korea or Venezuela are two prime examples. These leftist we have been referring to in the article claim they are fighting fascism and against fascists. This was why pegging their opposition at Charlottesville as Nazi fascists was necessary before this assault on language and the society of the United States could be executed. They are now in a frenzied approach because they know there is a limit to the time that the hate in Charlottesville can be used as a bludgeon to silence their opposition. Once they succeed, and they will, as they will continue to try until they win, one of the tools of Progressive Fascism is determination never quitting, as complete power is the only acceptable result. This is why the loss by Hillary Clinton has been such a detrimental blow, as they cannot permit power to slip from their grasp, so for now they must do whatever is required to disembowel Trump and prevent him fulfilling his campaign promises as that would set them back a decade or more. Fascist target language as a means of control and hate speech is the most convenient of terms as all they need do is hold protests against any phrase or idea until it becomes classified as hate speech as why else would people take to the streets over a phrase? This is the secret behind the enormous efforts against President Trump and to paint all conservatives as Nazis or white supremacists despite knowing that this is a lie, a fabrication to silence the right. The rioting on campuses to prevent right leaning speakers from presenting ideas to their minions attending college, and that is how the left sees these college age kids, as mere minions to serve their cause. Immediately as any student shows signs of thinking freely they are ridiculed and derided hoping to intimidate them back into the fold. It is all about power and control, nothing more, nothing less. So, our suggestion is learn phonics and watch your word lists and vocabulary grow and along with it, your mind and your understanding of life and everything it will throw your way.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

August 21, 2017

Life with a Deceitful Media

 

If it were just the media perhaps things would be a little less, how can we put this politely, messed up. But the problem is in Western Civilization media encompasses a little bit more than just the news or even including the entertainment which is included by adding a word to make multimedia. As soon as we add that word, we have thrown in the Internet. There is one more arm of the multimedia conglomerate which was the most recently added, education. With all of these tentacles, the media has unbelievable power and it is only growing. As the Internet gains power, the Internet will become reality and will paint the history which is believed by the majority of the population. Educators will rely on the Internet as a teaching aid and eventually it will replace all other forms of knowledge and will become the infinite knowledge base. The media has its imperfections and the Internet is all these things, their starting-point, their amplifier and their eventual home where they flourish or die. The correction factors are human just as are their original authors and those who store the results and those who decide which results are stored and which are permitted to fall through the cracks in the electronic net, the Internet. When everything depends upon a shaky foundation, the future can only amplify each tremor until something important breaks and when eventually that something is important enough the whole world can change overnight. That is what results when the past becomes flexible and can be altered by anything from a mere whim to an intentional plot and everything in between, but it will be the little cracks in the truth of what was which will eventually destroy truth.

 

There has been a truth which was drastically altered somewhere back long enough ago that the lie has become the accepted truth. Even today, it is not understood completely who made the change to introduce illusion to replace reality and then promote leaving the illusion in place of all reason. The evidence often comes to the fore only to be sent scurrying back into the blurred truths of the past. What was once known and understood by academics, politicians and many honest and honorable people, but those days have all but melted away into what will soon be the distant past. But we have been informed that there is a cavernous distance on the political spectrum between the two major parties in the United States, the Democrats and the Republicans. We are told that the democrats hold the elite and more enlightened side at the leftmost end of the political spectrum and that the Republicans staunchly hold pragmatic far right end of the political spectrum. That is what is depicted on the top picture which one may have seen in some learned textbook or drawn on the board walking into a lecture on the political ethics or modern politics in the United States. You will be told other lies such as that the Communists are on the left and the Nazis were on the right, also depicted on the top image. The Communists are always said to be even further to the left than are the Democrats and the Nazis to the further right than the Republicans. Often the Democrats are said to be in the center while the Republicans are still reputed to be on the far right almost neighbors with the Nazis. Well, allow a welcome reality which can and remains on the Internet of the political spectrum represented on the bottom image below. The Democrats and Republicans are almost next-door neighbors and both situated and slowly sliding further leftward with time. Then there are the Communists, the Nazis and the new world bad boy, Kim Jong-un, all even further to the left. Oh, and for your information, very little exists to the actual right of center except the theories which founded the United States stated in fairly plain English in the Constitution of the United States along with the Bill of Rights (see image below). These truths are taught but in a few university and college courses in a few limited and smaller institutions, and that is all the more sorrowful.

 

Political Spectrum Taught Versus Actual

 

In many ways, in an honest study of history, the societies which traditionally were most destructive to freedom, liberty and individualism with rights for the people have been those which favor the government and its power over that of the people and the individual. It matters little whether the Statist Imperialist were Kings and Queens, Dictators, Pharos, Czars, Führer, Emperor, Dear Leader, Caliph, Judges, Sultan, Prophets or whatever title they may choose. They may even choose to have elected officials who cannot make any real difference. The government itself becomes the holder and enforcer of true power and holds the politicians hostage, as they owe their wealth and power to the government as without the government the people could take back that which they lost to the bureaucracy. When the state holds the power then the people will fear the government and when the people hold the power then the government fears the people. There are no places left on earth where the people are feared by governments any longer as the governments have arms and powers which the people cannot match. The United States Second Amendment was actually intended to allow the people to be as armed as was the government but as the government gained more powerful weaponry they passed new laws for the safety of the people, or so were the claims, and disallowed the people the same weapons as the government, as the military. The reality was by limiting the power held by the people the government was protecting the government, not the people, them they were enslaving. The one redeeming factor in a few selected nations is that the military, which holds the true and final arbiter of all power and thus the governance, is comprised of citizen volunteers and thus more aligned with the people than their political leaders. Even so, often the final decision lies with their commanders who they have been trained to follow and obey.

 

Should there come a point where the people and the government, not necessarily the highest elected officials but the so-called Deep State, the bureaucracy, should come into direct conflict over a power grab by the government which the people see as illegal and unjust and they were to rise up, if the military were to side with the people, then the power would return to be with the people and the power balance could be returned to the lines such as those in the Constitution of the United States or to an even older constitution, the one promised by Hashem to Israel where the Kings were to have limited power and wealth with the people and the tribes themselves holding the real power while the King was held short of absolute power as described in Devarim – Deuteronomy – Chapter 17: 14-20. This was the initial and first great limitation on political power to be introduced into human history. This limitation of Kingly power along with the Ten Commandments and the other precepts of Judaism upon which Christianity was placed like a cloak to conceal parts and regalize other parts and from this and with time came Western civilization and the modern Western World. But there are those on the extremes of society which the media falsely states posit on the extreme left and right, they are both extreme statists and anti-individualists, and wish to return all to the barbarous days of early history. And these are things which the media will control and spin to make their own power increased and merged with the government, the bureaucracy. Together they would drain the people of their freedoms, their wealth and over time their desire to live and be free. Once that spark has been extinguished, it will not be rekindled even in the time of their children or likely their grandchildren, if it will ever be rekindled. Should the Hebrew Bible ever be erased from human memory along with everything which it spawned directly, then the spark which kindled freedom will have died and been wantonly buried. This is what both extremes desired to bring about given the opportunity in Charlotte. Only one of them has the current ability to even attempt such a grab of power. That is the one backed by this monster we call the media, a product of society but too often corrupted by those hungry to tell everyone how they must live. That is the real evil of statists.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.