Methodology of Leftist NGO’s and Their Enablers

 

Some are amazed at the apparent support that exists for the farthest leftist causes and how they inundate companies resulting in sufficient influential force to have these companies alter their business practices. The greatest example of this has been the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanction) efforts against Israel. Such charities as Oxfam have been pressured to forcing a choice upon their chosen international representative, Scarlett Johansson. The problem is that the well-known actress, Scarlett Johansson, was also in advertisements for the company SodaStream, which at the time had a factory in the Shomron which many claim is rightfully belonging to the Arab Palestinians. Scarlett Johansson chose to remain the representative for SodaStream and stepped down from Oxfam. There is a further development on this story. When SodaStream built a new factory, they also bent to the pressures and built the new factory within the Green Line. This resulted in hundreds of Arab Palestinians losing their jobs. That BDS pressure sure is helping these Arab workers, but they are just collateral damage in the war to destroy Israel. Destroying the Jewish State by claiming to assist Arab Palestinians more often than not harms these very same people causing them to become unemployed from Jobs which paid higher wages than any other including Palestinian Authority positions including their Security Forces. The only higher paying jobs for these people are to become terrorists and murder Israelis in order to gain an early retirement income from the Palestinian Authority. Perhaps this is the real reason for the BDS Movement; force Arab Palestinians into unemployment until they become so desperate they are willing to kill innocent Israelis in order to generate a permanent income for them and their families.

 

The latest target of the BDS Movement has been the real estate listing service, Airbnb. They have censored their listings removing those beyond the Green Line which belong to Jews as well as those in the Golan Heights. We would like to quote NGO Watch found in the article titled, “The New Israel Fund encouraged the Airbnb boycott of Israel.” NGO Watch noted:

“This change in policy was a clear result of a coordinated and well-financed campaign targeting the company by NGOs involved in BDS (boycott, divestment, and sanctions) campaigns against Israel, led by Human Rights Watch (HRW) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP), in concert with the UN Human Rights Council (HRC), at least three Israeli groups, and the Palestinian Authority. The funders responsible for this campaign include a number of European governments as well as the US-based Rockefeller Brothers Fund.”

The above-mentioned article contains other references for any interested in finding any additional information.

 

So, this is how these numerous groups on the far left can organize to apply so much pressure on companies, governments, charities and other organizations including international organizations. This amount of organization is impressive and gives the appearance that these groups have hundreds, thousands and far more in some instances. Their tactic is to inundate their target with e-mails, snail mail, phone calls directly to top officials’ numbers when they are able to procure them and press releases to every media source on the planet castigating their target for their obvious questionable actions, support, locations or political leanings. Their tactics actually use their most active and dedicated members to assume numerous identities in order to magnify their pressure. This can be accomplished through simple subterfuge. One easily adopted methodology is for members to apply for numerous e-mail accounts using different names from the many numerous free e-mail services. By attaining a second e-mail address, one can then apply to another service using both of these e-mails as identification. Then they can use three of these e-mails to gain three additional addresses from their first e-mail provider. Now they have seven with which to get additional addresses all under different names and one can see how with the numerous free e-mail providers, one can accumulate a great number of e-mails all under separate names identifying the sender. Then, when they need to pressure anything which has crossed the targeting of their NGO or organization, they send a single e-mail from each of the addresses amassed with a different message. These messages do not need to be elaborate, though a small number will be more fervent than the rest, and send these to the targeted entity which will soon get the feeling that they are facing a massive populist movement with potentially millions of supporters. These NGOs who master this ploy maximizing their effectiveness are rewarded with additional funding from government and the numerous arms of the United Nations and other supportive groups, as noted in the above NGO Watch quotation.

 

Do not even bother to ask whether this is proper or legal, as such is of little concern when there is a cause to support and force upon some unsuspecting victims. It is the cause and only the cause and whatever it takes is all fair in love of cause and the war to impose it upon the public. Unfortunately, the laws which might be applied would be a stretch as they would need to apply racketeering laws, fraudulent representation or some related or similar laws. The people would play the innocent victim of the state attempting to intimidate them in their efforts to make changes in the world and make it a far better place. Any such attempt would result in a media feeding frenzy which would only serve to further amplify the efforts by these dedicated leftists. Well, don’t rightist groups also use these tactics? Even if this was so, there is a huge difference between most right wing groups and the left wing groups, especially the ones on the far left, and that is a little thing called intersectionality. Intersectionality is a very interesting idea which further amplifies the voice of leftist groups because of the way it links them all into mutual support. Even finding a group of right wing people who share sufficient ideas to form a group is difficult, as we found when attempting to put together a campaign for office. The difference between right and left can be simply described. For two right wing groups to coordinate, they will be required to go through every last political position and should they not agree in total, then they will split and each go their separate way and not coordinate or only loosely coordinate. This does not lead to right wing groups working together and part of why there are so few right wing large demonstrations; you just cannot herd that many right wing groups together and have them play well together. Intersectionality is a weapon which works mostly on the left.

 

There are some exclusionary properties to intersectionality. It normally is used in order to enlarge demonstrations by bringing in supporters from varied groups to support one another and to make every demonstration appear to be more highly active and supported than it is in reality. This also works when supporting political candidates. Take the Women’s March as an example. They were also supported fully by BLM (Black Lives Matter), anti-fa, Amnesty International USA, an SEIU chapter, the Mothers of the Movement, the National Center for Lesbian Rights, the National Organization for Women (NOW), the National Domestic Workers Alliance, and the Muslim Women’s Alliance for starters. In the end it was reported that there were over four-hundred supporting groups filling the ranks of the march to highly impressive numbers. But there are some lines which must not be crossed, and anything outside of those lines is shunned and often banned from supporting these preferred movements and from receiving support from this core group included under intersectionality. The shining examples of such ostracized groups are any which support Israel. With groups such as the BDS Movement, BLM, Muslim Women’s Alliance and numerous other ardently pro-Palestinian Arab groups along with others which simply denigrate Israel as the greatest oppressor in all of history, eclipsing the empires of the past from the Babylonians to the British, there is no room for any Jewish group which has not sworn to the destruction of the Jewish State. This came to a head in the 2017 Chicago Dyke March where a group who displayed multi-colored flags with a Star of David was denied permission to participate in the parade. That was topped this year with numerous Palestinian Flags being displayed and, of course, the Jews denied again participation. Israel has received a permanent black spot as far as the inclusive intersectionality leftists are concerned.

 

Multi-Colored Flags with a Star of David

 

This has become a major incident concerning the Women’s Movement as Teresa Shook, one of the original co-founders of the Women’s Movement, has declared her ire at the anti-Semitic leanings of the new leadership and demanded they step down as they have been completely ineffective in preventing hate from seeping into the movement. Teresa Shook took to Facebook and stated:

“As Founder of the Women’s March, my original vision and intent was to show the capacity of human beings to stand in solidarity and love against the hateful rhetoric that had become a part of the political landscape in the U.S. and around the world. I wanted us to prove that the majority of us are decent people who want a world that is fair, just and inclusive of Women and All people. We proved that on January 21, 2017 (and in the U.S. this past midterm with a diverse electorate).

Bob Bland, Tamika Mallory, Linda Sarsour and Carmen Perez of Women’s March, Inc. have steered the Movement away from its true course. I have waited, hoping they would right the ship. But they have not. In opposition to our Unity Principles, they have allowed anti-Semitism, anti- LBGTQIA sentiment and hateful, racist rhetoric to become a part of the platform by their refusal to separate themselves from groups that espouse these racist, hateful beliefs. I call for the current Co-Chairs to step down and to let others lead who can restore faith in the Movement and its original intent. I stand in Solidarity with all the Sister March Organizations, to bring the Movement back to its authentic purpose. As Women’s March founder, I am stepping up to bring focus back to the Unity Principles on which our movement began, and with the support of all of those who marched and have continued to march, I pledge to support grassroots, decentralized leadership promoting a safe, worldwide community devoid of hate speech, bigotry and racism.”

The results of this should be interesting but we hold out little hope for Teresa Shook to regain control over the movement she helped to birth as the new leftists represented by Women’s March organizers, from left to right, Bob Bland, Linda Sarsour, Carmen Perez and Tamika Mallory are going to simply push her aside as inconsequential and blame it on her support for Israel when their real reason is that she is a proud Jew.

 

Teresa Shook takes on the New Leftist Gang
Bob Bland, Linda Sarsour, Carmen Perez and Tamika

 

Control of the future of the Women’s Movement and the face-off mentioned above will be a telling result which will indicate whether or not the Jews have any future on the left. There is far more at stake than demonstration rights and inclusion with the intersectionality group, also at stake is the future and control of the Democrat Party which is rapidly falling into the hands of others just the same as the new leadership in the Women’s Movement. This has been a long time building and was obvious to any observer whose eyes were open and they were not sleeping at the wheel. The left has become weaponized and their sites are currently merely on Israel, but from there it will be a short hop, without even requiring a skip or a jump, to anti-Semitism. The reality is their singular targeting of Israel and no other nation for harming the rights of supposed minorities, despite recognizing that Israel supports the LBGTQ rights, claiming this is merely to hide their sins against the Arab Palestinians which Israel does not rule or have any legal influence upon, is a form of anti-Semitism. They do not even require the hop; they just need be honest which is something we expect to surface in the very near future. The Jews living in the United States reside in a fool’s paradise and are blithely unaware of the target which is being place on their heads. We have seen this exact playbook almost to the letter in too many historical settings to miss seeing the future and the difficulty which will soon start to become even more evident as the Jews start to become confused because none of what will happen will make sense to them. They will claim that they mean those other Jews and will live on in denial until, once again, it is too late. There is another side to these coming realities, and that is that Israel has to wean herself from all United States aid and start producing all her weapons and munitions within her own borders and do so with some urgency. Dark clouds are on the horizon.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

New Multiculturalism Declines Orthodox Faith

 

Anti-Semitism is rife throughout Europe and spreading like a wildfire throughout urban and metropolitan America. Apparently multiculturalism does not include Orthodox Jews or any other Jew who stands with Israel, their faith, the Torah and the tenets of their faith. The new multiculturalism also rejects Catholic Orthodoxy, Christian Evangelicals, religious Christians and anyone who stands with the Bible. To be completely honest, they do not much like the United States Constitution either or anything originally written on parchment. Do not even mention stuff originally carved in stone, like the Ten Commandments. Our new multicultural society has a whole new set of rules and they are quite open-minded and accepting. Their one rejection is those who refuse to be as accepting as the mainstream multiculturalists. You have to understand, it is all about their rights and the rights of all those who choose to expand the societal structures and tear down the old walls which were too restrictive for the new multiculturalists. And we beg forgiveness ahead of time for any insult one might feel or find in what follows as we are not as sensitive as society now demands.

 

We are now a very sensitive society and we feel for everybody and everybody has rights. The LBGTQ and who knows what other letters are to come have rights. The transgendered rights are very fluid as one can feel like anything at any point in the day and switch a few moments later, that is their right. The gays and lesbians have rights and must be permitted to have marriage as a social arrangement such as civil unions are insufficient, it must be marriage because the Biblical definition must be challenged and destroyed. The old constructs must be challenged and destroyed utterly and completely. Nothing of the old must be permitted to stand, and that includes anybody found holding on to those antiquated, obsolete and hateful standards on which Western civilization stood supreme for these past numerous centuries. Military service is out and the soldier must be reinvented and the military services are the new Petri dishes where societal changes are tested. Women in submarines, on the front lines and in every last place where only men dared tread before and if they cannot meet the requirement, then change the requirements until even the most tender woman will pass if she decides to join. The requirement for a Ranger to run eight miles twice every day of the week, are you sure it has to be eight miles, and twice a day, for real? Perhaps you meant yards for the ladies who want to have that Ranger patch upon their shoulders. As we stated, the standards of the old must be bent and broken to accept the new openness where everybody had rights, well, except the right to limit anyone else’s right to be and do whatever they please, that would be standardism, a forbidden ism.

 

Ism’s are another problem for the multiculturalists. They abhor the vast majority of ism’s, and for many we agree. They oppose Fascism, a wise choice, and classism, racism, sexism and other exclusive ism’s as do we. They claim that these destructive isms’s are all the children of religious belief because religious belief is what led to all the wars of history, well, Judeo-Christian beliefs led to all the wars of history. They have replaced ism’s with their defined freedoms. Fascism was replaced with social justice, classism was replaced with social justice, racism was replaced with social justice, sexism was replaced with social justice, every ill has been cured by social justice. And exactly who gets to decide what is social justice, well; everybody provided their definition is all-inclusive and free of any rejection beyond rejecting those who wish to apply standards. Standards are evil and are replaced with rights to defy standards. This is a very happy-go-lucky new world where you can be whatever you want to be without any pain, suffering, accomplishment or even proficiency. We are waiting for the last of the standards to fall, those standards which require physicians to be licensed, lawyers to pass an exam, pilots to be certified and all those other restrictive qualifications so many of the choicest professions require for people to practice these trades. How so limiting these items are. We will wait patiently as the new multiculturalists get around to breaking down these barriers to the right to choose whatever profession you feel qualified to hold each morning when you wake, or afternoon if you choose to sleep in. One might even decide to change professions at lunchtime. Oh the world will be so much freer once those requirements to practice so many professions are removed and anybody can be whatever they choose.

 

 

It is all about you, or actually the I, where I is individuals and individuals have rights, all rights, and no responsibilities. That makes the world so much more open and accepting. Open and accepting, those are the new bywords we are to live by. Don’t hate, simply accept. Follow that credo and you will be feeling on top of the world by noon today. With everyone free to be free and every I for individual gets to decide everything about their life and who or what they decide to be, what could be more liberating. So what if the new pilot of the Jumbo Jet you are flying on never flew even a paper airplane before this morning, he decided he wanted to pilot a Jumbo Jet and who are you to tell them they cannot be your pilot, remember, universal acceptance. You need surgery, well we know just the person, they decided over lunch today they wanted to be a surgeon and they will do your operation for free, just sign this release form, remember, universal acceptance. Doesn’t this make you all squishy inside with the new world without standards where anyone can be anything they want? It is just so liberating to be rid of those stuffy old standards.

 

Rights without responsibilities are just so darn liberating. We should have special days celebrating our new liberated world. How about an international be whatever you wish day. Never mind, that is every day in this standards free environment. Oh, wait; we do need environmental standards because all pollution is evil. We will need a standard whereby polluters are punished for destroying the Earth and injuring Gaia. We have adopted some things which we do believe in such as our actual atheistic religion because having an omnipotent and all-seeing, all-knowing Supreme Being would be just so like before. We want everything to be new. We have decided on being atheists who believe in Secular Humanism, a new ism we accept. This is a completely new faith where we follow a philosophy or life stance that embraces human reason, ethics, social justice, and philosophical naturalism while specifically rejecting religious dogma, supernaturalism, pseudoscience, and superstition as the bases of morality and decision-making.* We celebrate the human being as the highest form of life, intelligence, knowledge and atop of all things. This is a whole new philosophy and is absolutely nothing like ancient Greece. Why would we bring up Greece, especially ancient Greece? Sure they allowed all forms of sexuality and the freedom to choose whatever one felt they should be and all those other rights but they had a slave class, people who were denied full rights. We would never do that except for those social-luddites who insist on imposing those old religious standards rejecting the freedom and rights which we believe. They want to hold society back from becoming totally free with their insistence that rights come with responsibilities and that what we do matters and they believe in a Supreme Being, how so year zero. They do not deserve to be full citizens in our new reality as they would be such a bummer and bring us down from our responsibility free lives where we can be whatever we decide whenever we decide. Especially those who want to drag those ancient Judeo-Christian ‘actions have consequences’ definition of life, unacceptable, completely unacceptable.

 

This new secular humanism morality is based on the 1960 and 70’s “If it feels good, do it.” There were so many phrases back then. Things which still work today such as, “Life is what you make it.” Of course we look at that somewhat slanted making it more like “Life is what you want to define it to be.” This is still as the base concept, just liberated a little. The problem with the new social construct comes when you add in children. But the education system has figured out the way around having lessons restrict the children. So they are now giving them lessons in how to feel including feeling different. They educate children pre-puberty about being transgendered, gay, bisexual and all about sexual liberty in modern society. Burdening children with this almost immediately before they reach their teen years, like life itself does not mess with their minds during those years. Prepubescent children are unaware of their sexuality and teaching them about such things only serves to confuse them and lead them to believe they are transgendered or gay or lesbian or whatever unusual thoughts they may have as a result. Then their hormones and bodily changes kick in and there is no wonder so many children end up needing help, but even the help only serves to further confuse them as the modern approach is all about feelings and how no feeling need be suppressed. Schools need to teach children how to think and solve problems and not how to feel and be empathic to everyone around you and support their feelings. When your teachers teach that there is no such thing as evil or restrictive rules except that you must allow everyone to be who and what they choose to be. Then the teachers show preferences for the children with the most imaginative realities for themselves, often realities which cannot be continued into the real world. But soon these students with nothing in the way of logical problem solving will be the ones leading the Western World and deciding its fate.

 

These morality free and open-minded students will have minds so open that nothing is beyond imagination and since they are taught that nothing is inherently wrong, it is no wonder that they simply accept everyone as is. What is amazing is how these children are able to operate in the real world, but then many of them have proven they are unable to cope. This is the reason for “safe paces” on our college and university campuses along with therapy rooms where they can be placed in a stress proof environment with calming music, puppies and kittens to cuddle, overstuffed pillows to sit or lie upon and counselors to reinforce the concept that you are strong and you are just great as you are, even if as you are is someone unable to cope with the simplest things in life. The thing is the students are given some very strict standards they are required to follow to the letter. Their liberal, leftist teachings are to never be challenged and they are not to be required to ever accept any alternative to what they have been taught to feel. If and when a speaker has been invited to speak at their college, university, community, club, organization or even at their place of employment, this is never to be tolerated. They must be petitioned against until the invitation is withdrawn and upon failure of such the event must be prevented by any and all means necessary and should such a speaker actually make it to their event, they must then be shouted down having their speech drowned out making their words unintelligible to those who came to listen to their talk. This has become standard procedure across many college and university and now in high school and even earlier such people are booed off the stage at the insistence of the teachers. The students are also taught strict obedience to those who are more, or most, knowledgeable. Never must a disparaging word be uttered in their presence. Many colleges and universities also have added a free speech zone where any conservative or standards centric student can rant and rave about their old and now discarded as barbaric concepts to their heart’s content as no matter how loud they scream these small places are well out of the range of any to hear their protestations. They may as well invoke the Cone of Silence from the Television show Get Smart.

 

 

Perhaps the way forward is to actually allow everybody to choose his or her own morality. The problem is these new libertarians, self-professed as they may be, have also decided that there will be standards after all. Unsurprisingly, their standards are simply defined; it’s their way or the highway. They will not tolerate even the lightest deviance from their defined perfect world. Every form of deviance must be permitted and accepted and any attempts to live by the old standards are to be shunned and forced out of the view of the society. Judeo-Christianity may be practiced freely within your own home with the shades drawn or in your house of worship, but such is banned from the public sphere. Nobody is to be judgmental unless it is to judge any conservative stalwart as mental. Conservatism needs to be eradicated from all life, particularly political life. This has been the new standard for the Democrat Party which is why on virtually every piece of legislation proposed, they have voted in complete uniformity as if their leaders have cast their votes for them. Even if a bill would benefit their home constituency, if the Democrat hierarchy decides the bill is conservative and supportive of the old world or damaging to their craven new world order, then it must be uniformly and unanimously rejected. The same goes for the appointment of conservative jurists or even strict constructionist jurists to any national judgeship. The Democrats will reject a judge even if their decisions have been exacting to the law as they want judges whose minds are more liberated from stuffy old laws and who can find new rights and new liberties in the existing laws expanding their plurality strewn society into sectors before unimagined. Abortion on demand was one such right which was discovered in the Constitution under the Roe v. Wade which was a decision handed down by the Supreme Court under Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, considered one of the most liberal leftist courts in modern history. The consenting seven justices were Harry Blackmun, Warren Burger, William Douglas, William Brennan, Potter Stewart, Thurgood Marshall, and Lewis Powell while the dissenting two justices were Justice William Rehnquist and Justice Byron White. Six of the seven voting in favor were appointed by Republican Presidents, something to note for posterity. This was the landmark case which led to a number of additional cases where rights were discovered hidden within the laws of the land. This was also the case which opened the Supreme Court to the new social outlook for maximizing rights while removing responsibilities. This decision took away the consequences to having unprotected sexual encounters or not planning or choosing wisely in one’s sexual habits thus removing the responsibility for such restrictions on how one lived and replaced this restraining responsibility with the consequence free means for removing the consequence of sexual encounters, namely procreation.

 

The right to abortion has had a devastating affect on the public, particularly in Europe and Russia where the population is decreasing as abortions combined with abortifacients and birth control measures to women having two or less children with many choosing against marriage, or at least permanent marriage, and having no children to restrict their choices in life. Life is now more free but as a consequence the society which has broken into this state after a long and successful run as the top of the chain, most wealthy, technologically advanced and leading the world only to now have a swindling population even in the United States of the very peoples who had accomplished much of these fetes. Western society has reached a magic plateau which in a few more years, if things which us old school fools believe are broken are not repaired and solutions found to make our society worth preserving through required sacrifice, then the new, sacrifice free, standards open, universally accepting and judging all cultures equal will wither and soon die on the vine producing nothing and affecting nothing replaced by whatever proves to be the strongest of those remaining. Currently those appear to be Islam, Chinese Communism with a touch of Capitalism or some other unforeseen group which could prove to be the Hispanic society which will inherit the productive might of the United States. The death of Western Culture has been the conscious choice to place personal pleasure over any societal future. No standards and no limits appear to have produced its limit, the lack of progeny to carry their wonderful new lifestyle forward. The only group reproducing near, at or above replacement rate has been those who have that old time religion, imagine that.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

* Secular Humanism defined on Wikipedia

 

Calls for Revolution Will Lead to Undesirable Results

Revolutions are part of the natural cycles of governance and are often required to bring forth change. Change is the one result of revolution that is guaranteed. Desirable change is not guaranteed and is the least likely of all the possible results from a revolution. The one consequence of revolution is unpredictability and such uncertainty is a wicked mistress. The closest analogy of revolution in nature is fire. The great plains and forests of the world left to nature will suffer cleansing fires as that is nature’s way of effecting change. The renewals resultant from these flames is necessary in the cycles of renewal by Mother Nature. The other similarity between nature’s renewal by fire and political renewal by revolution is that each is an extremely dangerous process to all living things within the effects of the sweeping flames of change. The forests and plains then reset to an original starting point from which nature rebuilds eventually reaching the point where the conditions will eventually again reach the point where the conditions are ripe for the next renewal by fire. Governance of man is similar in that the governance that results from any revolution is not guaranteed and, more often than not, the forces in control at the end of the revolution are rarely the same forces that began the revolution. The recent revolutions in the Middle East are perfect examples of this consequence.

 

The originators of the Egyptian uprising, for example, were students and young adults who using the new high tech media began a revolution that presented the opportunity for the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafists to step in and reap the rewards from the wind swept flames of change. Similar results followed from what began actually in 2009 Iran where the students and many from the society protested the stealing of the election by Ahmadinejad and were violently oppressed. Their attempt at change failed largely due to the timidity by the rest of the world to support their calls for relief from despotic rule. The next country was Tunisia where a vegetable street vendor reached beyond his limits and revolted by self-immolation. This was the spark that lighted the flames of revolution in Tunisia which then ignited across Northern Africa and beyond. The original protests were demands for freedom, democratic representation, liberty, and an end to economic repressions. The results have thus far been the replacement of nationalistic dictators with the election of Islamic religious leaderships which may result in the imposition of a new dictatorial type of theocratic tyrannies. The freedom expressing youth who wished for modernized democratic governance began these revolutions and the theocratic fundamentalists had the organizational presence to take advantage of an unstable leadership vacuum which they used all their influence and power to fill while displacing the idealistic youth. The history of revolutions will verify the posit that those who initiate revolution are more often than not cast aside by other forces who have the necessary organization in the ready seemingly waiting for just such an opportunity to divert the situation for their own gain.

 

There are those who believe that a revolution may be required in order to reinstitute the original Constitutional limits and reinstate idealistic governance that they believe existed at the birth of the United States and honestly believe that they would be able to control the transformation once the existing governance had been toppled making room for their visions to be realized. Other than the disillusioned truth that even at the time that George Washington was taking the oath of office the constitution was on the verge of being compromised as soon as Congress was seated. The Constitutional standard set forth in the actual document was an idealistic governance for which we were to strive and described a perfection which was to be minded in order to limit the evils to which men fall victim simply due to the fact that all are imperfect and corruptible when compared to a perfection of the vision such as presented in the Constitution. The ideal is near impossible yet is what must be the used definition of governance if society is to have any possibility of resisting the temptations that lead to corrupt ruling leadership that result from partaking of a taste of power. The problem with any revolution, even one with the stated goal of reinstating the original Constitution in its entirety, the temptations of power will work their tantalizations on those who find themselves as leaders. Since revolutions will tend to appoint or have some assume power, they leave the aims of the revolution to become victim of the desires of those trusted with leadership. History has proven that those trusted with leadership often break every vow and trust that was instituted when they first assumed leadership and power. As the old phrase states, “Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.”

 

When looking at the current state of political power in the United States and comparing it to the allocations of power according to the Constitution, one finds the structure which was meant to protect the individual States from an overreaching central government have been completely turned on their head. This is very much a stipulation for change that is made by those who believe the time has come to take whatever steps may be required to reset the governance of the United States back to the originating Constitutional arrangements. The problem is there is far too much risk in attempting to force such a change as those in power will not likely surrender that which they now hold. Forcing the issue would necessitate revolution and the flames of change are usually not kind. The only guaranteed manner of reasserting the limits and doctrines of the Constitution is to go through a period of disciplined change in order to undo over two hundred years of compromise. Such an endeavor would take near inhuman dedication over generations all the while resisting the exact same temptations which caused this problem in the first place. The problem is that each compromise committed to the purity of the Constitution was seen and accepted as an improvement or necessity and was generally approved by the majority at their inception. The perfect example would be the Seventeenth Amendment which called for a change in the manner for the selection of United States Senators. In accordance with the humanistic philosophies of the period where it was theorized that the people as a whole entity were of superior intelligence and pure nature than were the State Governments which were seen as even more corrupt than the Federal Government. This caused the belief that the citizenry would be preferred to be given the power to elect their Senators instead of allowing the State Legislators or Governor to appoint them. This was seen as advantageous and the Constitutional Amendment was presumably ratified as such. The theory that the Senate was to be the house that represented the individual States was set aside and transformed to mean the Senators were to represent the will of the peoples of each State. This was definitely to the advantage of the powers in Washington as it completely removed any vestige of power over the Federal Government actions and laws from the State legislators or other governmental power. This one Amendment may have had the most far reaching affect in subsuming power from the States into the centralized Federal Government. To undo the evisceration of the United States Constitution by two centuries of compromises and cheating performed by the representatives of the people, often despite vocal protests from a minority of strict constitutionalists, the people must be convinced it is in their vital interest to partake of an effort to reassert the original limitations, definitions, identifications, and structures of the Constitution of the Federal Government and all other forms of governance throughout the United States. Even if this should become evident, it would then take transmitting this eminent desire to the ensuing generations very likely for far longer than it took allowing for the constitution to be abridged. That will be one difficult and possibly climbable mountain to conquer, but likely a worthy goal. It is that very difficulty that makes the idea of revolution and quick restoration so tempting, but that allure would likely not produce the desired end. The fires of change tend to burn out of the control of those who lighted the initial flames.

 

Beyond the Cusp