CONFRONTING THE ULTIMATE PARADOX!
CONFRONTING THE ULTIMATE PARADOX
Wanted: Narrow Minded Evangelicals Racists Rednecks Bigots
And Plain Dumb Hillbillies for the Republican Party. Those with Half a brain have left already.
I saw this message prominently displayed on the inside of the wooden door to a toilet cubicle located in a haven for truck drivers and other travelers in Olive Branch, Mississippi.
The opinion of the writer is the same as political pundits who believe that voters are deserting the Republican Party in droves, and that this will result in this Party losing its majority in both Houses of Congress in the upcoming October elections.
A serious decline in popularity is already affecting the other important member of the coalition that invaded Iraq; in local government elections in Great Britain the Labor Party lost two hundred and forty seats, precipitating a reshuffle of the Cabinet.
The question is whether a resurgence of the Democratic Party in the USA, or the reshuffling of the Cabinet in Great Britain will result in solutions to the urgent, ubiquitous and massive problems that confront humanity in the opening decade of the Twenty First Century.
I suggest that these changes are meaningless; that the issues of poverty, global warming, unending conflict, dependence on petroleum are but symptoms of a much more dangerous disease affecting body politics in Western civilizations.
I suggest that the problem is cultural, and the solution would require a fundamental change in human culture.
It would require the most basic and fundamental change in human culture that is possible; that we change the means relied on to motivate the other to act, that we become aware of the dread and dire effects of relying on coercion, and, become in proficient in applying, and adopt positive reinforcements as the motivation most relied on.
A wise man has said that those who do not understand the past are doomed to repeat it.
I concur. I would go further; I would say that our study of human history, the development of sophisticated social sciences have not led to our understanding of the past in enough depth and detail to allow us to create a viable future for the human race. That what in fact we are doing is repeating our past, our tragic, savage and cruel past over, and over, and over again.
For example, Secretary of State Rice on recent Sunday morning television talk shows admitted that numerous mistakes had been made in Iraq and she used that media to encourage the nation to move on, to get beyond those mistakes.
But the objective of Secretary of State Rice, possibly the only ranking member of the Bush Administration with any credibility left, seems to be cosmetic; by increasing her visibility and appearing in as many public forums as possible, she hopes to repair the image of the President and improve his popularity ratings while employing the same methodology which precipitated this problem - an approach which is bound to exacerbate not provide a solution to the incipient chaos and spiraling out of control conflict in Iraq.
This problem was created by the Bush Administration ignoring the facts; turning a blind eye to evidence that strongly indicated that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, that there was no concrete evidence that the government in Iraq was a sponsor for terrorists organizations, or that it was involved in any way in the 911 attack on the towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Moreover, in the absence of such credible evidence the spin doctors of the Bush Administration contrived evidence to garner support among a nervous and agitated populace for military action which would never have been seriously considered – if the 911 attack had not occurred.
They used every means at their disposal to attack critics of their policies up to and including improperly divulging the identity of an agent of the CIA.
Further, the Bush Administration ignored and belittled the advice of both the then Army Joint Chief of Staff, and, the then Secretary of State and former Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff in deciding the number of troops required to successfully prosecute the war.
This is a very, very important point which hitherto has not been given the weight it deserved. If the advice that three hundred thousand soldiers would have been required for victory had been given due consideration and had been accepted, it would have been impossible for the invasion to be launched posthaste and the evidence that had been contrived to justify the attack would have been exposed to be nebulous at best, and, popular support among Americans might have dissipated.
What Secretary of State Rice wishes the American public to do is employ the methodology of the Bush Administration, the palpably failed methodology of the Bush Administration and ignore these facts; and, continue to support the President and his Administration as they prolong this conflict and dig the Allied Forces deeper and deeper into the quagmire that Iraq very predictably has become.
However, these facts change completely the complexion of this conflict, and how it should be resolved.
In the light of these facts, the United States of America and its Allies are engaged in a naked act of aggression against the Iraqi nation.
There was no valid justification for the invasion of this nation. If there was no justification for the attack, every act engaged in by the Allied Forces could reasonably be considered to be criminal and illegal, including taking the lives of Saddam Hussein’s sons. The destruction caused by the sophisticated bombs and artillery unleashed during this attack could be considered to be illegal and the Iraqi people would be completely justified in seeking reparation for the damage done to their country in such circumstances.
Since there was no just cause for the attack, there was no justification for deposing the duly constituted head of the Iraqi nation, Saddam Hussein. His trial is therefore a farce and is likely to result in a great travesty of justice.
The treatment of minorities in the United States of America where hundreds of thousands of African Americans languish in prison on some small pretext or another, where thousands of members of this ethnic group are legally murdered by the police each year should bar the Government of this nation from criticizing the record of any leader or other nation in the realm of minority rights. It a clear case of the pot calling the kettle black. The pun is intended.
It might reasonably asked, what would be the treatment meted out to Native Americans currently - if tribes of these peoples continued to exist in sufficient numbers to merit the consideration of the Government?
This is a moot point because these were almost completely the victims of racial cleansing in the Nineteenth Century.
To support the continued occupation of Iraq by American troops is tantamount to giving a convicted sex offender license to continue sexually abusing and murdering minors - to anyone who has any semblance of belief in, or respect for, natural justice.
This is not only a matter of justice; it is a matter of function, of what works.
The unjustified attack on Pearl Harbor brought out the best in American people; it caused individuals and groups to be capable of great acts of heroism and valor to defeat the Axis of Evil. Each year this nation celebrates the American heroes produced by that war, those who sacrificed their lives to retake atolls and territories in the South Pacific, the pilots of the Flying Fortresses who bombed German cities to destroy the Nazi war machine, the valiant soldiers who went ashore in Normandy on D day.
Americans who celebrate these acts of heroism, those Americans who dare to see the Iraqi people as human beings very much like themselves, should be aware of what is fuelling the insurgency. They should expect that the unjustified invasion of their country should create and inspire patriots in that country to similar feats of bravery and sacrifice and this has, and will continue to be reflected in the body count of Allied casualties.
This must also have an effect on the morale of the Allied Forces. They have access to the evidence, and must have formed a judgment with regards to the validity of their actions. They are being asked to injure and kill other human beings, something diametrically opposed to what is usual in their lives, they bear the added burden of ambivalence about the moral implications of their actions and about what will be the future implications of their sacrifices.
The conflict seen from this realistic perspective requires a much different policy than the continued prosecution of this war with the hope that some as yet unforeseen circumstance will result in the Allied Forces snatching victory from the jaws of defeat.
It requires that the occupation of Iraq end posthaste. That the Iraqi people with the assistance and support of the United Nations determine the future of that country. It requires that the United States of America not only withdraw its forces as quickly as security permits, but that it restore Saddam Hussein to power and agree to pay reparations for the damage it has caused. This is what would restore stability to the region and contribute to depressing the price of crude oil to bearable levels.
But this is just one example of the massive, urgent problems the human race confronts in the first decade of the Twenty First Century. There is the immediate and urgent issue of global warming, the perennial problem of poverty and hunger worldwide, and drug abuse, to name a few from a seemingly endless list.
That brings us back to the hypothesis I am trying to prove, that what is needed is the development of a mental approach permissive of the solution of the manifest and manifold social and political problems that are, and must be, a recurring feature of human existence.
It might also be opportune to speculate, at this juncture, why so few problems in the physical environment remain insoluble, while social and political problems are entirely beyond our ken?
Could it be that our intellectual approach in the physical environment is diametrically opposed to that we apply to social and political problems?
Could it be that in one milieu we ignore the facts, and the other we are at great pains to create ideas that are adequate to the reality?
Could it be that in one milieu to disregard facts creates immediate and palpable dysfunction, while in the other; the situation is so unbelievably complex, intricate and because failures in function were not immediately apparent that it has been permissive of irrationality which has fed on itself?
I am suggesting that this is the case, and I would like to present a logical explanation for this difference in approach, the reasons why in the social milieu we drift from tragedy to tragedy, why the majority of individuals exist in this milieu on a treadmill of despair, why this has been true from the beginning of the human story.
I suggest that this has much to do with the past, with conditions at the beginning of the human story.
When human beings began to create social organizations, they had only one model of interaction, the roles of territorial predator and prey. They had been habituated for many millennia to relying on one form of motivation, coercion.
This determined the intrinsic nature and form of the vast majority of social systems and determined the nature of human culture.
But very early in the human story, individuals developed ethics.
To appear to behave taking these into consideration, to be moral – and do the things necessary for survival in a physical environment that was still very unstable and in a state of flux, human beings became habituated to paying lip service to ethics.
There began to be a difference between how human beings thought, and how they acted; a difference between concept and precept. This difference significantly increased with the passage of time and eventually became the massive delusion that lames our higher mental processes today.
How else can we explain the fact that we cannot perceive the true intrinsic nature of our past; that social systems were constructed to satisfy the needs, wants and desires of the few who held power, and that that design was reinforced and buttressed over many millennia into an unchanging monolith of ways of thinking, attitudes and patterns of behavior no less unyielding and impermeable because it is intangible.
That design could never form the basis for a functioning democracy; it is clear that implicit in every contemporary policy and initiative is a choice between benefiting the elite, and, the common good. And, in respect of almost every important decision, it has been the few who have always and perennially benefited to the detriment of the common good.
With the inception and strengthening of democratic institutions, a conflict has been ignited between what would benefit the elite, and the common good. In the physical environment, in the economy, the elite have perennially prevailed to the detriment of the common good.
Can such a brief description encapsulate the many millennia of history that is the immensity and complexity of the human past? It can, because during that period, for all those countless years, the intrinsic nature of human interrelationships and society has been static and unchanging, for the duration of this epoch the human animal has been trapped in the relentless, crushing, insensate embrace of Absolutism, in a veritable stasis of tyranny and despair.
This paradigm dictates our actions today, it is not Americans who are addicted to oil, it is the major oil companies who are addicted to the profits that result when demand for crude oil is very high, as it was in the Seventies and it is currently. And these major economic players have used their massive clout and influence to perpetuate and even increase the reliance on crude oil.
The fact that Brazil is decreasing every day its reliance on petroleum products while the USA is increasing its dependence on this fuel is mute testimony to the validity of my claim.
Democracy should have been to means to extract the majority of human beings from the treadmill of despair on which they have existed from the beginning of time; it has not because its impact has been diluted to the degree that it has now become window dressing, part of the conceptual framework to which is paid lip service, a willing aid and accomplice perpetuating the status quo.
Every institution that could have advanced the legitimate rights and claims of the majority and leveled the playing field is in complete disarray. Most notably education, the USA has become a nation of drop outs – if we are to accept the opinion of Time magazine.
Those who are elected will invariably be the candidates who have the largest war chests, those who have collected the funds to buy television commercials, so after taking office to be reelected politicians must promote the interests of the few to the detriment of the common good.
Nothing will change until a bare majority in every body politic switch their allegiance from the wholly selfish and opportunistic me, my family and my organizations and begin to support what would benefit the common good; they must become less narrow minded, they must substitute the ethos of cooperation and eschew the unbridled, unprincipled competition that is a powerful tradition from the human past.
A switch to the Democratic Party means a switch to individuals with different appearances and personalities but who are agents of the same culture, coercion based culture. They too have been conditioned to play the same roles, those of predator and prey.
They will have the same ethos, competition. And competition is what breeds poverty as the weak must fall further and further behind as long as life continues to be a marathon.
Those who display civilized tendencies are also left behind, and most soon become aware of this and driven by their ambitions suppress their tendencies toward simple justice, love and compassion and come to see these values as liabilities; to be glorified but never acted on, as they are beguiled and attracted by the lure of material possessions.
The struggle for supremacy that causes modern civilizations to be accurately described as concrete jungles is obscured because it occurs behind a façade of concepts, of romantic and idealistic notions. Moreover, these illusions and delusions are made real on television, in movies, and, to a lesser degree in sport arenas.
In these arenas good guys come first, in these arenas there are happy endings, and the actors and actresses live happily ever after; to a degree where ever observer is forced to conclude that his, or her life on the treadmill of despair is the aberration, the oddity, and pretends to be as happy and content as the others with whom they encounter, creating the delusion of normality.
All are oblivious of the fundamental cause of their unhappiness and discontent, the design for living from time immemorial, the conscious and unconscious premises for thinking and action was meant to benefit the few, and these ways of thinking, attitudes and patterns of behavior have become automatic responses that are seldom questioned.
The proof of what I claim lies in the fact that successive Governments in the USA have access to more revenue than any other in history, have had more resources at their disposal than any other government on Planet Earth; yet over the past five decades have made little progress in combating the social ills of poverty and hunger.
If further proof were needed that there is a serious inadequacy in our intellectual approach to social problems, we need look no further for that evidence than to examine the fact that motivation is given scant regard and very little consideration in the formulation of public policy, nor is this very important factor given much weight in the decision making process of ordinary men and women.
Yet it is clear that the lack of motivation, since coercion to the degree necessary, is no possible; is the major factor inhibiting our efforts to socialize our young, is the major obstacle to igniting and releasing the creativity and maximum effort in the labor force.
We will never be able to compete with China, a very pertinent example since this is a nation that continues to rely on coercion, unless we can find an alternative form of motivation to galvanize the populace of this nation.
Until this is found and applied, and embedded in the social system, democracy will continue to exist in its current eviscerated state, its ideals, hopes, aspirations and institutions rendered futile, ineffectual and meaningless as it grapples with the inertia and sloth created by the cultural monolith that is Absolutism.
Absolutism is deeply embedded in every social system, in the very minds of individuals and is relentlessly and unfeelingly attempting to perpetuate a status quo of elitism, of five per cent of the populace in every country controlling ninety per cent of the wealth of that country. This has been so from time immemorial and this will not change the fundamental changes in culture that I have recommended.
Moreover, the price of freedom is that this change occurs in the man or woman in the mirror. There is a very popular tradition of creating scapegoats, of blaming the failure in social systems on politicians, on some world view or ideology, on minorities, or foreigners when in fact the problem is human culture, the inevitable consequence of the evolution of human societies from a state of nature.
Shall we continue to languish on this treadmill of despair, or do we dare to dismantle it by accepting and practicing the discipline of truth?
This choice is not made easier by the fact that the religious institution that first discovered this prescription opted to dilute and destroy its impact and wondrous efficacy by substituting and emphasizing possession as the way to grace.
This, like so much else; has not worked to create the necessary, fundamental behavior modification in human beings. Yet it is persevered with, reinforced and legitimized not because it contributed to function but because human beings were intensely conditioned to accept this dogma during many millennia when unlimited and unmitigated coercion could be applied.
Will it ever become clear to human beings that anything that would negatively impact the status quo of elitism is consigned to the dark corners and crevices of experience?
It is not in any way my objective to apportion blame to any individual or institution, but to create an accurate description of this ultimate paradox and consummate irony of human existence so that it can be resolved and positive developments occur.
I know beyond doubt that for most of the human story telling the truth would have meant death or penury for any individual who dared to practice this discipline. Indeed, the Church may not have survived – if it had not accepted the compromise of possession.
My experience is redolent with examples that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that good guys come last, that telling the truth is not the way to win friends and promote the support, affection and the loyalty of human beings.
My practice of this discipline has separated me from the human concourse. As I have become proficient in the practice of this discipline, as it has produced more and deeper insights into the intrinsic nature of social reality, I have become more and more isolated and alone.
It has meant that I became more and more aware of the hypocrisies, mendicancy and obfuscations practiced by individuals and organizations as they compete in this modern ‘state of nature.’
It has meant that I could evoke greater and greater hostility and ever increasing animus in family and friends because I had detailed and extensive knowledge of the reality of their existences, because I shared their experiences.
Yet I persevere armed with the certain knowledge that only telling the truth will make us free, will transport us beyond the ultimate paradox and consummate irony of the fact, the inescapable and unchangeable fact that our race evolved from a ‘state of nature.’
Down all the countless millennia of history, the majority of human beings have endured miserable, broken lives of quiet desperation. The time has come that from somewhere within we find the vision, courage and will to fix this, to construct social systems which provide for the majority the possibility of happiness.
It is time for us to confront and resolve what is the ultimate paradox and consummate irony of human existence. It is time for us to precipitate what would be the most pivotal, critical, and all embracing positive development in human history since the discovery of agriculture. It is time for the change.
William E. Virtue
Copyright Retained
Web site: voiceofpeace.net
E mail: vox_pacis@hotmail.com
Wanted: Narrow Minded Evangelicals Racists Rednecks Bigots
And Plain Dumb Hillbillies for the Republican Party. Those with Half a brain have left already.
I saw this message prominently displayed on the inside of the wooden door to a toilet cubicle located in a haven for truck drivers and other travelers in Olive Branch, Mississippi.
The opinion of the writer is the same as political pundits who believe that voters are deserting the Republican Party in droves, and that this will result in this Party losing its majority in both Houses of Congress in the upcoming October elections.
A serious decline in popularity is already affecting the other important member of the coalition that invaded Iraq; in local government elections in Great Britain the Labor Party lost two hundred and forty seats, precipitating a reshuffle of the Cabinet.
The question is whether a resurgence of the Democratic Party in the USA, or the reshuffling of the Cabinet in Great Britain will result in solutions to the urgent, ubiquitous and massive problems that confront humanity in the opening decade of the Twenty First Century.
I suggest that these changes are meaningless; that the issues of poverty, global warming, unending conflict, dependence on petroleum are but symptoms of a much more dangerous disease affecting body politics in Western civilizations.
I suggest that the problem is cultural, and the solution would require a fundamental change in human culture.
It would require the most basic and fundamental change in human culture that is possible; that we change the means relied on to motivate the other to act, that we become aware of the dread and dire effects of relying on coercion, and, become in proficient in applying, and adopt positive reinforcements as the motivation most relied on.
A wise man has said that those who do not understand the past are doomed to repeat it.
I concur. I would go further; I would say that our study of human history, the development of sophisticated social sciences have not led to our understanding of the past in enough depth and detail to allow us to create a viable future for the human race. That what in fact we are doing is repeating our past, our tragic, savage and cruel past over, and over, and over again.
For example, Secretary of State Rice on recent Sunday morning television talk shows admitted that numerous mistakes had been made in Iraq and she used that media to encourage the nation to move on, to get beyond those mistakes.
But the objective of Secretary of State Rice, possibly the only ranking member of the Bush Administration with any credibility left, seems to be cosmetic; by increasing her visibility and appearing in as many public forums as possible, she hopes to repair the image of the President and improve his popularity ratings while employing the same methodology which precipitated this problem - an approach which is bound to exacerbate not provide a solution to the incipient chaos and spiraling out of control conflict in Iraq.
This problem was created by the Bush Administration ignoring the facts; turning a blind eye to evidence that strongly indicated that Saddam Hussein had no weapons of mass destruction, that there was no concrete evidence that the government in Iraq was a sponsor for terrorists organizations, or that it was involved in any way in the 911 attack on the towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon.
Moreover, in the absence of such credible evidence the spin doctors of the Bush Administration contrived evidence to garner support among a nervous and agitated populace for military action which would never have been seriously considered – if the 911 attack had not occurred.
They used every means at their disposal to attack critics of their policies up to and including improperly divulging the identity of an agent of the CIA.
Further, the Bush Administration ignored and belittled the advice of both the then Army Joint Chief of Staff, and, the then Secretary of State and former Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff in deciding the number of troops required to successfully prosecute the war.
This is a very, very important point which hitherto has not been given the weight it deserved. If the advice that three hundred thousand soldiers would have been required for victory had been given due consideration and had been accepted, it would have been impossible for the invasion to be launched posthaste and the evidence that had been contrived to justify the attack would have been exposed to be nebulous at best, and, popular support among Americans might have dissipated.
What Secretary of State Rice wishes the American public to do is employ the methodology of the Bush Administration, the palpably failed methodology of the Bush Administration and ignore these facts; and, continue to support the President and his Administration as they prolong this conflict and dig the Allied Forces deeper and deeper into the quagmire that Iraq very predictably has become.
However, these facts change completely the complexion of this conflict, and how it should be resolved.
In the light of these facts, the United States of America and its Allies are engaged in a naked act of aggression against the Iraqi nation.
There was no valid justification for the invasion of this nation. If there was no justification for the attack, every act engaged in by the Allied Forces could reasonably be considered to be criminal and illegal, including taking the lives of Saddam Hussein’s sons. The destruction caused by the sophisticated bombs and artillery unleashed during this attack could be considered to be illegal and the Iraqi people would be completely justified in seeking reparation for the damage done to their country in such circumstances.
Since there was no just cause for the attack, there was no justification for deposing the duly constituted head of the Iraqi nation, Saddam Hussein. His trial is therefore a farce and is likely to result in a great travesty of justice.
The treatment of minorities in the United States of America where hundreds of thousands of African Americans languish in prison on some small pretext or another, where thousands of members of this ethnic group are legally murdered by the police each year should bar the Government of this nation from criticizing the record of any leader or other nation in the realm of minority rights. It a clear case of the pot calling the kettle black. The pun is intended.
It might reasonably asked, what would be the treatment meted out to Native Americans currently - if tribes of these peoples continued to exist in sufficient numbers to merit the consideration of the Government?
This is a moot point because these were almost completely the victims of racial cleansing in the Nineteenth Century.
To support the continued occupation of Iraq by American troops is tantamount to giving a convicted sex offender license to continue sexually abusing and murdering minors - to anyone who has any semblance of belief in, or respect for, natural justice.
This is not only a matter of justice; it is a matter of function, of what works.
The unjustified attack on Pearl Harbor brought out the best in American people; it caused individuals and groups to be capable of great acts of heroism and valor to defeat the Axis of Evil. Each year this nation celebrates the American heroes produced by that war, those who sacrificed their lives to retake atolls and territories in the South Pacific, the pilots of the Flying Fortresses who bombed German cities to destroy the Nazi war machine, the valiant soldiers who went ashore in Normandy on D day.
Americans who celebrate these acts of heroism, those Americans who dare to see the Iraqi people as human beings very much like themselves, should be aware of what is fuelling the insurgency. They should expect that the unjustified invasion of their country should create and inspire patriots in that country to similar feats of bravery and sacrifice and this has, and will continue to be reflected in the body count of Allied casualties.
This must also have an effect on the morale of the Allied Forces. They have access to the evidence, and must have formed a judgment with regards to the validity of their actions. They are being asked to injure and kill other human beings, something diametrically opposed to what is usual in their lives, they bear the added burden of ambivalence about the moral implications of their actions and about what will be the future implications of their sacrifices.
The conflict seen from this realistic perspective requires a much different policy than the continued prosecution of this war with the hope that some as yet unforeseen circumstance will result in the Allied Forces snatching victory from the jaws of defeat.
It requires that the occupation of Iraq end posthaste. That the Iraqi people with the assistance and support of the United Nations determine the future of that country. It requires that the United States of America not only withdraw its forces as quickly as security permits, but that it restore Saddam Hussein to power and agree to pay reparations for the damage it has caused. This is what would restore stability to the region and contribute to depressing the price of crude oil to bearable levels.
But this is just one example of the massive, urgent problems the human race confronts in the first decade of the Twenty First Century. There is the immediate and urgent issue of global warming, the perennial problem of poverty and hunger worldwide, and drug abuse, to name a few from a seemingly endless list.
That brings us back to the hypothesis I am trying to prove, that what is needed is the development of a mental approach permissive of the solution of the manifest and manifold social and political problems that are, and must be, a recurring feature of human existence.
It might also be opportune to speculate, at this juncture, why so few problems in the physical environment remain insoluble, while social and political problems are entirely beyond our ken?
Could it be that our intellectual approach in the physical environment is diametrically opposed to that we apply to social and political problems?
Could it be that in one milieu we ignore the facts, and the other we are at great pains to create ideas that are adequate to the reality?
Could it be that in one milieu to disregard facts creates immediate and palpable dysfunction, while in the other; the situation is so unbelievably complex, intricate and because failures in function were not immediately apparent that it has been permissive of irrationality which has fed on itself?
I am suggesting that this is the case, and I would like to present a logical explanation for this difference in approach, the reasons why in the social milieu we drift from tragedy to tragedy, why the majority of individuals exist in this milieu on a treadmill of despair, why this has been true from the beginning of the human story.
I suggest that this has much to do with the past, with conditions at the beginning of the human story.
When human beings began to create social organizations, they had only one model of interaction, the roles of territorial predator and prey. They had been habituated for many millennia to relying on one form of motivation, coercion.
This determined the intrinsic nature and form of the vast majority of social systems and determined the nature of human culture.
But very early in the human story, individuals developed ethics.
To appear to behave taking these into consideration, to be moral – and do the things necessary for survival in a physical environment that was still very unstable and in a state of flux, human beings became habituated to paying lip service to ethics.
There began to be a difference between how human beings thought, and how they acted; a difference between concept and precept. This difference significantly increased with the passage of time and eventually became the massive delusion that lames our higher mental processes today.
How else can we explain the fact that we cannot perceive the true intrinsic nature of our past; that social systems were constructed to satisfy the needs, wants and desires of the few who held power, and that that design was reinforced and buttressed over many millennia into an unchanging monolith of ways of thinking, attitudes and patterns of behavior no less unyielding and impermeable because it is intangible.
That design could never form the basis for a functioning democracy; it is clear that implicit in every contemporary policy and initiative is a choice between benefiting the elite, and, the common good. And, in respect of almost every important decision, it has been the few who have always and perennially benefited to the detriment of the common good.
With the inception and strengthening of democratic institutions, a conflict has been ignited between what would benefit the elite, and the common good. In the physical environment, in the economy, the elite have perennially prevailed to the detriment of the common good.
Can such a brief description encapsulate the many millennia of history that is the immensity and complexity of the human past? It can, because during that period, for all those countless years, the intrinsic nature of human interrelationships and society has been static and unchanging, for the duration of this epoch the human animal has been trapped in the relentless, crushing, insensate embrace of Absolutism, in a veritable stasis of tyranny and despair.
This paradigm dictates our actions today, it is not Americans who are addicted to oil, it is the major oil companies who are addicted to the profits that result when demand for crude oil is very high, as it was in the Seventies and it is currently. And these major economic players have used their massive clout and influence to perpetuate and even increase the reliance on crude oil.
The fact that Brazil is decreasing every day its reliance on petroleum products while the USA is increasing its dependence on this fuel is mute testimony to the validity of my claim.
Democracy should have been to means to extract the majority of human beings from the treadmill of despair on which they have existed from the beginning of time; it has not because its impact has been diluted to the degree that it has now become window dressing, part of the conceptual framework to which is paid lip service, a willing aid and accomplice perpetuating the status quo.
Every institution that could have advanced the legitimate rights and claims of the majority and leveled the playing field is in complete disarray. Most notably education, the USA has become a nation of drop outs – if we are to accept the opinion of Time magazine.
Those who are elected will invariably be the candidates who have the largest war chests, those who have collected the funds to buy television commercials, so after taking office to be reelected politicians must promote the interests of the few to the detriment of the common good.
Nothing will change until a bare majority in every body politic switch their allegiance from the wholly selfish and opportunistic me, my family and my organizations and begin to support what would benefit the common good; they must become less narrow minded, they must substitute the ethos of cooperation and eschew the unbridled, unprincipled competition that is a powerful tradition from the human past.
A switch to the Democratic Party means a switch to individuals with different appearances and personalities but who are agents of the same culture, coercion based culture. They too have been conditioned to play the same roles, those of predator and prey.
They will have the same ethos, competition. And competition is what breeds poverty as the weak must fall further and further behind as long as life continues to be a marathon.
Those who display civilized tendencies are also left behind, and most soon become aware of this and driven by their ambitions suppress their tendencies toward simple justice, love and compassion and come to see these values as liabilities; to be glorified but never acted on, as they are beguiled and attracted by the lure of material possessions.
The struggle for supremacy that causes modern civilizations to be accurately described as concrete jungles is obscured because it occurs behind a façade of concepts, of romantic and idealistic notions. Moreover, these illusions and delusions are made real on television, in movies, and, to a lesser degree in sport arenas.
In these arenas good guys come first, in these arenas there are happy endings, and the actors and actresses live happily ever after; to a degree where ever observer is forced to conclude that his, or her life on the treadmill of despair is the aberration, the oddity, and pretends to be as happy and content as the others with whom they encounter, creating the delusion of normality.
All are oblivious of the fundamental cause of their unhappiness and discontent, the design for living from time immemorial, the conscious and unconscious premises for thinking and action was meant to benefit the few, and these ways of thinking, attitudes and patterns of behavior have become automatic responses that are seldom questioned.
The proof of what I claim lies in the fact that successive Governments in the USA have access to more revenue than any other in history, have had more resources at their disposal than any other government on Planet Earth; yet over the past five decades have made little progress in combating the social ills of poverty and hunger.
If further proof were needed that there is a serious inadequacy in our intellectual approach to social problems, we need look no further for that evidence than to examine the fact that motivation is given scant regard and very little consideration in the formulation of public policy, nor is this very important factor given much weight in the decision making process of ordinary men and women.
Yet it is clear that the lack of motivation, since coercion to the degree necessary, is no possible; is the major factor inhibiting our efforts to socialize our young, is the major obstacle to igniting and releasing the creativity and maximum effort in the labor force.
We will never be able to compete with China, a very pertinent example since this is a nation that continues to rely on coercion, unless we can find an alternative form of motivation to galvanize the populace of this nation.
Until this is found and applied, and embedded in the social system, democracy will continue to exist in its current eviscerated state, its ideals, hopes, aspirations and institutions rendered futile, ineffectual and meaningless as it grapples with the inertia and sloth created by the cultural monolith that is Absolutism.
Absolutism is deeply embedded in every social system, in the very minds of individuals and is relentlessly and unfeelingly attempting to perpetuate a status quo of elitism, of five per cent of the populace in every country controlling ninety per cent of the wealth of that country. This has been so from time immemorial and this will not change the fundamental changes in culture that I have recommended.
Moreover, the price of freedom is that this change occurs in the man or woman in the mirror. There is a very popular tradition of creating scapegoats, of blaming the failure in social systems on politicians, on some world view or ideology, on minorities, or foreigners when in fact the problem is human culture, the inevitable consequence of the evolution of human societies from a state of nature.
Shall we continue to languish on this treadmill of despair, or do we dare to dismantle it by accepting and practicing the discipline of truth?
This choice is not made easier by the fact that the religious institution that first discovered this prescription opted to dilute and destroy its impact and wondrous efficacy by substituting and emphasizing possession as the way to grace.
This, like so much else; has not worked to create the necessary, fundamental behavior modification in human beings. Yet it is persevered with, reinforced and legitimized not because it contributed to function but because human beings were intensely conditioned to accept this dogma during many millennia when unlimited and unmitigated coercion could be applied.
Will it ever become clear to human beings that anything that would negatively impact the status quo of elitism is consigned to the dark corners and crevices of experience?
It is not in any way my objective to apportion blame to any individual or institution, but to create an accurate description of this ultimate paradox and consummate irony of human existence so that it can be resolved and positive developments occur.
I know beyond doubt that for most of the human story telling the truth would have meant death or penury for any individual who dared to practice this discipline. Indeed, the Church may not have survived – if it had not accepted the compromise of possession.
My experience is redolent with examples that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that good guys come last, that telling the truth is not the way to win friends and promote the support, affection and the loyalty of human beings.
My practice of this discipline has separated me from the human concourse. As I have become proficient in the practice of this discipline, as it has produced more and deeper insights into the intrinsic nature of social reality, I have become more and more isolated and alone.
It has meant that I became more and more aware of the hypocrisies, mendicancy and obfuscations practiced by individuals and organizations as they compete in this modern ‘state of nature.’
It has meant that I could evoke greater and greater hostility and ever increasing animus in family and friends because I had detailed and extensive knowledge of the reality of their existences, because I shared their experiences.
Yet I persevere armed with the certain knowledge that only telling the truth will make us free, will transport us beyond the ultimate paradox and consummate irony of the fact, the inescapable and unchangeable fact that our race evolved from a ‘state of nature.’
Down all the countless millennia of history, the majority of human beings have endured miserable, broken lives of quiet desperation. The time has come that from somewhere within we find the vision, courage and will to fix this, to construct social systems which provide for the majority the possibility of happiness.
It is time for us to confront and resolve what is the ultimate paradox and consummate irony of human existence. It is time for us to precipitate what would be the most pivotal, critical, and all embracing positive development in human history since the discovery of agriculture. It is time for the change.
William E. Virtue
Copyright Retained
Web site: voiceofpeace.net
E mail: vox_pacis@hotmail.com
posted by voiceofpeace at 2:06 PM
0 comments
