This seems to be a time when it is important to stay calm and not to be provoked, for the inhabitants of the so-called “swamp” in Washington D.C. actually have no interest in preserving the peace. Why should they? Peace would involve exposure, for peaceful people have honest discussions, and honesty would expose a lot of corruption, which is how the name “swamp” was earned.

The corrupt have backed themselves into a corner, and therefore many will not do the spiritual thing, which is to publicly confess their wrong-doing. For if they were spiritual they would not have been corrupted in the first place. Therefore many will do the unspiritual thing when cornered, which is to fight like a cornered rat.

The thing that always amazes me is the ability the corrupt have to deny their own corruption. They often are oblivious of the way their greed has led them astray, even when it is blatantly obvious to others. “All a man’s ways seem innocent to him, but motives are weighed by the Lord.” (Proverbs 16:2)

In the case of communism the greed is justified in three ways. First, the highest spirituality is dismissed as “the opiate of the masses”, and atheism is put forward as being more pragmatic. Second, coveting what others own is justified as “sharing”, in some ways like Christians shared what they owned in the book of Acts, but in other ways by brute force, at the point of a gun, like a bank robber. Third, dishonesty is made to look positive because “the ends justify the means”.

The dishonesty always seemed most vile to me, especially when it involves using others, and laughing at them behind their backs. To use another as a “useful idiot” always seemed like a violation of trust to me. Furthermore the person most likely to be fooled is the person doing the tricking, because procrastination is a way we mortals have of never doing what we promise ourselves we will do “someday.” Therefore “the ends justify the means” is like a person buying cigarettes so he can seriously think about planning to quit; (the person will never quit by smoking, but it placates his uneasy conscience to “plan“.) Lastly, the “means“ get meaner and meaner, because the greed for power gets greater and greater. Stalin may have meant well, but he killed off more and more “partners“, erasing them from public pictures until he alone was pictured, for that was his “means” of effective control, good governance, and order. He was proof that “power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”.

Stalin erasing foes Soviet_censorship_with_Stalin2

Our Founding Fathers were well aware of how power corrupts, which is why they were so careful to devise a constitution that shares power between three branches of government, with checks and balances. Some in Washington want to escape the checks and balances, because it seems to obstruct efficient governance. Therefore they speak of the constitution as being an “evolving” document, which is just a way of trying to get around its constraints. They don’t want to be constrained, because they feel they know best, and others are not as wise as they are.

This is how corruption begins. One loses respect for being open and honest and discussing things with others in a respectful manner, and resorts to some form of dishonesty and disrespect. Rather than arriving at a decision based on higher Truth, back-room deals are made, involving bribes of one sort or another. Rather than what is best for all concerned, the focus becomes narrow: “What’s in this for me?”

When such rot sets in our nation is designed to expose it. A free press is suppose to be part of that exposure, but in our current crisis the press was purchased by the elite and all but emasculated. Were it not for the unexpected blooming of the internet in the past twenty years the free press would be dead. As it is the public became aware of how bad the corruption in Washington was becoming in the nick of time, and now a desperate battle has begun.

This is a battle between Truth and deceivers. The deceivers do not want to give up all that deceit has illicitly “earned” them. They think they know how the game is played, when in fact they have broken countless rules. They want to continue to play as they have played, unaware that they have broken so many rules they have created a sort of anarchy, and have undermined their own foundations, and are sawing off the very branch they are perched upon. If they studied history at all they would see that, if they “win”, they are likely to inherit horrors as bad as, or even worse than, the horrors they fear they’ll face if they “lose”, and have to give up all the perks of their corruption.

One attribute of the corrupt, and also of communism, is that there is a movement away from true sharing of power. It involves the mentality of all-or-nothing. Communism allows no other party besides the communist party, and corruption allows no alternative as well. It is a narrowing down of thought, a diminishing of the mind.

Because of this, communism prefers violence to civil discourse. It wants no checks and no balances. In order to eradicate opposition it seeks to “purge” differing views, and dislikes individuality. Individuality is abhorred because it differs, whether it differs as a person, or a family, or a community, or a state, or a nation. Communism seeks a “multiculturalism” that abolishes all nations, and therefore all cultures. All the talk about “respecting diversity” actually disrespects differences, when you look hard at what is actually stated. In the end what is wanted is not a cultured people, but culture-less masses.

A cultured people prefer to use civil procedures, to becoming a rabble that riots. The corrupt prefer a riot, and encourage riotous behavior, because if things get out of hand they may seize power in the name of “restoring order”, whereas civil procedure would expose their corruption and face them with reform.

Therefore it is important to stay calm and not be provoked. When faced by useful idiots chanting nonsense, point out the nonsense quietly. Over and over and over again. For many innocents have not thought all that deeply about what they do, and are largely being loyal to a cause. And one thing about the loyal is this: Once they discover they have been lied to, and are being used, and are laughed at behind their backs, they flip sides with astonishing alacrity.

Lastly, keep your sense of humor even when things look grim.

Cartoon Ban Ice FullSizeRender


2 thoughts on “AVOIDING CIVIL WAR

  1. A couple of thoughts on this. The first one is this – when history is rewritten every 20 years or so by the next generation of “historians,” it becomes exceeding difficult to learn from history. In fact, if you have a contrary thought to what history says, wait a couple of decades, it may be mainstream.

    The second thought is this – Jefferson didn’t much like “democracies.” I believe he said it was worse than a monarchy because half of the people could enslave the other half. You have singled out communism, but democracy isn’t that far behind. It all depends on who “we the people” represent. So let’s attempt to consider history.

    Within this nation, historically, the most corrupt governments have always been in the cities. The city bosses ran the cities and the people’s voice didn’t much matter. Oh yes, there were times of rebellions from the ranks that put the “bosses” back in the shadows, but it was just a matter of time before they took control again.

    This country, as in the USofA, was slowly being taken over by “big money” as far back as the “other” not so “Civil war.” But basically, that was mostly on the federal level and in the back rooms of party meetings where “money talks and BS walks.” The state governments, as a whole, and as a necessity under the Constitution if it was to remain viable, remained mostly immune to the corruption of both the federal government and the city governments. And then.

    Yes, and then came the Warren Court’s landmark decision of “one man, one vote.” Now realize that since we are talking how the states ran themselves, the Supreme Court actually had no right to even accept the case, but they did and in their liberal way, destroyed the nation, for with the one man. one vote decision, they turned the state and county governments over to the cities, where the vast majority of state residents would reside.

    Gone was the control exercised by necessity of the agricultural counties on what to do with revenue. With the state senates turned over to the cities, as well as their house of representatives, “corruption central” took charge of the piggy bank and started buying votes with hand outs. With political power now totally vested in the cities, so came the party’s power as well, and the whole system started lurching along in lockstep with city corruption. The last vestige of control exercised by agriculture is in the US Senate, and even there, the party chooses the candidates based on City preferences, and the state gets to vote for what the parties select.

    As a nation, the US is exactly where you would expect it to be based on the simple fact that all processes that select governments are controlled by corruption, either indirectly by the bosses, or directly by the parties. And we can’t blame it on an “executive order” which has questionable legitimacy to me, or some lame bill being passed by Congress, but on an illegal decision made by “the boys in black” that are just as susceptible to corruption as any other political person, and yes, judges, for the most part, ARE political people, just generally have a higher price you have to pay when you buy one. The Warren Court sold out the nation, just hope old Earl got enough for all the misery he and his band of robes gave the nation from that day on. I doubt if anyone that has suffered injustice since would think he did if he didn’t catch a knot with 13 loops instead.

    • Incidentally, the reason I say the Supreme court had no right to consider the case that resulted in “one man, one vote,” was because it was about how the states set up their own governments – all modeled on the US Constitution, which allowed individual states to have 2 senators, just as the state governments allowed each county to have 2 senators. But since this is a states’ rights issue, the federal government had no jurisdiction over it, only over the manner in which federal positions would be filled from within the states – that is, Representatives would be elected by populations of equal amounts. States could have chosen to have monarchies if that was their chose, as long as their federal elections followed federal rules.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.