Members of the human species are powerfully attracted to absolutes, they shrink from a state of doubt and ambivalence, they celebrate surety and intensely abhor uncertainties; yet there are few absolutes and certainties in human existence even the survival of the species itself remains in doubt, I would suggest that as I write today humanity confronts two equally dire alternatives; either we will destroy the civilizations we have laboriously and painstakingly built with the weapons of mass destruction we have devised; or, we will suffer the slow lingering death precipitated by the long term impact of global warming.
These uncertainties, these manifest vicissitudes, I suggest, has always been a powerful factor in human existence; a human infant is born with a potential for language, for intelligence, for civilized behavior; but these potentials can only be realized with learning and have only been completely and totally embraced by two human beings down the long march of human history, by the man called Jesus and by my poor self.
This completely incredible, wholly iconoclastic statement must cast doubt on the state of my sanity, how dare I have the temerity to claim that only two human beings out of the billions that have lived have KNOWN what they were doing?
What I am saying is that only two human beings have managed thus far to reject and renounce being agents of coercion determined culture, the design for human existence whose ideology is that ‘might is right,’ whose ethos is competition, which relies on coercion to motivate the other, whose dominant roles have been territorial predator and hapless prey; whose impact on the lives of the vast majority of human beings has been unalterably malignant, inordinately vile, and completely depraved; what I am making is a simple statement that all but two human beings have existed for the entire duration of their miserable, inevitably tragic lives imprisoned in the shackles of determinism; and, this thesis I intend to prove beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt to create for members of my species, for the first time at last, the possibility of happiness.
I intend on this date, the 10th September, 2010 to create the ideational means for human beings to divest from their minds the shackles of determinism; and, on September 11th using the medium of the World Wide Web I mean to disseminate this information; and, I entertain the hope that this will cause a bare majority of human beings to follow the faint trail I have blazed out of the ‘state of nature’ and begin to create the peaceful and prosperous future I envision for the human race, a path through time diametrically opposed to the road we have been travelling for all of the rest of our checkered, bloody, replete and redolent with pain and suffering history, a period during which we have been languished on a treadmill of despair consigned to blindly repeating the past, over, and over, and over, again.
When shall the future of the human species begin?
That choice should, in the name of simple justice, be made by he who has created the possibility of happiness for his species, by he who has for upwards of three decades has spoken the truth and done the right thing; and, borne the dire and malefic consequences of having the temerity to embrace a new design for human existence - whose world view is that ‘right is might,’ whose ethos is cooperation, which relies on positive reinforcements to motivate the other, an ideology which is hoped will transport members of the human species into a brand new world, a continuum for the first time at last, beyond the ‘state of nature.’
I was born my birth certificate documents on September 11, 1945, seven years ago this date became a day of infamy, the date on which Muslim Fundamentalists flew aircraft laden with jet fuel into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in the city of New York and precipitated a situation in which I could never have a happy birthday as long as I lived, an act so replete and redolent with terror and hate that I could never celebrate anything on the date on which it occurred.
In atonement, when I became aware that I was ready to make another assault on the forces and inertia of Absolutism, I deemed it appropriate that this assault would take place on this day creating if it were successful, a cosmic balance so that again I could happily and without reservation celebrate my birthday, so that 911 would not only be a day of infamy; but also the day when human beings began to KNOW what they were doing, when they ceased to be imprisoned by the shackles of determinism, when they ceased to be flesh and blood puppets animated and galvanized by coercion determined culture, when they took their heads out of the stanchions and began to be free, independent beings whose behavior was mediated by intelligence and limited by the dictates of their consciences.
News reports indicate that some mindless, talking animal of a Pastor in Gainesville Florida has decreed that this will be the day when this infamy will be expanded, enlarged and escalated by the reprisal of burning Holy Books of Muslim Fundamentalists; I am sure that might will never be overcome by might, that injustice will never be overcome by greater injustices, that might can, and will only be overcome by human beings having the compassion, courage and will to do the right thing; and, it is to this proposition I have dedicated my life to bring about the dawning of a day when might will be defeated and completely subordinate in the minds and hearts of human beings to that which is right.
The fundamental issue that must be resolved is how any human being perceives the other; I suggest that events, circumstances and conditions have conspired to create a treadmill of despair formulated out of and driven by the engine of predation a drama in which the hapless prey surrenders its all to satisfy the needs for energy resources of the predator, this mindless, natural paradigm has come to be the basis for all social interaction; and, fundamental to all human interaction is the notion that the other is prey and that all and every means at the disposal of the strong should and can be utilized to preserve that primitive, atavistic status quo.
Two human beings have completely rejected and renounced that paradigm, that this world view can ever be rationalized or justified to apply to complexity and uniqueness of social relations, the man who taught “If a man strike you on one cheek, turn to him also the other;” and a man who has committed to using positive reinforcements in all his relations with the other human beings.
But if we dare to travel into the ancient past when this issue was decided when this paradigm was set in motion, thus far immutably, and apply our higher mental processes the circumstances that obtained then it will be clear that this model was functional with regards to one organism attaining the energy resources required for its survival; but because it was so ubiquitous and pervasive it began to be utilized as the means used to satisfy all the needs, wants and desires of human beings.
Closer examination of the situation that obtained then will reveal that cannibalism was not practiced within the tribe, that since coercion was used by the strongest members of the tribe to procure food resources, the hunters, this means became popular with respect of the need to satisfy all innate drives; it began to be used to satisfy the goading of sex, to be influential in deciding how food and other scarce items should be distributed, to determine the relations between stronger and weaker members of the tribe; the weak began to be expected to do all in their power to satisfy the needs, wants and desires of the strong, the basis of modern Elitism and Absolutism.
Predation, I submit, was the dominant drama in the ‘state of nature,’ to be successful, to survive in this social environment required that human beings had to become proficient even expert in applying force, the attitudes, ways of thinking and patterns of behavior required for applying force became the foundation of human culture, and created the shackles of determinism a model which was functional then, which was required for survival then; but which has now become the major obstacle to the human species realizing its potential for civilized existence.
The culture required for survival in the ‘state of nature,’ generalized from the drama of predation to become the basis for social interaction and social organization and this situation last for such an extended period of time, One Hundred Thousand years, and this learning was attended by such intense, sere conditions that this culture has become so deeply embedded in social institutions that could be said to have developed a life of their own.
It could be accurately stated that reliance on coercion to motivate the other, a requirement for survival then, determined thus far immutably and unalterably the intrinsic nature of human culture.
What must be emphasized is that this was never deliberate, never a result of conscious thought or planning; but rather a consequence of habits practiced for such an extended period of time in such intense and sere conditions that these began to have the force and impact of instincts, unconsidered and not subject to mediation by intelligence or limitation by the dictates of conscience.
The situation is made more complicated by the fact that fear was, and is the most powerful and efficient motivation for human beings and is therefore the most potent spur to action but to produce such intense fear requires significant diminution of the rights and personal autonomy of the other which generates conflict.
During the first One Hundred Thousand years after the emergence of the new branch of the genus hominid, Homo sapiens, a period in which ethics and moral values had not yet been learned - if we had evolved as moral beings, with higher mental processes in place, if we had been created in the image of an Omnipotent God the world would be a very different place - but that is not how it happened and wanting it to be that way will never make it happen that way will never make that model the basis for function, what we must do is socialize a bare majority of the human species to attitudes, ways of thinking and patterns of behavior now required for the survival and progress of the race; and, we must do this with a clear understanding that there are interest groupings that are diametrically opposed to the triumph of rationality.
BIOLOGICAL BASIS FOR SOCIALIZATION
The human infant comes into the world as a biological organism with animal needs and impulses and certain innate capacities. Man’s biological nature makes socialization possible and necessary. For example, socialization is possible because man has the inborn capacity to use language, but this capacity is realized only with socialization. The following are some of the biological characteristics of the human animal on which socialization is based:
Absence of instincts An instinct is a relatively complex behavior pattern biologically fixed for a species. Nest-building techniques among birds are a familiar example: they vary between species but not within species. If man possessed such biologically fixed behavior patterns, they would limit his learning and his socialization; variation and change would then be impossible.
Man has biological drives rather than instincts. A drive, such as hunger or sex, is an organic tension felt as discomfort or impulse but does not direct behavior to specific goals or in specific ways. A drive impels activity but does not determine it in detail. That man is activated by drives rather than by biologically fixed behavior patterns makes his needs amenable to social direction.
The absence of biological instincts makes socialization possible. Other aspects of man’s biological nature make socialization imperative.
Interactional needs Interaction with others during infancy is a biological need of many higher animals. If deprived of bodily contact and interaction in early life, rhesus monkeys develop behavioral aberrations and are unable to mate as adults. A few females who were deprived in this way were impregnated but were incapable of maternal behavior and often beat, bit, and maltreated their young.
In an experiment, infant monkeys were taken from their biological mothers and each infant was placed in a cage with two mock “mothers,” one constructed of wire, the other covered with soft cloth. Some monkeys were fed by bottles attached to the wire mother, others by bottles attached to the cloth mother. Even those monkeys that were fed by the by bottles attached to the wire mother spent most of their time clinging to the cloth mother. Primates appear to have a biological drive for bodily contact independent of the satisfaction of feeding.
When confronted with unfamiliar objects, the infant monkeys fled to the cloth mother. As their fears diminished, they explored the new objects, with occasional returns to the mother. If no mother or only a wire mother was present, the infants cowered in terror, screaming, sucking their fingers or toes, and other manifesting fear and withdrawal. The cloth mother allayed fear, the wire mother did not.
Monkeys raised with cloth mothers did not show normal development, however, unless they had contact with other infant monkeys. Only then did they develop into socially and sexually competent adults. This shows the importance of interaction for biological development among primates.
These findings cannot be mechanically applied to human beings, but they are consistent with studies of children deprived of sustained human contact.
Childhood dependence Man has a longer period of physical dependence than other primates. This dependency is further prolonged by his need to learn the techniques of social living. Because the infant is helpless and the child socially inept, it is necessary to assign responsibility for child care and training. Social control transforms biological mating into the social institution of the family; the helplessness of the child thus contributes to the socializing of the adult.
The long period of physical dependence encourages long- term emotional dependence, and ties of feeling develop between the child and those who care for him, whether or not they are his biological parents.
Capacity to learn The child is highly educable throughout the long period of childhood dependence. Although abilities vary from one individual to another, a high level of intelligence is an innate human biological potentiality. Man can learn more than other animals and can continue to learn more over a longer period of time. For a few years the young chimpanzee learns as well as, and in some respects better than, a human infant of the same age, but his relative rate of learning soon declines.
Language Man’s ability to learn is directly related to his capacity for language. Other animals have intelligence, but because he has language man alone has reason. When a chimpanzee fits some poles together to secure an otherwise unobtainable banana, he might be said to have insight into solving a problem. But without language he can neither reflect upon the principle nor elaborate it, nor can he convey it as a principle to another chimpanzee. Only through language can insight be formulated as knowledge and transmitted to and shared with others, thus becoming a social rather than merely an individual possession.
Language also expresses and arouses emotion, conveying values and attitudes as well as knowledge. Whether as a vehicle for knowledge or for attitudes, language is the key factor in the creation of human society. By making possible the communication of ideas, it frees response and interaction from the limited confines of the purely biological. It makes possible symbolic interaction, upon which human society depends. (Broom 86)
I inflicted this lenghty quote on my readers, if I still have any readers, to demonstrate the capacities that members of the species Homo sapiens have the potential to access that are unavailable to every other organism on Planet Earth, this is especially relevant from my perspective because we are rejecting and renouncing these capabilities, specifically we are renouncing the most valuable adaptation produced by the process of evolution, intelligence.
Contained herein is a debunking of theory popular with the Gay community that sexual preference is genetically determined not learned; something that would expose how could we possibly be renouncing something of inestimable value, intelligence, it arises out of the mindset ‘beliefs are opportune, they conceal interests,’ the Gay position is of course validated if sexual preference is genetically determined, which is nonsense but they fervently believe this.
I want to present a clear choice to human beings between the rational and the irrational; and, to do this I need to expose the source of these irrational beliefs, self interest.
The human species emerged in a ‘state of nature,’ into the physical and social environment created by a planet that had not yet attained physical equilibrium; that was suffering the stresses and strains occasioned by the cooling of its crust; that was experienced earthquakes, Ice Ages, floods, upheavals that created islands or submerged land masses, that created mountains or valleys or lakes; they emerged into a social environment in which the law of the jungle dominated, survival of the fittest, in which fang and claw prevailed, in which ‘might was right.’
For One Hundred Thousand years small tribes of human beings lived and flourished in this milieu; and, developed hunting and gathering societies based on the law of the jungle, the genes of the strongest male predominated, as in all bands of predators, then and now, and the social system was hierarchical and therefore elitist.
This social heritage, that is all the knowledge, beliefs, customs and skills that are available to members of a society, produced, when human beings began to domesticate certain grasses and animals, a design for existence, Absolutist Regimes, determined by attitudes, ways of thinking, and patterns of behavior that they had successfully practiced for One Hundred Thousand years, a design for existence in which Absolute Rulers had the power of life and death over their subjects; again ‘might was right,’ the ethos was competition, coercion was the means relied on to motivate the other, and, the dominant roles were territorial predator and hapless prey.
But human beings during these Ten Thousand years demonstrated that they were capable of creating social systems in which there was increased cooperation, if circumstances demanded such an adaptation:
An important change in military tactics checked, for a few centuries, the drift of Greek society toward the Middle Eastern pattern of polarization between a leisured aristocracy and an oppressed, poverty-stricken populace. In the second half of the seventh century, and more especially in the sixth, the hoplite - a heavily armed and armored infantryman - replaced the horseman as the decisive element on the battlefield. When massed together into a phalanx - a regular formation trained to charge and maneuver in unison - hoplites could prevail even against cavalry and were able to sweep loosely organized infantry from the field. Although regular military formations were nothing new in Greek or Middle Eastern warfare, the combination of heavier armor, closer order, and above all, the rhythmic coordination of mass movement in the phalanx, raised the effectiveness of Greek infantry to hitherto unequaled levels.
In its mature form, the phalanx comprised eight ranks, each so closely formed that every man's shield helped to cover the neighbor to his left in the line. Whether this arrangement prevailed from the beginning is not clear. But by the early sixth century, the charge of a well-trained and well-armored phalanx, its thousands of men acting as one and keeping pace by means of the rhythmic shouts of the paean, proved itself to be all but irresistible. Cavalry could not oppose the advance of such a unit nor break its front. Only by taking the phalanx on the flank or in the rear could horsemen still play an effective role in battle.
Profound social consequences flowed from this change. The ultimate basis of aristocratic primacy was, of course, removed when the farmer-hoplite became the decisive factor on the battlefield. Far more important was the psychological effect of the prolonged drill needed to train the members of the phalanx to maintain formation in the field and to execute maneuvers quickly and smoothly in the face of the enemy. In the ranks each man was the equal of his fellows. Each hoplite's life depended upon the stalwart behavior of his neighbor in the battle line. Differences of wealth or social status ceased to matter, while strength, and discipline were at a premium. All this no doubt fostered a sense of solidarity and equality among the citizen-soldiers of the phalanx. Moreover, as graduates of close-order drill of a modern army will readily admit, oft-repeated drill exercises, involving rhythmic movements of large masses of men to the accompaniment of singing and music, acts like a powerful hypnotic, fostering a quite subrational sense of well-being and social solidarity.
As a natural extension of the sentiments generated within the phalanx, a new standard of behavior gained ground among the Greeks. Aristocratic display became bad form, un-Greek, barbarian. The measure of a good man and citizen came to be the modest life of an independent farmer, owning enough land to live decently, able to equip himself with spear, shield, and helmet, and ready to play his part manfully on the battlefield. As this ideal won increasing acceptance, the amassing of private wealth lost much of its attractiveness; and by the close of the sixth century, even wealthy aristocrats had begun to live and dress simply. Competitive conspicuous consumption which had been characteristic of the nobility in the seventh century was diverted into new channels, as men of wealth began to take pride in financing public buildings and services with a munificence they no longer dared or cared to lavish upon themselves. Thus, a lively spirit of egalitarianism and civic solidarity began to distinguish Greek from foreign ways of life.
The introduction of the phalanx had far-reaching political as well as social consequences. Other things being equal, the larger the phalanx, the stronger and more secure the polis. Hence a system of society permitting wealthy landowners to acquire the small farms of their fellow citizens and reduce the poorer agricultural class to penury or slavery became intolerable. Each such downward shift in status meant a smaller phalanx, a weaker city, and insecurity for all. Consequently, both Sparta and Athens (the only two states about which we are tolerably well informed) took steps in the late seventh and early sixth centuries B.C. to insure themselves against the decay of their phalanxes.
Sparta's response to the problem of organizing and maintaining an efficient phalanx took the drastic form of the so-called Lycurgan constitution. Probably introduced toward the end of the seventh century B.C., the sole aim of this constitution was to make the Spartan phalanx as strong and numerous as possible. It set up a rigorous system of obligatory military training lasting throughout every citizen's active life. The Spartans suppressed all outward marks of differences in rank or wealth - indeed officially they termed themselves Homoroi, or Equals. All able-bodied citizens became, in effect, professional soldiers, a garrison planted in the midst of a subject population of disfranchised freemen and serfs who were compelled to work the land and support the citizenry. As a result of full-time training all the year round, the Spartan phalanx became by far the best in Greece. Yet the insidious fear of corrupting citizens by exposing them to the temptations of a freer life abroad, together with the even more paralyzing fear of revolt in the rear, deterred the Spartan leaders from using their military superiority to support a consistent imperial policy vis-a-vis other Greek cities. Instead they settled for the establishment of a loose league of cities under their own rigidly conservative leadership.
Athens' reaction to the threatened decay of her phalanx was drastic enough but did not involve conscripting all citizens into a barrack life. Instead, the Athenians appointed Solon as a special magistrate with extraordinary powers to revise the laws. Solon forbade debt-slavery for the future; and by canceling outstanding debts, he restored the small farmers to their land and to the status of free citizens. In this fashion, some of the grosser economic inequalities within the Athenian citizen body were removed; and the strength of the phalanx was restored.
The phalanx, therefore, was the school which made the Greek polis. It checked the incipient growth of an aristocratic luxury and substituted an ideal of moderation in all outward things. It confirmed, if it did not actually create, the ideal of self-identification with and dedication to the polis. Finally, it greatly broadened the class of citizens who took an active part in the polis affairs, for the hoplites who defended their city on the battlefield could scarcely be excluded from participation in civil affairs. Nor were they. Solon's laws, for example, gave the class of hoplites the right to act as a court of appeal from judicial decisions of the aristocratic magistrates; and in Sparta the Lycurgan constitution gave the assembly of citizen-hoplites power to elect all magistrates. In this fashion, the right to a voice in public affairs, formerly restricted to nobles, was broadened to include all citizens having the means to equip themselves as members of the phalanx. The "hoplite franchise" remained a conservative ideal for many Greek cities throughout the fifth century and later. (McNeil 198)
All these developments, I suggest, as random, disparate and diverse as they may appear to be were driven by individuals with power who had the mindset ‘mind was right’ who were simply trying to achieve selfish, self interested aims and objectives.
From the beginning, training must have been a factor in producing the best hunter; and, a father would not have thought twice about spending more time training his son as against the time he spent training the sons of others; individuals who were dependent would be much more amenable to satisfying the needs, wants and desires of the strong giving rise to the institution of patronage and dependency which is as powerful today as when centuries ago social systems began to attempt to create functioning democracies.
What I am saying is that technology has changed dramatically down the long march of human history; but the culture has changed very little from that which was learned in the ‘state of nature.’
What produced more than cosmetic attempts to create government of the people, for the people, by the people was the need to enlist the arms of the majority to overcome the threat of the Hun, and then of the Nazi/Nippon Axis; and, the greatest threat of all, the threat of World Communism.
The increased cooperation that resulted during this period is not very different, albeit on a larger scale, than that resulted from the need to create a powerful phalanx centuries ago in Greek cities.
The greatest threat to the dominance of coercion determined culture occurred Two Thousand years ago when ethics and moral values began to have a serious impact on human affairs and then occurred the accommodation that resulted in the vast majority of human beings completely renouncing and rejecting the greatest gift of evolution, intelligence, galvanized by the blind, unconscious, mindless need to perpetuate the status quo that ‘might is right.’
Most individuals began to be moral and ethical in concept, and, their self esteem was based on whether they considered themselves to be moral or ethical in concept; while they continued to in precept act consistent with the dictates of coercion determined culture; which action occurred in the subconscious compartment of their minds.
Someone whom I considered a dear friend from my youth whom I recently began to communicate with on Facebook broke off communications when I said I was good as Jesus, not mind you the total, wholly incredible fantasy created by the Roman Catholic Church; but the man Jesus who, as I did, told the truth until telling the truth created awareness of what he was doing.
It is not Europeans who committed the atrocities during the Crusades; nor was it Europeans who created the horrors and cruelties that dominated the Middle Passage; nor was it Europeans who committed the numerous genocides against South and Central American populations; nor was it Americans who committed ethnic cleansing that decimated Native American tribes like the Sioux, the Apache, the Comanche, and on and on and on; nor was it Germans who were involved in the Shoah during which more recently, in civilized times, millions of undesirables perished in Concentration Camps; all these atrocities were committed by members of the species Homo sapiens which was made possible because the human psyche is divided into two compartments and this has made individuals capable of committing any atrocity because they honestly can report they have absolutely no knowledge of what they were doing.
Individuals who are horrified and whose animus is ignited by the simple claim that I am a moral being, that I am as moral as Jesus and attained that state the same way he did by telling the truth, cannot say coercion determined culture; and, continue to function because they have hundreds of channels of television that give them access to catharsis, a situation the creators of Greek Theater could never have envisioned as they created variations on the Oedipus complex, on the Pygmalion theme, and other Muses.
Moreover, nothing I can say, no proven ability to prophesy and accurately predict the future, no dire combination of conditions and circumstances could galvanize them to tell the truth as much as is humanly possible even for a week.
The fact is during the One Hundred and Ten Thousand years of human history, the period our forebears lived in a ‘state of nature,’ and the reinforcing Ten Thousand years of Absolutism, immorality was deeply embedded in every social institution; and, the accumulation of power of any kind, required the commission of immoral acts, in the Sixteenth through Nineteenth Century slaves in Jamaica were subjected to the following sanctions by Christian Englishmen:
Sloane, who never questioned the idea of slavery and whose evidence is therefore reliable with regard to punishment, wrote that the usual punishment for rebellion was:
Burning them by nailing them down on the ground with crooked sticks on every limb and then applying the Fire by degrees from the feet and hands, burning them gradually up to the head, whereby their pains are extravagant . .
For crimes of lesser nature Gelding, or chopping off half of the foot with an Ax . . .For running away Iron Rings of great weight on their Ankles, or Pottocks about their Necks, which are Iron Rings with two long Necks rivetted to them, or a Spur in the Mouth . . . For Negligence, they are usually whipt by the overseer with Lance-wood Switches, till they be bloody, and several of the Switches broken, first being tied up by the hands in the Mill-Houses . . . After they are whip'd till they are Raw, some put on their Skins Pepper and Salt to make them smart; at other times Masters will drop melted Wax on their skins and use several exquisite tortures . . . ( Patterson 82)
This produced a degree of conflict and resistance to this institution as indicated by the following conditions:
Individual Violence The legal penalty for a slave ‘imagining the death’ of a white person or threatening to injure him in any way, except in the defence of his master’s property, was death. Despite the severity of this law and the barbarous manner in which it was executed (usually the culprit was burned to death) the incidence of masters dying at the hands of their slaves were not uncommon. The means usually employed for exacting vengeance on the master was poisoning. At this the slaves were extremely expert, especially the African obeah-man from whom most of the poison originally came. Long gives a detailed account of the numerous herbs known to and used by the Negroes, with an impact which could be varied for different lengths of time after application. Lewis, who thought that poisoning was the Negroes’ greatest vice cited the following cases:
A neighbouring gentleman, as I hear, has now three Negroes in prison, all domestics, and one of them grown grey in his service, for poisoning him with corrosive sublimate; his brother was actually killed by similar means . . .Another agent, who appears to be in high favor with the Negroes, whom he now governs, was obliged to quit an estate, from the frequent attempts to poison him; and a person against whom there is no sort of charge alleged for tyranny, after being brought to the doors of death by a cup of coffee, only escaped a second time by his civility, in giving the beverage, prepared for himself, to two young book-keepers, to both of whom it proved fatal. (Patterson 265)
I welcome my readers to the real world, a world in which in order to perpetuate the status quo of the unmentionable and unthinkable design for human existence, coercion determined culture, when ethics and moral values began to have an impact, human beings renounced their intelligence by engaging in actions that created such a burden of guilt that this resulted in the laming of their intellects.
The proof of this, and that this is a phenomena observable in all centers of Western civilization, is that when serious attempts began to be made to create functioning democracies ignited by the threat Nazi/Nippon Axis, when limitations began to be placed on the degree and extent to which coercion in any form could be applied to citizens, no alternative means was developed to MOTIVATE the patterns of behavior required to preserve societal order and progress.
When slavery was abolished, in a logical progression the threat of dismissal replaced the whips, chains and exquisite tortures, when wage slavery was abolished nothing was done, there was little awareness that anything needed to be done resulting in the incipient chaos and anomie which characterizes the operations of all those nations which are engaged in the transcendent enterprise of attempting to create functioning democracies within their borders.
In 1974, two small children were burnt to death in the Fire at Orange Lane, as a consequence of arson by political goons who supported the same political movement as I did, I refused to accept, and have never accepted, that children should lose their lives to further the corrupt machinations of politicians.
In October, 1975 while in sojourning in Israel I determined to tell the truth as much as was humanly possible and stumbled upon the means to create an ideology that could change the world into a place where incidents of man’s inhumanity to man were the exception rather than the rule, the development which I believed would make the world safe for minor children.
After a few years of the practice of the discipline of truth I developed the mental acuity required to embark upon an independent audit of the human condition and discovered a monstrous situation in which human beings were capable of doing anything because they did not know what they were doing, because they could consign any activity to the subconscious compartments of their minds.
What I have been trying to do in the period thereafter was communicate to a bare majority of human beings in any social system the positive developments that would result from telling the truth, that this would cause actions to be mediated by intelligence and limited by the dictates of conscience, which would in turn reduce incidents of man’s inhumanity to man, my original objective.
I say again that the intellects of human beings, especially the intellects of those who form the elite with their hands on the levers of power are inevitably lamed by guilt, disabling their higher mental processes and perpetuating the status quo of coercion determined culture; which is certain to result, soon or late, in the destruction of the human species.
The ultimate paradox and consummate irony of this situation is that no amount of evidence that I present is meaningful for what is required is that individuals begin to simply tell the truth, it does not matter that I was nearly one hundred per cent right in prediction of the result of the prosecution of former Governor Blagojevich several months before the fact because this is strictly a matter between each human being and his or her conscience, whether they decide to use the practice of the discipline of truth to change the man, or woman, in their mirrors, whether they can subordinate their selfish interests to the common good.
But it is necessary to state the obvious, that the imminent failure of American democracy must usher in a new era of Absolutism dominated by Communist China that the human species is unlikely to survive.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The Sociology of Slavery, An Analysis of the Origins, Development and Structure of Negro Slave Society in Jamaica by Orlando Patterson, published 1969 by Fairleigh Dickinson University Press London: Associated University Presses.
Sociology A Text with Adapted Readings Fourth Edition by Leonard Broom & Philip Selznick, A Harper International Edition.
THE RISE OF THE WEST, A History of the Human Community by William H. McNeill The University of Chicago Press, Published 1963
No comments:
Post a Comment