By Robert Williams

We are told by pollsters that about three quarters of our American population declare Christianity as their faith.  While the Constitution provides protection from government take-over of religion,  with an 80 percent majority it is safe to say that as a populace Christianity is “our faith”.   Christians believe in a benign attitude towards their fellow humans because that sort of attitude is a primary element of our faith.  This benign attitude spread into secular circles enough to justify it as a commonly accepted American principle.   It is no surprise then that we find it hard to understand and accept that some among us do not necessarily share this attitude and are motivated to commit dastardly acts.  We especially find it hard to understand that there exists a particular non-Christian  widespread faith in the world that is not at all benign,  but just the opposite.  We are also justifiably puzzled that after more than two thousand years of efforts to curb human mischief,  we still have con artists and liars and thieves.  We have even allowed such mean-spirited human vampires to dominate our government.  The key to understanding this is partly that we have not sufficiently taken to heart our own faith’s warnings about false Gods and false prophets, — and partly because our wishful thinking chooses to disregard human nature.

In the animal world it seems that evolutionary pressure was served by grouping in a manner facilitating the most competent “alpha” member dominating the group until some younger and more competent member takes over by successfully overcoming the power of the existing alpha and thus proving the newcomer’s right to rule.  In order to sharpen evolution with competition,  the instinct to compete was strengthened. Greed was the natural outcome of alternating scarcity and plenty.  Gorging and hoarding in times of plenty helped survive the times of scarcity.

As far as historians can tell,  emerging humans copied animals, — and the same forces that drove animals to compete and hoard,   helped tribal chiefs emerge as leaders.  The unfortunate collusion of spiritualism and government that our Constitution protects against,  began when the first “shaman” was able to influence the chief and make the collusion of the two — better cement intimidation of the group.  Humans are born greedy and also seem to have copied the animal territorialism of guarding good food sources and hunting grounds.  Of course these factors encouraged ambitious conflict with other groups.  It is not so much that greed and ambition by themselves are destructive,  it is the manner of their application.  If greed and ambition motivate people to strive mightily in the creation of wealth, discovery, science, and art, — then the ultimate result provides jobs and philanthropy.  This is too often overlooked because the mis-application of ambition towards tyranny has been so commonly spectacular and bloody.

Almost by accident,  a form of democracy was established in early Greece but did not evolve much because it  excluded the common masses.  Nevertheless the idea stuck around and became an essential part of later thinking.

Tribal chiefs evolved into the system of Kings and Nobles and Serfs  that lasted right through the ancient Egyptian and Greek societies and the middle ages.  For all that time the common masses remained ruled by the elite.  What re-awakened interest in democracy seems to have been the huge changes that materialism  and science knowledge brought about in the industrial revolution which released the masses from grueling hand labor.   However, in spite of substantial pacifistic efforts by some parts of society,  the greed,  power mongering,  and war merely got intensified by the availability of mechanical weapons.  Obviously,  human nature contained some built-in flaws.  The thinkers of the past continuously pondered the situation but none quite came up with anything like the American Revolution and its resulting Constitution.

The American Revolution instituted the most radical change in previous history by giving ultimate power to the masses.  That appears to be the principle difference between early Greek democratic experiments and the American Constitution,  which went far beyond Greek concepts by introducing the idea of voting citizens being “represented” in a governing body elected by the people who could thereby periodically change members of the government institutions.  This modified form of democracy was referred to as a “Representative Republic”.

But from the first there have been wise skeptics.  Shortly after the Constitutional Convention one of the founders of the American system, Ben Franklin, famously remarked, “—we have a Republic,  if we can keep it”.  He knew well that all humans harbor power greed to a smaller or larger degree.  He presumed correctly that soon the most tenacious power-mongers around would find enough loopholes in the new system so they could manipulate advantages to themselves and their supporters.  Once lodged into positions of power these fanatics would find ways to consolidate and perpetuate their power and thus erode and ultimately destroy the original intent that the people should rule by consensus.

Such fanatics seem to be born convinced that if left to their own devices the masses will ruin society and therefor  somebody smarter has to take over.  The fanatics believe that only they are smart enough to organize the lives of millions in the minutest detail,  so they set up enormously expensive regulatory agencies to enforce tens of thousands of complicated and often foolish or self-contradictory rules.  They sell this idea to the unwitting public by claiming such methods are not only wise but also “humanitarian” and “compassionate”.    They entice primal instincts by promoting “equality” in substance even for those who accomplish nothing and refuse to work.  They claim it is “unfair”  that some humans are born with more accomplishment in their genes than others.  Therefore the wealth that a minority generates must be confiscated and forcefully redistributed to those of less ambition and talent no matter how great their numbers.  The fanatics drum the the populace with a constant theme of  ”we are your saviors and we alone can make you happy and prosperous”.  This plays on the old tribal instinct of wanting a father figure leader,  and so large segments of populations fall for it.

When the fanatics have achieved sufficient control,  their tune changes from benign fatherliness to an openly vicious, “we know better than you”  and “you will do as we decree and shut up or you will be tagged as against progress and punished accordingly”.   The worst irony of this is its cyclic nature.  From inspiration to self-rule and then back to tyranny.  Most of the more “advanced” world is now supposed to be “modernized”,  “civilized”, and “educated”.  Nevertheless we placidly accept the fallback into tyranny as “Hope and Change” even though its recent utter failures in “socialized” Europe have happened right before our eyes.  Why is this so tragic?  Because there is nothing intrinsic about the cycle that prevents it from being broken.  All we would have to do is stay in the sunshine of Liberty and refuse to move backwards by letting the power mongers prevail with their pandering falsehoods that money can just be printed and borrowed indefinitely to finance handouts even after the takers exceed the producers.  All we really have to do is massively boycott the handouts and the excessive regulations. We certainly can regulate ourselves more and do more for ourselves.   The only alternative is economic meltdown and slavery.

Nature’s primal urge is to evolve in order to survive.  Therefor we are naturally reluctant to oppose change and this emotional factor can be manipulated into accepting any change as automatically “good”; — even change that is not defined until after it is agreed to in the voting booth.   This may be why autocrats find it so easy to influence the populace simply by promising change.  Too often too late,  we realize that some changes are not at all “good”.   This happened in Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Communist Cuba, North Korea, and China.  China saw their neighbor Soviets collapse so the Chinese partly woke up and began to allow some free enterprise.  That change for the better immediately produced dramatic results for everyone to see.  Everyone except Americans hoodwinked by their own leaders.

Folks who get caught up in change for change sake are missing one key point.  Basic proven principles of behavior and style of government don’t need to change arbitrarily.  In fact our Declaration of Independence and Constitution warn against that very thing.  To return to an autocratic system proven by history as greatly inferior is not good evolution,  it is devolution — and insanely destructive of hard won gains.

The negative situation has been built up over many decades by determined fanatics following a relentless plan  to infiltrate, brainwash, censor, dumb down, and take over.  Short of a very bloody civil war, there is no quick solution — but there is a counter strategy that has a good chance.

1- promote awareness,  2- gather resistance,  3-fill the Internet,  4-harass political incumbents,  5-vet candidates, 6-boycott bad policies,  7-never give up,  8-never forget that when good men do nothing,  evil triumphs.


Posted September 12, 2013 by Candidus in Activism, Government

%d bloggers like this: