Man, Woman, Them, and God

I find it intriguing that some people believe they can change the earth’s climate. I find it interesting that some people believe they have discovered the smallest particles in the universe. I find it frightening that some people believe they can, given the history of mankind, end all war. I find it astounding that some people have taken it upon themselves to redefine biology and have created multiple genders with only two sets of chromosomes. I find it grotesque and disappointing that some people have given their approbation for the cosmetic murder of children. But mostly, I find it completely fascinating that many people believe man as a species has supplanted God as an entity. I say this because all those examples above are actions of a god-like being. The actions and proclamations of the self-righteous seem like a godhead seated upon a majestic throne declaring ex cathedra that things must be this way or that way. And therein lies the most fascinating thought of all; each of these ex cathedra proclamations is, simply put, an attempt to coerce a population to follow directions, thus creating a society where a few are in charge of everyone else.

There is nothing new here, being in charge has always been, and will always be, an item on humankind’s agenda. Who is in charge is important for it shapes the society. You can’t leave your home without government permission or you can’t run your business because the government says you can’t. This speech constitutes hate because it calls for action against an individual or identifiable group. This crime isn’t robbery, it’s a hate crime because the victim was a member of a protected group. Why do protected groups even exist? If we are a nation of laws then everyone is entitled to the same protection and, if enforced, those laws should be applied equally across the board. If they are not then it’s time to change the enforcers not the laws. In other words a crime is a crime regardless of why you commit that crime. It is the act that should be punished not the motive. Now my lawyer friends (including my brother) will tell you that my argument is not artfully presented and I’m missing basic tenets of the law, but my position (and I have a masters in Political Science with a concentration in U.S. Constitutional Law) is that law should not be as complicated as it has become, what with special crimes and special groups and special this and that. It should be simple as in, did you do what you have been accused of doing? If you did then we’ll talk about why you did it during the penalty phase of the trial while discussing what your punishment will be. A simple set of laws should suffice. A simple set that applies to all equally without regard to color, creed, gender or sexual preference, just like it says in the Constitutional amendments.

We talk about equality but we only have to look on our left and right to understand that not every individual is equal to another. Some are taller, broader, smarter, some are healthier, faster, stronger, quicker, and some have a great deal more common sense than others, regardless of education. Some are easily led believing whatever they are told, others cannot be led at all because they refuse to believe anything they’re told relying solely on their own observations. But like the myth of the tortoise and the hare or David and Goliath, both of which have fallacious teaching points, we adhere to the myth of being equal, refusing to apply it in the one situation where we truly should be and can be equal and that is under law. Instead we rush about creating special categories for protection. Protection from whom, why others who are supposed to be protected by the same laws. But what we’re really doing is creating smaller power blocs to play in society. Then those power blocs are used by master manipulators to maneuver society onto a path that allows this group of manipulators to control the present, past and future.

Those manipulators have been portrayed in science fiction as the Borg, “Resistance is futile, you will be assimilated.” And that is exactly the tact being taken by the collectivists currently manipulating the various power blocs in the United States. They really aren’t, at this point, what we would call “One Worlders,” or as some say “Globalists,” because their current concentration is simply to subdue the society of the U.S. They call themselves Progressives but I know that can’t be true because I was raised as a Progressive Democrat and these people don’t represent me. Rather, they should be called Collectivists because their rhetoric and proposed policies place them squarely in the Russian, Cuban, and Venezuelan camps of Marxism. Now, we can tolerate that in the U.S. because we are a free society and freedom of speech is a cornerstone of our republic. But, if we criticize them we become Nazis and their followers are told to harass us in the street and our homes or worse. Now, if we have a law on the books about hate speech I would think calling someone a Nazi and advocating physical violence might just fall under that rubric and should be a prosecutable offense, but since I think all speech should be allowed (except crying fire in a crowed theater kind of speech) then we’ll let them go their way as long as they let us go ours.

This could turn into a long polemic on how groups of people and some wealthy individuals are trying to create a one party totalitarian government in the U.S. solely for their own power craving egos but I’ve given you enough to think about. I suggest you not just think but do, for there is nothing so wasted as a good thought not acted on.

(See also ‘Are You Being Used’, ‘Whose Truth,’ ‘The Power of Propaganda,’ and ‘Attacking History’ for more background.)

And, as always, I invite your comments even if you want to cross pens with me. (That’s a joke, Cross pens, get it.)