Category: Mending Walls

Posted on

Decaying Moral Fiber

[A repost, with redactions for typos, orthography and tenses, of a post buried two years back in the archives]

Originally stated as, “A decaying moral fiber, especially in America’s so-called ‘Christian’ churches.” And, of course, once again I’ll not do more than skim a very, very small aspect of the issue, leaving you, faithful reader, to do your own homework to discover the veracity of my observations… or not..

Now, before some subliterate self-lobotomized moron jumps in making a defense of “slut and rut” sexual mores resulting from a thoroughly moribund sexual morality and attacks the raising of this issue as mere prudery, let me remind us all that morality relates to all of our daily lives, not just sex.

Honesty, respect for property, respect for persons, etc., that results in a condemnation and avoidance of lies, thievery and unjust violence against and manipulation and coercion of individuals: those are hallmarks of moral individuals and a moral society.

What we have is… not that.

Simple example: heck, forget cops who speed on their way to a donut break–an all too common occurrence. What about so-called “Christian” pastors who break traffic laws speeding to a preaching gig?

…it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God’s servants, who give their full time to governing. Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor. — Romans 13:5-7

So-called “Christian” pastors who think nothing of disobeying traffic or other laws are worse than politicians and LEOs who break whatever laws they wish, because in breaking the law, these so-called “Christian” pastors know they are accountable not only to the State and to society at large for their behavior but have represented themselves as accountable to a Higher Power for obeying the laws of the land.

But even if the shepherd of a flock leads the sheep astray by his actions, the sheeple of individual flocks of self-proclaimed “Christians” are still responsible for their actions.

Years ago, a group of us were discussing the passage above (and others) in a morning study group one Sunday. A deacon who was present had responsibilities in the service that followed, and interrupted the service for a personal confession and act of repentance. Between the time of the study group and the morning service, he had gone out to his car and removed his radar detector which he placed on the communion table saying that he was “convicted” of his sin in using it to disobey the law and get away with it. He made a public commitment then to start obeying the law.

Laudable, on its face.

After the service, of course, he picked the radar detector back up and re-installed it in his car and drove off as usual.

Now, you may think I’m playing nit-picker singling out traffic scofflaws as examples of moral depravity among churchgoers. Well, imprimis, traffic scofflaws can stand simply as examples of the many ways in which “good” church folks are often anything but. And those who stand as some sort of authority figures within churches who are scofflaws in one area of their lives have no moral suasion when speaking in others. And, as with the deacon mentioned above, most often the outright lies and blatant hypocrisy are moral wounds that even more deeply hamper “good churchgoers'” ability to impact society for good.

And after all, why should they even try to do so when their congregations are more and more openly embracing the “bread and circus” atmosphere of society at large in order to draw “seekers” in for fleecing?

Bah. The fundamental lie that blemishes most so-called “Christian” churches today is that they claim to be “people of the Book” all the while picking and choosing and explaining away or just flat denying what the Book they claim to use as their manual for life says.

And that’s the fundamental immorality of much of so-called “Christendom” today: the lie of claiming to be followers of Christ while trampling on His teachings.

(Liars are always immoral, by definition. )

Go ahead. Apply these thoughts to yourself, if you claim to be Christian, or even if you claim–if only in your own eyes–to be as “good” as a Christian ought to strive to be. Are “white lies” acceptable to you? Where do you draw the line between telling the truth and lying? Does it make any difference that you draw your own line? No. Does it make any difference that intellectual and spiritual laziness and dishonesty permeates much of what calls itself “Christian” today? Yes. Such, “Well, sure I do such and so (or, alternatively, “fail do any bit of real good at all, at all”), but I’m still a good person!” lies do nothing to persuade onlookers who see only the lies, the hypocrisy, the self-serving disrespect for law*, the fact that so-called Christians cannot be discerned in behavior from those who are outside the club. (Indeed, because of a long association with Christians–both genuine and typically fake–I avoid doing business with anyone who sells themselves and their services by promoting their self-proclaimed Christianity as a reason to do business with them. Almost always a sure sign of fakery, IMO.)

Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God’s will is… Romans 12:2

Anyone who denies that distinctly Christian principles and manners of thought and behavior form the basis for (former?) American success in creating a free and open society is an idiot, a liar or an uninformed idiotic liar. And one has to ask oneself what the motives of the liars who deny the Christian foundations (or who deny the value of those foundations, as the ACLU and its ilk regularly do) are. Still, as those values steadily erode and I watch more and more Christian churches wallow in pellagianism, embracing “hip-hop theology” and denying the life and work of the One they putatively claim to follow, I have to wonder, “Where is the Amos to call these contemporary faux Christians to account?”

I dunno. It certainly doesn’t seem to be something many (most?) of the pulpits of contemporary “Christian” churches seem wont to do. I do know a prophet is without honor in his own country, and that anyone who points out that the emperor’s new clothes… “ain’t thar” is in very deep doo-doo.

As [a past] quote in the header of this blog read,

“Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act.” George Orwell

Methinks we need a few more revolutionaries.

*BTW, is there such a thing as a true Christian who nevertheless disobeys the law deliberately? Of course there is. One instance in the New Testament gives an example of the only legitimate excuse a person claiming to be a Christian may have to deliberately disobey the laws of his community. Other excuses are bushwah, B.S., phony, lies. None of the folks I’ve heard make arguments for churches running “sanctuaries” for illegal aliens meet the criterion for biblically proper civil disobedience. None. Not one. Zero, zilch, nada, a big suck on a sour lemon’s worth. And never is simple personal convenience, pleasure or advantage a legitimate excuse for flouting laws, at least not for people who claim to be following the Nazarene. People who claim to be followers of Christ but who routinely and habitually and illegitimately flout the laws of their community without pang of conscience are plainly and simply liars, hypocrites and the truth is not in them–and that’s a fundamental failing of morality.

See also,

http://www.thirdworldcounty.us/?p=2212

http://www.thirdworldcounty.us/?p=2230

and

http://www.thirdworldcounty.us/?p=2250

for more along these lines.

Posted on

Testament of Freedom

Rosemary’s post, “Religion and Politics Don’t Mix?” brought Randall Thompson’s setting of some Thomas Jefferson letters to mind the other day, and I thought I’d post a short snippet of a performance of the first number in the work to hopefully entice some readers into purchasing copies of their own. Yes, I’ll link to an Amazon.com page featuring a decent recording of the work, but no I’m not including my Amazon.com linky stuff to get credit for any purchases… because I just want folks to look and perhaps buy and listen to the piece.

I have some small quibbles with the otherwise very credible performance I’ll link, but I cannot be certain whether the sloppy consonants are the vocalists’ fault or something lost in the performance/recording space or lossy compression in the download. So, I’ve included the text to the music Randall Thompson scored both above the snippet and below the fold in order that the text be clear.

Here’s the snippet of “The God Who Gave Us Life, Gave Us Liberty”–the signature opening number of Randall Thompson’s The Testament of Freedom

“The God who gave us life gave us liberty at the same time; the hand of force may destroy but cannot disjoin them.”

Or, if the media player doesn’t work for you, here:

The God Who Gave Us Life, Gave Us Liberty at the Same Time

Continue reading “Testament of Freedom”

Posted on

Misrepresenting Morality

[Follows a lightly redacted version of a post from 2007. It applies as well today as then.]

This is filed under the Mending Walls category, because while I’ll focus on stating issues, I hope some discussion will eventually turn toward addressing these issues with possible solutions.

First and foremost, I believe the issues facing the U.S. are almost all stemming from a lack of moral values based upon time-tested Western Civilization values. “Moral values” you say? Yep. For quite some time, probably beginning as far back as the time period of Nathaniel Hawthrone’s 19th century slanders against Puritans, the tendency in these (dis)United States has been to redefine “morality” almost strictly in terms of sexual morality, and then to disparage such sexual morality as dehumanizing (or worse, as “merely” quaint, outdated, unrealistic).

Morality, though, encompasses much more than what contemporary Mass Media Podpeople, Academia Nut Fruitcakes and others have brainwashed American sheeple into thinking. First, and here’s where the sub rosa communist-socialist agenda of mass Media Podpeople and Academia Nut Fruitcakes find cause to reject morality for an easily disparaged subset, moral values require an ultimate arbiter of truth, and Western moral values have always appealed to a Judeo-Christian God as that arbiter. That is, of course, why Mass Media Podpeople and Academia Nut Fruitcakes are in the forefront of those relegating God to the ash heap of superstition, even if only (if only!) by continually mis-representing people of faith.

Sidebar: it’s not only by misrepresenting Christians and their values in such Mass Media Podpeoples’ candy-coated cyanide pills as “Seventh Heaven” and “Touched By An Angel” and even more open slurs in other TV shows that distortion and misrepresentation of a couple of millennia of Christian thought (and a much longer span of Jewish thought) tears at the fabric of a “public faith” as practiced from the Founders on. No, it’s also by misrepresentation of other, non-Western, religions such as Islam that Mass Media Podpeople and their ilk attempt to destroy any sense of morality in America.

Oh? Well, what could be more immoral than the lies damned lies and Mass Media Podpeoples’ lies (the progression is intentional, with apologies to Twain) widely and continually propogated as truth (amid an atmosphere that also proclaims that all truth is subjective… except for the “truth” of anti-Western, anti-American, anti-Christian, anti-Jewish lies)?

Consider: when Christians, for example, are regularly portrayed as candy-coated wimps or fire-and-brimstone bigots but rarely–if ever–as, well, Christians, while Islam and Muslims are NOT presented honestly, the whole cult getting a bye on the little thing of veneration for a founder who is the very prototype of the modern Islamic terrorist, then that alone is enlough to establish the fundamental immorality of the Mass Media Podpeoples’ culture of lies.

Americans cannot be a moral people until we the people are first brought face to face with the reality that we are answerable to a Higher Power (and no, government is NOT that Higher Power) for our day to day behavior. We are answerable for our political choices, our business and financial decisions, our decisions in entertainment and leisure time.

Over at Thought Renewal, Lyn (formerly of Bloggin’ Outloud) has instituted a discussion of a recent book concerning the “law of attraction.” It’s a discussion worthy of our attention, IMO. One statement of the principle Lyn has noted (one that long predates the watered-down and more than slightly twisted restatement in the recent popular self help book) is a principle that former generations understood well, at almost a bone-deep level (because they were not biblical illiterates):

Give, and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap. For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” –Luke 6:38

In another post, he goes further and restates the principle with this citation of Galatians 6:7,

“You reap what you sow.”

Unfortunately, IMO, Lyn fails to cite the entire quote, and that is critical to understanding the “reap what you sow” aspect in this case, for every principle linked to faith, to moral conduct, to one’s normative daily behavior has attached both a blessing and a curse… and the choice is ours which it is. Here is the rest of the verse as not cited above:

“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.”

And that is the crux of the issue: the influence of Mass Media Podpeople, Academia Nut Fruitcakes et al, says, “Your behavior is not linked to real consequences. Good and bad events in your life are not influenced by your moral choices. Life is capricious; you will not be held accountable for your actions.” Oh, MMPP and ANFs don’t always say such things blunty (although sometimes they do), but it is at least a the subtext of most of their product.

For example, what rational, moral (as in committed to truth, at the least) person, after reading the Koran and the history of Islam from the time of the Butcher of Medina (Mohammed) on, could not see that the so-called “radical” Islamic terrorist is simply an honest expression of the principles laid down by the life and teachings of the founder of Islam? That claims by Islamic apologists, both among Muslims and among the dhimmis in the West, that Islam is a peaceful religion are all lies?

Well, the obvious answer is there is no rational, honest person who can make such claims for Islam, but nevertheless, we are subjected to such lies on a daily basis.

And this is but one example of the chief failure of morality in our society today: lies–about the nature of people, about various cultures, about “political realities”, about nearly every aspect of public and private life are daily pushed upon us with very little in the way of public outcry calling for condemnation of the lies and the liars who propogate them. In fact, anyone who points out simple truths is calling for their own condemnation! [Outdate alert! ;-)] Take for example Vice President Cheney’s recent observation that Nancy Pelosi and her cadre of surrenderists are espousing al-Qaeda policy. A simple comparison of Pelosi comments with verified al-Qaeda pronouncements reveals that Cheney’s statement is factual, true. And for this he’s been roundly excoriated in the media.

Oh, my. What an evil person! He spoke the truth.

M. Scott Peck wrote some 20 years ago or so about “People of the Lie” (a pretty insightful book, IMO, and one with particular application to understanding the Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind and politicians *spit* as a class) wherein he said that the truly evil “are masters of disguise and cloak themselves with masks of respectability, goodness and often piety.”

The Lie is central to the destruction of a moral culture, and it is by continually lying about darned near everything, continually selling the culture of The Lie that the culture of the Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind (almost entirely congruent with a culture of The Lie) makes its lies into reality, as sheeple ape the Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind in their daily life, in everything from envy of the lifestyles seen portrayed on the dullertainment offered to the political agenda of the Hivemind as revealed in dullertainment and “news”-ertainment programs.

And art. I saw a segment of a public television show the other night featuring an “artist” who painted on wood using house paints. The “artist” was shown as an example of a modern primitive painter. The “artwork” displayed was crap. And that’s speaking kindly. The worst stuff I’ve seen in years. Presented as “art”. When the very idea of art is debased to such a level, is it any wonder that in performance art we have such excrescence as “rap”? (Go on: try to make a convincing argument that listening to rap “music” does not debase an individual. Try. Please.)

I suspect (well, no, I do not suspect; I know) I could simply have used any of the traditional lists of “Seven Deadly Sins” (there’s a slight variation in the listing over the millennia :-)) as an outline for this post in reference to how moral behavior impacts (in no particular order)

Immigration/border control policy
Essential liberties/lies from the Left… and the Right
The growth of anarcho-tyranny (and the death-by-inches of justice)
Islamic Jihad/GWOT
Education, so-called
Abortion, or “murder by euphemism”
Science and pseudo-science (a materialistic approach to truth)
Energy, productivity and responsible management of resources
Work ethic

And a few more.

Posted on

Music and Sensibilities

One of the serious issues facing our society today is a direct result of what Ortega identified as but one of the undue effects of “mass man” on society: a coarsening of art in the public arena. Given my background and inclinations, I perceive the coarsening most often in the performance arts, particularly music.

Now, let me back up a bit and articulate a bit of what this lil rant was spurred by. I recieved a glurge-filled email today that went on about the life of John Henry Newton, author of the song most widely known as “Amazing Grace.” So, naturally, besides beginning an automatic critique of the glurge in the email text, my mind’s ear began replaying various performances–including choral, congregational and solo–of “Amazing Grace” and found, as always, that (almost) ALL of them fell short of the power and beauty of the lyrics, because the tune most commonly sung to the words is a lousy match for the words’ meaning and is not really very singable, to boot.

*sigh* And then there’s the fact that everyone and his untalented dog seems to think that they can improve the tune (and thus the song) by screwing around with it and mangling it badly. While it may well be proper to abuse poor tunes in sch a way, sadly the abuse never seems to be performed by anyone with any real musical ability.

Well, that’s where this rant originated, at least. Now, what’s its point? Simply this: most folks’ ears are too deafened by crap sold as music nowadays that even attempting to point out the differences between good and bad prosody, between music/lyric marriages made in heaven and those made BY hell is almost impossible. Sure, if one is able to catch a child young enough, and feed the child a daily dose of well-wrought music, perhaps the child will attain adulthood with ears that can actually–at least–reproduce pitch and hopefully even desire music that feeds rather than craps on his higher nature.

But should that occur, then that adult will be an alien in our debased society.

And this alienation from “better things” in favor of scarfing up feces misrepresenting itself as art is symptomatic of the coarsening of every aspect of our society. The deaf ears that cannot even hear the difference between the musical feces that passes as most “music” today (and I include most contemporary soi disant “serious, academic or classical” crap as well) and real music cannot tell the differences between any of the other lies that the Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind spews and truth, either.

*sigh*

And it’s all our fault for elevating the sensibilities of the common man to iconic stature, for whatever genuine virtues the common man posseses (and there are more than a few), lowering social sensibilities, and thus social virtues, to the lowest common denominator is a sure recipe for the demise of a society.

Teach your children well. The government schools and the Hivemind certainly will not.

Trackposted to The Pink Flamingo, Leaning Straight Up, , Democrat=Socialist, The World According to Carl, Right Voices, and DragonLady’s World, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Continue reading “Music and Sensibilities”

Posted on

People of the Light?

Not talking about Mass Media Podpeople whenever “people of the light” are mentioned.

See Orson Scott Card’s article at The Rhincerous Times of Greennsboro, NC. A taste:

Would the Last Honest Reporter Please Turn On the Lights?

by Orson Scott Card

October 20, 2008
An open letter to the local daily paper — almost every local daily paper in America:

I remember reading All the President’s Men and thinking: That’s journalism. You do what it takes to get the truth and you lay it before the public, because the public has a right to know.

This housing crisis didn’t come out of nowhere. It was not a vague emanation of the evil Bush administration.

It was a direct result of the political decision, back in the late 1990s, to loosen the rules of lending so that home loans would be more accessible to poor people. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were authorized to approve risky loans.

What is a risky loan? It’s a loan that the recipient is likely not to be able to repay.

The goal of this rule change was to help the poor — which especially would help members of minority groups. But how does it help these people to give them a loan that they can’t repay? They get into a house, yes, but when they can’t make the payments, they lose the house — along with their credit rating.

They end up worse off than before.

This was completely foreseeable and in fact many people did foresee it. One political party, in Congress and in the executive branch, tried repeatedly to tighten up the rules. The other party blocked every such attempt and tried to loosen them…

…It’s not too late. You know that if the situation were reversed, and the truth would damage McCain and help Obama, you would be moving heaven and earth to get the true story out there.

If you want to redeem your honor, you will swallow hard and make a list of all the stories you would print if it were McCain who had been getting money from Fannie Mae, McCain whose campaign had consulted with its discredited former CEO, McCain who had voted against tightening its lending practices…

More, much more, at the LINK.

Interesting that it would take a lifelong Democrat to upbraid the Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind so unequivocally. Maybe, if there remain even a few more–a remnant of honest, decent men and women–such people in the Democratic Party (and hopefully a few in the Replublican Party as well), just maybe there is hope for the republic of the Foun ders that once was.

I’ll not hold my breath, though. Rather, I’ll use it to cheer such folks on. Way to go, Card!

h.t. Jerry Pournelle’s mailbag

Trackposted to Blog @ MoreWhat.com, , Faultline USA, DragonLady’s World, The Pink Flamingo, Leaning Straight Up, Cao’s Blog, Democrat=Socialist, Conservative Cat, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted on

Mending Walls: Politics

“Good fences make good neighbors.”

In several posts over the years here at twc, I’ve invoked the principles of Classicism. Usually these invocations are in aid of addressing the artistic merits–or more often lack thereof–of different expressions claiming artistic merit, but I think the principles have a broader application to society at large, as well. For review, here they are:

Aside from technical matters of form, the principles of Classicism, as found in Classical Music, were

  • balance
  • clarity
  • accessibility
  • expressiveness
  • edification

Think about it a bit. Wouldn’t it be better were political discourse to be balanced? No more thumb on the Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind scales or being in the tank for one viewpoint or candidate over another, just balanced reports by reporters who are aware of their biases and attempt to be fair in reporting the viewpoints and positions of those with whom they disagree? And wouldn’t it be amazing if that behavior were to spill over into political speech by candidates? What a boon for participatory government that would be!

And how about clarity? If politicians would seek to be clear, open and transparent instead of obfuscating their views with obscurantist babble and long-winded perorations and rambling perambulations designed to conceal the fact that they’re avoiding questions, people might actually listen with understanding (even appreciation! Amazing thought). Clear, unequivocal statements that lean heavily on fact and reason to persuade would be refreshing in politics, don’t you think?

And with clarity, accessibility goes hand-in-hand. If politicians were accessible, open to honest inquiry and continually aiming to make themselves available for discussion with The People, continually striving to make their policies, goals and purposes understandable instead of hiding behind doubletalk, perhaps we’d be able to have more political discussions about policy than about personality.

Expressiveness. Is anyone else besides me tired almost to death with the low quality of political speaking? Persuasive speech that depends on projecting phony emotion rather than full of genuine emotion powered by real reasons is a paper tiger. Even reading from teleprompters, it seems most contemporary politicians have the persuasive speaking ability of a doped chimp. Not pointing fingers, exactly, but when The One is held up as an example of expressive and persuasive public speaking, I begin to suspect the ones describing him so of being lobotomized and deaf.

Or perhaps it’s just that they’ve been around contemporary examples of political speech too long and have become effectively brain damaged by those examples. Could be. Rather in the manner of a public that laps up the artistic poison that is top 40 “artists'” manufactured “music” because their ears have been long dulled by exposure to similar noise.

Could it be that Sarah Palin’s convention speech electrified so many in part because it embodied at least some elements of Classical principles? My exhortation to her would be: Punch up the good stuff, Sarah. More clarity, please. Be balanced and restrained when dealing with jackasses like Charlie Gibson. Remain accessible. You need no lessons on expressiveness; just keep it up; more, please. And continue to build up (edify) our coutry, our people, by talking about what’s right about America. Proudly display the confidence that faith trumps doubt, that real hope and real change, as opposed to the phony hope n change (or is that “shuck n jive”–oops! now I’ll be accused of being a racist! My bad. *yawn*) of empty rhetoric, must come from the People.

Maybe some of it’ll rub off on the smart pols. I’ll not hold my breath, but maybe.

Trackposted to The Pink Flamingo, Phastidio.net, Wingless, Political Byline, Conservative Cat, and Stageleft, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted on

Whither Now, Conservative?

A Few Shiny Pebbles notes the serious problem of articulating conservative first principles. That’s nothing new. I could wish that American Conservatism did not conform to the model that R.L. Dabney noted in the 19th Century, but wishes alone ain’t gonna wash the dog…

“Conservatism’s history has been that it demurs to each aggression of the progressive party, and aims to save its credit by a respectable amount of growling, but always acquiesces at last in the innovation. What was the resisted novelty of yesterday is today one of the accepted principles of conservatism; it is now conservative only in affecting to resist the next innovation, which will tomorrow be forced upon its timidity and will be succeeded by some third revolution, to be denounced and then adopted in its turn. American conservatism is merely the shadow that follows Radicalism as it moves forward to perdition. It remains behind it, but never retards it, and always advances near its leader. This pretended salt hath utterly lost its savor: wherewith shall it be salted? Its impotency is not hard to explain. It is worthless because it is the conservatism of expediency only, and not of sturdy principle. It tends to risk nothing serious for the sake of truth.”

As I said much earlier (January 21, 2008) in this election cycle regarding the choices being offered us for the presidential race (choices that by and large reflect the choices also offered us in other races),

Folks, the only difference of opinion that bears on elections of late is this: do you or do you not favor scrapping America in order to make it over into a fledgling third world country, as France, et al are attempting to do in Europe? Each and every one of the potential candidates [running for office as Dhims, and most who are running as Repubs *sigh*] are in favor of policies that would Frenchify America even further. It is still possible that the Republican’ts may come up with a candidate who is willing to at least drag his feet in approaching the ultimate goal of pulling America down to the level of Mexico or Saudi Arabia or Iran or even *shudder* France.

Remember: modern “liberalism” (which is not liberal in any rational sense of the word) has as its ultimate goal is to destroy the America the Founders left us. Nothing else will satisfy the left’s cravings for multiculturalist, divisive victim identity, statist anarcho-tyranny politics.

And, looking at most Repugnican’t candidates for federal offices, how much less do they advocate multiculturalist, divisive victim identity, statist anarcho-tyranny politics?

About 1/2 ounce less.

Want to clarify conservatism? Start with this–but unlike the current crop of politicians *spit* you must MEAN it–with every fiber of your being proclaim:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

(Yes, I added emphasis to a portion not usually cited.)

THEN, read through the “long train of abuses” and ask yourself: Would the Founders long endure the “long train of abuses” of life, liberty and property our current government regularly inflicts upon The People today?

Kelo
Government sponsored baby killing
TSA
Ruby Ridge, Waco
Martha Stewart, Ramos and Compean, et-oh-so-many-al
Promotion of the Cult of Hate and persecution of the religion that teaches, “Love your enemy”
Punitive taxation of the productive and subsidy of the slackers
Punishment of citizens in order to reward outlaws (the Bush-McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill for ILLEGAL aliens comes readily to mind here)

Failure at every level to protect citizens from its own abuses is becoming the hallmark of our own Federal government.

Is it time for a rearticulation of the Declaration of Independence? Maybe, but do note the header quote for this blog:

“In a democracy (“rule by mob”), those who refuse to learn from history are usually in the majority and dictate that everyone else suffer for their ignorance.”-third world county’s corollary of Santayana’s Axiom

Makes one wish for an electorate that matched the Founders’ model more closely, eh?

Any political conservatism that does not focus on protecting The People’s life, liberty and property is not conservatism at all, but something very like Dabney’s description. Any political aims that threaten The People’s lives, liberties or property must be eliminated from so-called conservatives’ lexicon of political aims. Still, one must work with what one has, unless another Revolution is forced upon the few remaining conservatives in this nation (and I do not doubt that there are far too few who possess the Founders’ conservative values for such a thing to ever come to pass), and so, even though some of the suggestions below make use of Federal usurpation of People’s and States’ rights and responsibilities, let’s start with what we have:

Given: that the Federal government has far too much influence on “energy policy”; it ought at least to focus that policy on protecting its citizens from foreign limitations on their “pursuit of happiness” instead of playing footsie with such as the Saudis who export not only overpriced oil but jihadism.

Energy policy: allow the exploitation of ALL known oil deposits; remove artificial Federal barriers to atomic energy production; remove artificial Federal barriers to building new refineries; remove artificial (and, frankly, harmful) barriers to oil manufacture via small TDP plants, etc.; scrap NASA and in its place offer “X Prizes” for space ventures focused on energy production (and resource enhancement–see Pournelle’s “A Step Farther Out” for examples): these would be a start.

Given: the Federal tax structure is not only a mess, it penalizes productivity and thrift and is exactly the kind of taxation the Founders saw as abusive. The Fair tax would return our Federal government to something more like the Founders envisioned, while still affording a realistic nod to current Federal excesses of non-constitutional (and thus illegitimate) authority by continuing the current funding levels. I have read all the critiques of The Fair Tax I can get my hands on and have reluctantly concluded that almost all the critics (all of the critics I’ve seen in Mass Media Podpeople bloviations) I have read are either idiots or liars. Get the facts. No, the real facts.

Given: the Federal government is doing damn all to protect its citizens from foreign invaders. 20,000,000 or more illegal aliens; at least 80% of them Mexicans entering through our southern border. And what do our federales want to do? Roll over on their backs and pee themselves like submissive puppies, lapdogs to successive Mexican regimes. Close the damned borders. Close them and allow people through ONLY at official gateways and ONLY according to already established law. Prosecute to the fullest extent of the law each and every employer of illegal aliens. Deny ALL Federal funding to ALL agencies, municipalities, states that provide social services to illegal aliens (yes, I mean schools and hospitals as well). Recognize and effect policy to reflect the FACT that by entering our country in defiance of our laws, illegal aliens have asserted that they are NOT under our jurisdiction and so they are NOT under legal protection, either. Make our country so very harshly inimical to ILLEGAL aliens (and warmly friendly to LEGAL aliens) that the masses of alien invaders will seek to return to their own lands.

There’s more, of course, but you get the drift: protection of CITIZENS’ lives, liberties and property is the legitimate function of our government. Anything else is just cause for rebellion. And that’s exactly what we need at the polls: rebellion. Mass write-ins. We need, as well, to harass–yes, harass–any congresscritter who allows or encourages abuse of citizens to continue. We can do it nicely for a while, perhaps, but if such abuse continues, then a genuine “fairness doctrine” would assert that those who encourage or allow such abuses to continue ought to be themselves abused. Excoriation in print, in person, via phone; campaigns for removal from office; continual denunciations to each and every person of our acquaintance: these and more are the just due of any politician who does not FIRST seek to PROTECT the lives, liberties and property of his constituents, whether from outlaws or from an outlaw government that simply legislates outlawry. (Yeh, the perfect definition of anarcho-tyranny: when government becomes THE Outlaw Gang.)

Trackposted to Rosemary’s Thoughts, Allie is Wired, McCain Blogs, Right Truth, DragonLady’s World, Pirate’s Cove, The Pink Flamingo, Dumb Ox Daily News, Conservative Cat, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

Posted on

Re-Run: Mending Walls: “holes and gaps, lacks and losses”

Here’s a post I’ve ressurrected in slightly redacted form from July 28, 2006.

In an earlier post I made allusion (allusion, heck: I linked the thing) to the (musical) Principles of Classicism in “Seven”. But first, for those who will not click the link, an excerpt from Principles of Classicism *heh*

One of the primary reasons I am a fan of Classical (and even much classical) music is not just because the music is complex, beautiful and compelling but because it is the expression of a particular ethos which our society sorely lacks.

Aside from technical matters of form, the principles of Classicism as found in Classical Music were

  • balance
  • clarity
  • accessibility
  • expressiveness
  • edification

Although two of these principles are still found in abundance in contemporary music (though not in contemporary “serious” or “academic” music, IMO) it is the lack of the others, especially the last, that has seriously harmful effects upon our society.

The email exchange that led to this post included an excerpt from William Blake’s Laocoön that I think points up several “holes and gaps, lacks and losses” in our society today:

A Poet a Painter a Musician an Architect: the Man Or Woman who is not one of these is not a Christian

Caveat: Blake’s view of Christianity was idiosyncratic. If we take not only the rest of his Laocoön inscriptions but the whole of his body of work into account, what Blake seems to mean when he refers non-ironically to a “Christian” is more in line with his thinking on “true” or “whole, complete, authentic” man (which to Blake in this sort of context meant simply human, male and female).

Strangely, for Blake, his thought in this and other of his Laocoön inscriptions (viz., “The Unproductive Man is not a Christian, much less the Destroyer” et al) are quite closely aligned with traditional Christian theology as it relates to the concept of imago dei.

Think for a few secs: the traditional Christian view of the imago dei (loosely, the image of God in man) includes the expression of God’s eternally creative nature in mankind. Thus in this model, all human acts of creative nature are indicative of God’s continuing creation… and all destructive or harmful acts are indicative of a marred, damaged, imperfect mankind.

Understanding this fundamental principle as embedded in Western Civilization (and lacking almost entirely in other so-called civilizations–and I use “so-called” in a deliberately challenging tone) leads us to see some of the critical elements that are fading from today’s society, elements we sorely need in abundance to prevail in The War Against the West being waged on many fronts both at home and abroad.

Look, folks, once the fides covenant meme began to fade in our society, many of the other foundation stones supporting our society began to crumble as well. The idea that creation is better than destruction came under assault as soon as good and evil were dismissed as culturally relativistic phenomena. I’ll not continue the litany of woes perpetrated by postmodernism and post-postmodernism and their progeny in the multiculturalists and others. Dig for a few on your own.

Suffice it for this relatively short post to simply point out: absent the values derived from just the Creator/imago dei meme, we have scant chance of turning the tide of barbarism that has resulted in the Academia Nut Fruitcake Bakeries, the Mass Media Podpeople’s Hivemind and the Loony Left Moonbat Brigade steadily chipping away at our society’s foundations.

Continue reading “Re-Run: Mending Walls: “holes and gaps, lacks and losses””

Posted on

Mending Walls: Faith, Part 3

While time is a tad tight here at twc central, here’s a reprint (with minor redactions) from June of ’06, and yes, just like the original post, this is a linkfest also (see below the post body).

In part 1 of “Mending Walls: Faith” I very, very briefly discussed the faith (fides) covenant meme so lacking in today’s society. In part 2, I even more briefly outlined how this lack has affected the three realms of legitimate governance in society, civil government, marriage & family and, for Christians at least, the church.

In this last installment, I’ll once again very briefly mention some examples that illustrate how the current culture of faithlessness affects everyday life and how the moribund state of the faith covenant at work, in civil government, marriage & family, and in churches affects everyday life.

Keep in mind: I will NOT explore this topic in depth, although this will still be a tad long as compared to most blogposts. It’d take a full length book for each of these three parts to cover the topic seriously. That being said, and knowing it’ll be a tad longer than the majority of blogposts you may read today, either page on off or CLICk to read more at the link.

Continue reading “Mending Walls: Faith, Part 3”

Posted on

Mending Walls: “…holes and gaps, lacks and losses…”

Note” Open Trackbacks to this post Friday, Saturday and Sunday (28-30). Link to this post and track back. More below the post body.

I made allusion (allusion, heck: I linked the thing) to the (musical) Principles of Classicism in “Seven”, earlier this week both here and at The Wide Awakes. Since then, I’ve had a productive email exchange with a commenter at the TWA posting. But first, for those who will not click the link, an excerpt from Principles of Classicism *heh*

One of the primary reasons I am a fan of Classical (and even much classical) music is not just because the music is complex, beautiful and compelling but because it is the expression of a particular ethos which our society sorely lacks.

Aside from technical matters of form, the principles of Classicism as found in Classical Music were

  • balance
  • clarity
  • accessibility
  • expressiveness
  • edification

Although two of these principles are still found in abundance in contemporary music (though not in contemporary “serious” or “academic” music, IMO) it is the lack of the others, especially the last, that has seriously harmful effects upon our society.

The email exchange that led to this post included an excerpt from William Blake’s Laocoön that I think points up several “holes and gaps, lacks and losses” in our society today:

A Poet a Painter a Musician an Architect: the Man Or Woman who is not one of these is not a Christian

Caveat: Blake’s view of Christianity was idiosyncratic. If we take not only the rest of his Laocoön inscriptions but the whole of his body of work into account, what Blake seems to mean when he refers non-ironically to a “Christian” is more in line with his thinking on “true” or “whole, complete, authentic” man (which to Blake in. this sort of context meant simply human, male and female).

Strangely, for Blake, his thought in this and other of his Laocoön inscriptions (viz., “The Unproductive Man is not a Christian, much less the Destroyer” et al) are quite closely aligned with traditional Christian theology as it relates to the imago dei.

Think for a few secs: the traditional Christian view of the imago dei (loosely, the image of God in man) includes the expression of God’s eternally creative nature in mankind. Thus in this model, all human acts of creative nature are indicative of God’s continuing creation… and all destructive or harmful acts are indicative of a marred, damaged, imperfect mankind.

Understanding this fundamental principle as embedded in Western Civilization (and lacking almost entirely in other so-called civilizations–and I use “so-called” in a deliberately challenging tone) leads us to see some of the critical elements that are fading from today’s society, elements we sorely need in abundance to prevail in The War Against the West being waged on many fronts both at home and abroad.

Look, folks, once the fides covenant meme began to fade in our society, many of the other foundation stones supporting our society began to crumble as well. The idea that creation is better than destruction came under assault as soon as good and evil were dismissed as culturally relativistic phenomena. I’ll not continue the litany of woes perpetrated by postmodernism and post-postmodernism and their progeny in the multiculturalists and others. Dig for a few on your own.

Suffice it for this relatively short post to simply point out: absent the values derived from just the Creator/imago dei meme, we have scant chance of turning the tide of barbarism that has resulted in the Academia Nut Fruitcake Bakeries, the Mass Media Podpeople Hivemind and the Loony Left Moonbat Brigade steadily chipping away at our society’s foundations.

Continue reading “Mending Walls: “…holes and gaps, lacks and losses…””