Thursday, 3 January 2013

For The Right Reasons

I want to make it clear where I come from.  As things heat up between the 'left' and the 'right', tensions are going to build, and we need to step back a bit and look at the whole picture, in order to gain the whole picture.  For, both sides of the building confrontation have elements of the larger truth in them (else they wouldn't even be in that larger picture).  And so it would behoove us to keep this perspective, as we engage with the changes afoot in human society, and try to see our way through the moment, in order to get to the timeless.  For we are, indeed,verging on the timeless.  On the end of the historical process, and the moving into a new, higher dimension of being, than we have ever been involved in heretofore on this level of existence.  Well; as far as our historical record tells us, of what has transpired on planet Earth in its past.  In our past, as incarnate beings having either a human or human-like experience here.

But all of that is another story, than what I wish to concentrate on here.1  Which is a summation of the historical scene, as I see it; and then a statement, as to where we best go from here.   Which, in a word, is Up  But first things first.  So, first: the historical scene, as I see it.

And I see it - I will clarify right at the beginning - through the eyes of an observer; not as one attached to either, or any, position within the observed.  I will admit to a preference to the 'individualist' position, rather than the 'collectivist' one; up to a point.  Up to the point of Synthesis, opening us to the new level of the process - or rather, to the completion of the process, and the beginning of the entire New.  But again, I get a bit ahead of myself.

So: the scene, and its process.  I like the philosophical approach of Freidrich Hegel to this matter, of the unfolding of processes such as the historical one.  It has been called the dialectical process, or 'the Hegelian dialectic'.  He posited a process whereby a position, called the 'thesis' - not complete in itself - generates opposition(s) to it, called the 'antithesis', and out of the clash of those two positions comes a new level, containing elements of both positions, called a 'synthesis'; which, then, becomes the 'thesis' to another round of  such processing, and development.  Thus - to make a long story short - the development of modern capitalism - an owner class; particularly with the development of the Industrial Revolution, and a very powerful statement therein of that position - generated a reaction to it, and its excesses, that resulted in the rise of communism, i.e., the concept of ownership by 'the people'  - and in practical terms, by the state - of the means of production; to give the workers a better break.  Out of that clash grew the 'compromise' position of socialism, i.e., a system neither fish nor fowl; consisting of elements of both sides of the process, and thus a bit of a synthesis.  But it wasn't the total end of the process, because it itself still contained unresolved elements of the life condition; of 'reality'.  Of Truth.

In particular, its accompanying ideology of materialism; of a belief that there is nothing more than Man, who is the be-all and end-all of existence.  Now, obviously, not all socialists are mere materialists.  Nor are all capitalists, for that matter.  The belief in 'something more  than Man'  is a factor in the dialectical/unfolding process - which got caught up in it in a big way, when 'religion' was used by the capitalist/ruling class to keep the people 'in their place', i.e., subservient to their 'rulers'.2  But for the sake of simplifying this treatise on this issue, I'll just say that the 'issue' of the rejecting of 'religion' got picked up by the socialists, not only from their roots in materialist Marxism, but in the Age of Enlightenment -  the enthroning of 'reason' over 'religion', or any supposed superstition.  Socialists, by and large, pride themselves on being scientific; evolution, and all that.  And as Darwinian evolutionists, they see things, look on things from the perspective of 'the survival of the fittest' -  the ruling and the ruled.  As do their counterparts in the capitalist class, that they are hoping to overthrow, by Fabian means or more abruptly.  Whatever works.3 

So, there are elements of 'unfinished business' in both camps; neither is a Synthesis in itself.  The 'Right' -  the current ruling class; the class of the bankers and the corporations (owner class) and their minions in government - i.e., the fascists - saw their chance for world hegemony in the collapse of Soviet communism (which they had helped into existence, in order to make money out of the competition thus created), and tried to 'seal the deal' with 9/11, and its resultant 'War on Terror' stroke excuse for the elimination of civil rights and liberties and ultimately the Constitution itself, as a key element in the establishment of their fascist New World Order, and total control over the populace.  'And in the Left corner, ladies and gentlemen, in the red trunks, we have  the Socialist International, and their desire to do the same.  And may the better state win.' 

A word at this point.  I have to get it off my chest.  It weighs on me.  And that is how the Left has used people in order to further their ideological ends; used them simply as fodder.  And unfortunately, the middle-class Right didn't mount a sufficient opposition to this cynical maneuver, didn't educate Joe Public sufficiently to the matter.4 

Simply put: The welfare system should not be enticing people onto the rolls.  Why should a person become self-supporting if they can be better off by not doing so?  This is madness; and I don't blame anybody for not supporting it in any way, including withholding their tax money just as much as they can, including before it is withheld by the system before the taxpayers can get their hands on their own income, to do with as they choose.  Not as the state, in all its puffed-up arrogance, chooses for them.  The government must stop the black hole of welfare dependency from growing.  And that includes in-effect paying females to have babies that they can't afford to support decently, thus creating a permanent welfare class.  Which obviously has been the point of the whole exercise: to create a voter class, the bleeding of taxpayers' money to which can take down the capitalist system in bankruptcy, with the perps all ready to replace it with a socialist system, of dependency-minded citizens, in one fell swoop.

It's called the Cloward-Piven strategy.  And it stinks to high heaven.  Because it uses people - no matter how desperate their intentionally-created circumstances - as a means to an end.  And a not-good end at that: a herd of weak-willed sheep, sapped of their strength to stand on their own two feet, and thus able to run away from the abattoir.  

And now, the picture gets complicated, in a sense.   

No. 1.  Welfare should never have been made a way of life.  You do nobody any favors by seducing them into a mindset of dependency on the state.  That undercuts them as autonomous individuals, responsible for their own welfare in life - and their own actions; as 'spiritual beings having a human experience'.  To say: as mammalian-clothed souls, on a mission.  A mission of soulular growth, in a realm of dualism - to say, of choice.  Of choice making.  To strengthen their souls.

Not weaken them.

Having said that, and made that point: With the Human society up against the historical fact of its technological development, it doesn't need as much manpower as it used to, to run its 'economic' system.  So that factor - of historical evolution - is causing it to 'have' to look at separating 'income' from 'employment'.  I.e., the idea of a guaranteed annual income, that the Left has already floated.  And that 'futurist' factor - now upon us -  has caused the ruling class, looking down the linear road of history to this time, to think in terms of 'useless eaters', and genocidal activity.  Like vaccines that cut fertility.  Or side-effectively kill.  And other scenarios, to deal with 'the problem'.  Like wars.

Having forgotten, or never known - at least, this incarnation around - that  'we' are more than our bodies.

And the wannabes, of a socialist bent of mind, don't even bother with that concept.  It's not part of their belief system.  They want 'people control' for their own purposes.  Some of those being good purposes, like living in balance with nature; in harmony with Gaia.  And thus their wanting to do away with the concept of private property; the idea that a person can simply do whatever they want with 'their' property. 

But with the mindset, the philosophy of the end justifying the means, they should never be given power over The People.  They are despots; at least, like unto despots.  And with the linchpin of individual freedom - America as she has been, and its Constitution, guaranteeing such freedoms; being the champion of such freedoms on Earth - out of the way, it would be a clear field for totalitarianism to reign.

From either the Left OR the Right.  Small point, there, socialist-minded dude...    

Result of the historical process: Dynamic stalemate. 

Enter the answer:

From above. 

An entirely New Era.  Containing elements of both sides of 'the process'.  And adding a new one (the whole being greater than the sum of its parts).

Not the one of the love of the Creator for His/Her/Its creation.  That has been present all along.  All along the long journey in the wilderness of dualism; the realm of the illusion of separation.  

Rather, the one of the end of the journey.

At least, the end of the journey in the dimension of dualism. 

We've been there.  Done that.

Now, we start the real journey Home. 

By becoming One.


With nothing between Us - no matrix; no mirror - this time.

As we leave the realm of Time.  Of Illusion.  

And enter the Real Thing.

For the right reasons. 



1)  Having to do with the intriguing likes of ancient (to say, pre-Ice Age) maps, artifacts, monuments, etc. etc.  A plethora of mysteries not yet fully uncovered.
     'There are more things in heaven and earth...'

2) And especially Christianity in this regard, with 'scriptural' statements - in fact, interpolations into the record; such as it was - directly to the issue.  Growing out of the use of that religion by the Roman empire to keep the subjects in a state of subjection to the state.  But not to go into all that in detail here.  
     A good overview of that whole picture is the book 'The Christ Conspiracy' (subtitled 'The Greatest Story Ever Sold') by a woman who calls herself Acharya S.  And there are other sources, equally compelling, as to the falsity of the story of the Christian religion, and Church, as it got handed down by 'vested interests'.  Unfortunately, to the cause of Truth; misleading many good people over the centuries, and causing considerable mayhem and suffering.  But to get back to the issue at hand, in this particular blog.    

3) They are, if nothing, pragmatic.  Their approach to their goal of takeover is reflected in Saul Alinsky's 'Rules for Radicals': 'By Any Means Necessary'.
     Or is that the motto of the Mossad???  I keep getting the two mixed up…

4) The better-off Right - the banking elite, corporate good ol' boys - couldn't be as fussed over the issue.  Anything to keep the peasants quiet.  Besides, it wasn't as if they had much of their tax money involved.  Snicker snicker.


P.S.  A bit further on the subject of withholding one's tax money to a renegade regime: I did just that in 1975 (before I happened to leave the U.S., for different, spiritual climes), when I discovered, through the help of some 'Taxpayer Rebel' people and their literature, that the American people had been, and were continuing to be, conned, by the scam going on regarding the since-1971 totally unbacked Federal Reserve notes that they were forced to use as 'legal tender'.  Our money slowly slowly - surreptitiously, one step at a time - over the years became backed only by the 'credit' of the American people.  And look where that monetary policy has landed us.
     The current 'fiscal cliff' that that policy/scam set us up for got put off a ways in the mid-'90s, with bipartisan support under Clinton (but to the consternation of the far left, who wanted Crisis, and when do we want it: Now), when a lot of the welfare system went to the states to administer, and the former unchecked AFDC program (Aid to Families with Dependent Children) was turned into the TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families).  A good, intelligent move, that - away from the government creating a welfare class.  But still (and additionally with a recent executive-order-stryle move on the part of the 'imperial president', Resident Obama) there are horror stories out of the black hole of welfare in America, sucking its energy in to that bottomless pit, whereby e.g. we hear of young people on welfare getting 'Obama phones'.  What in heaven's name is that all about???!  The man is turning into a demagogue - if not a veritable demigod - before our very eyes.
     And speaking of the bottom line (of the nation's finances): It is that the state has no business taking from some in order to give to others.  That is theft, in my book.
     And that goes for a taxpayers' bailout of banks, too.  Granted, a lot of people can be hurt by a bank failure.  But this business of being 'too big to fail' - and the bailout monies never making it down to the Main Street, to help stimulate the economy from the grass roots - is obscene.  Bank managers should never have been led to think that 'the government' would save them from themselves, from their folly, their irresponsible gambling (on hot-shot new-fangled 'financial instruments', i.e., money-making scams) - in short: from their poor management.
     An ounce of prevention, and all that sort of good advice.  Otherwise, there is just a repeat of the S&L scandal in the '80s; because we never seem to learn.  That the lure of money is like a lure to a fish.
     And haven't the moneylenders caught some big ones, in their day.
     In their day passing.
     Before our very eyes.

No comments: