Neither Left Nor Right But Up

...subtitled: 'Nancy Pelosi: Are we serious? Are we serious? Er, Yes.'

The 17th of September was an anniversary of the signing of the US Constitution. It established a federal system of government with a central government of limited and delegated powers; "few and defined," in the Federalist Papers' words of 'the Father of the Constitution,' James Madison. Time has passed, and there have been attacks on that principle, by people wanting a stronger central government to rule the country from that center. But the 9th and 10th Amendments still hold, against such a potential encroachment, now made manifest, and in spades, at a key historical juncture, between 'capitalism' and 'socialism' - between those roughly aligned with the idea of 'natural rights' and a dispensation of such by a caring Creator God, and those roughly aligned with the idea of rights derived from the state, in order to establish government reflecting the values of a rejection of religion, and the substitutive enthronement of the philosophy of secular humanism (or just simply outright despotisms). And hence Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's comment, to someone querying the constitutional rationale for a central-government healthcare system mandating health insurance: "Are you serious? Are you serious?" A typical atheistic socialist's attitude, and retort. Occasioning this response from me, on the Comments thread of an article, honoring Constitution Day, on a constitutionalist (and very capitalist) web site, that of the Heritage Foundation:

"[17/9]

John Rossi @11:12am says:
"Let us stand as a nation and retake our country and end this tyranny that Oblama has begun and reverse the course of history."
I don't see it as a need for a reversal, John. I see it as a pushing through to a new level of civilization on fair Earth. Consider:
The socio-economic order has gone global. That is putting pressure on nation states to follow suit (see, in its regional way, the EU). But that level of power and control creates tensions between democratic and authoritarian elements - the difference between top-down and bottom-up government. The top-down types made a move in America, under the latter Bush administration in particular (as part of the process I am positing), to take control of and weaken civil rights (the Patriot Acts, etc.). Obama came along and promised 'change' - but appears to be bent on delivering 'change' from the left with the same commitment to authoritarianism as had been raised on the right. I'll see you, and raise you. So far, so thesis-antithesis.

Enter the Opportunity of a Turning Point, that will resolve the contradictions of both sides of the civilizatory equation, and add the ingredient that can lift the process out of the level of its problem and take it up a notch: the spiritual fact of life. That is, that life is more than merely material. Given that factor - the God factor, as it were - we can see our way out of our current dilemma.

Neither side of the current equation has the answer en toto. The answer is to eliminate money as it has become - ie, an end in itself; via the seductive effects of interest-bearing money and fractional-reserve banking - and replace the profit motive with a higher motive: the motive of giving our best to one another, in the providing of goods and services and ingenuity, out of gratitude to our Creator for life with meaning.

It is the answer that evaded the monkey with his fist in the jar of goodies. It is time we moved out of our monkey stage as a species, and inherited our higher identity, as spiritual beings having a human experience. And if we will, all else will be added unto us.

Until then, indeed we should honor the wisdom of the Founding Fathers, and keep a solid system of checks and balances between the three branches of government: that America does not fall under the sway of tyrants, of any stripe. And remains steadfast in its spiritual potential, until the new, higher stage of government on the planet can come into being.

So not in reverse, John. But full speed ahead. So that we can get through the rough patch leading up to the promised land; on another level of consciousness than we inhabit, in large part, today."*

So: a Turning Point time. THE Turning Point?

We will see.

But 'it' has all the earmarks of being so. And I think here not only of the general subject of '2012', and the dangers of nuclear holocaust occasioned by present-day unresolved geopolitical factors. But of the likes of the damage wrought by the Gulf Oil spill on the Gulf Stream Current. If there is even one left, to be so named.

Clearly: a major time in the history of human life on Earth.

Ah, to be alive then. To say: now.

In Our Time.

To use our free will for good. Or ill.

It is up to us.

Choose, friend.

And choose wisely.

Much depends on it.

Including your personal journey, as a spark of the One.


P.S. As for the philosophy of secular humanism: I really don't get how professors of that philosophy think that it can prevail, anymore than the communist experiment in Cuba prevailed (its demise as recently announced) - an experiment in living a merely materialistic existence, sufficient unto itself for its meaning and purpose. Think: If there is no 'God' - and all that that implies; a meaning to life beyond its boundaries** - then nothing really matters anyway, and one might as well live simply for oneself, independent of the effect of that pursuit on others, as not; for the end of the closed system of life can, then, as easily be seen as that as anything else, a presumed 'social gene' gracing one with a concern for the welfare of others, or whatever.
Now I know that, eg, Prof Richard Dawkins claims that in the natural world, a sense of social consciousness - or a perceived 'altruism' - helps in the natural selection process; that nature selects for those individuals who give to and receive from a social construct, out of the protection that it brings. But there is something far larger going on in life than this simple mammalian template can account for. And I encourage secular humanists - who presume to have a scientific mind, and to be guided by that consciousness - to look at the whole picture of evidence, and not just select those parts of such that agree with their current philosophy. A philosophy that might well owe much to mere reaction against the bearer's upbringing in what they come to perceive as an unenlightened familial situation. This is a warning, to say, not to throw the baby out with the bath water.
We are conditioned. We are also capable of releasing our conditioning, and seeing the larger picture. For we are, in essence, 'spiritual beings having a human experience'. Not merely a species of great ape. We are, then, coded for a far greater outcome than simply ashes to ashes, and dust to dust. And it is this coding that gives rise to moral impulses. Otherwise we would, indeed, return to our animal natures, if given half a chance. To that part of our nature. Which extends far beyond just it. And, as part of that deal: in having been given free will - set free to do as we will - we are far more dangerous to ourselves and our environment than animals operating solely from their coding for instinct. We are, in short, capable of what can be called 'evil'.
But, being phototropic beings, we will turn to the light in the end.
All, of us.
Just some sooner than others.
Which brings up the subject of 2012. But of that, another time...

---

* Actually, for some reason my comment never appeared on that thread. It may have been due to faulty technology - on my part or theirs - or the decision of the moderator. Such is life. At least them's my thoughts.
(N.B. I tried again later, very carefully and dutifully this time. Same result. I can only conclude that the Heritage Foundation does not want to support looking outside of their given paradigm. Fair enough, in a sense. They are, after all, constituted to honor the American heritage. I would only wish that they would consider to look at that deeper heritage. The primacy of the individual, yes. But in its spiritual context, in a social construct. Landing the fullness of the Golden Rule.)

** And I'm not talking about a 'fear of God's wrath'. I'm talking about the clear gift of a Plan to and Purpose in life, as reflected in such indicators thereby as the evidence of a reincarnational path leading upwards in consciousness, whereby indeed our efforts are 'rewarded' - but not in a crude sense, ie, by a God passing out merit or demerit badges. We are our own judges.