The Democrats
Don't get me started.
Oh, all right. A little.
What were they thinking of, when they introduced federal programs like Aid to Families with Dependent Children1 without proper safeguards; built-in measures to keep it from turning into a way of life (paying females to have babies, on the taxpayers's dime; what a nonsense)? Which simply institutionalizes poverty and dependency; creating a permanent welfare class.
It would appear that that was the intention all along. A permanent class, of votes.2
To pry the nation free from its roots, in individual initiatives and merit, with the government there primarily to secure the blessings of liberty to the founders and their posterity, as a gift as well to the world, to help break it free from dependency on and to Royalty or Church or other arbitrary power over The People, rather than of The People. As a free people, beholden to no one or nothing; no agency but themselves, and their personal mental, emotional, and spiritual development, as free moral agents, attending to their souls's business.
And then along came the spider: the statists, with their lust for power over people...
The Founding Fathers did their best to keep this sort of thing from happening, here, in this grand experiment in self-goverenance and -determination. But it's up to each generation of such citizens to keep the dream alive. With self-governance comes self-responsibility.
I know it's hard to keep an eye on the bigger picture when you're busy in your own life's doings. But that responsibility 'comes with the territory', in such a system, of citizen politicians and governors.
Today could be seen coming many years ago. A lot of the statist intervention in the lives of The People can be traced to the '30s, when 'the system' seemed to be on the verge of breakdown, and other systems were afoot in the world - primarily socialism (Soak the rich - excuse me; 'redistribution of wealth'. There, that sounds better), communism (Everybody's equal; and some are more equal than others), and fascism (The rich rule by right of might). But then, somehow, 'the system' - with some aspects of socialism spliced into it to help assuage the bite of naked capitalism, red in tooth and claw ('survival of the fittest') - muddled through (actually, it was the war wot done it), and carried the country into the post-war years. But the other systems were still in place in the world (fascism got moved to behind-the-scenes America, was all; another story), and their proponents still eager to 'catch' the great prize that was America (and still is; although to a more enervated extent). I remember discovering the extent of socialist infiltration into the education arena when my oldest nephew was starting school, and I decided to look into Why Johnny still Couldn't Read, from the mid '50s, when the issue first came to public attention, and caught my eye as I was leaving university.3
This was now the late '60s, and not only was I alarmed by the look-say method of teaching reading - which seemed to be the chief culprit; and which by its nature limited the child's vocabulary (and therefore thinking) just to the words presented in the readers4 - but I discovered examples of outright indoctrination in the stories themselves. One5 was a story (with, of course, illustrations; since a picture is worth a thousand words; even in the best of phonics times) about two squirrels, one of 'whom' was busily gathering nuts while the other was looking on, somewhat bemused. Finally the second one asks the first what he is doing, and when told ("I'm gathering nuts for the winter"), says, "Don't you know that the little boy who lives in the white house will feed you?" - and there, in the background of the last sketch is the little boy, sitting sweetly on the stoop of his white house. The only thing missing was some front columns to the house; but that might have taken the whole thing out of the realm of sublimation, and made it just a little too obvious.
And here I'm reminded of the video shot of a young black female supporter of Obama during his campaign in Florida, who was so excited, not only from the energy of the rally, but by the prospect of his actual election, when "I won't have to worry about putting gas in my car. I won't have to worry about paying my mortgage. You know, if I help him, he's going to help me."6
One of two things was going on there. Either the equivalent of the squirrel story has been carried on to this day in our public schools; or both stories were squirrelly - to say, propaganda from the right-wing likes of the JBS; who are fighting their corner just as hard as the Left is fighting its.
To the finish.
When the real finish should be a synthesis of both positions. The best of both. Honoring the individual, as a unique spark of divinity, with specific talents, that should be given the opportunity to be fully expressed. And honoring us all as a collective of souls, living in cooperation with each other; no longer in competition with one another, as though we were separate entities from one another, fighting each other for supremacy. When in fact, We Are All One.
And in the meantime: No female has any business having babies that she can't take care of properly, on her own dime, or that of her immediate family. Not that of the taxpayers - and especially not when many of them can't afford to have their own children, and are being responsible in the matter by not having them.
Let's get clear. No one has a right to the earnings of any other person. This business of the Democrats 'teaching' prospective votes that it's okay to have children on 'the government' - i.e., on the taxpayers's dime - is flat-out immoral. It is not an 'entitlement'. It's theft, pure and simple. And theft should not be rewarded. It should be disowned. By any right-thinking person.7 And by that, I don't mean by the 'right' side of the political game going on these days - and for long enough, now. I mean the right as in the honorable.
So stop with your temptation nonsense, Democrats; your seduction of voters. And Republicans: join them in creating a better world for us all.
Us. We. Who are One in essence. Experiencing Itself. And needing a better job of it being done from Its Parts, than It is getting yet.
In this day and age. But which is rapidly changing. So, be a part of the change.
The real Change, in our time.
Into a closer approximation of the One that we fundamentally Are. By our spiritual nature; as, essentially, spiritual beings having a human experience. Looking to ourselves for our sustenance. And, yes, to our collective Self.
But the right One of those.
---
footnotes:
1 or whatever it was called; I understand there is a new such program these days. I wonder if lessons have been learned? Doesn't appear to be the case, yet
2 not even 'voters'. They're not looked on as individuals; persons. They're looked on as tools.
3 and heading out into the world to find out what ALL was going on; including the Truth about life itself. Another story as well.
4 To the initiated: The look-say method is a form of hieroglyphics, whereby the child is taught to recognize words by their shapes - e..g., the word 'monkey' by the picture, along with the story, of a monkey hanging on the 'tail' of the 'y' - instead of learning how to sound out words for him- or herself, by the tried and tested phonics method.
The rationale is to try to increase the child's comprehension of what (s)he is reading, rather than letting them rattle along merrily by themselves. But this is not really about comprehension. It's about control.
5 in an article in a publication of the John Birch Society (which has always had to be precise with its claims, since the Left has been trying to demolish/demonize it from its very beginnings, as a classic reactionary movement. Both sides knowing that this is a fight to the death, between collectivism and individualism), which I found in one of their bookshops, when I was continuing my wide-net investigations into what was really going on in the world, i.e., behind the scenes of oh-so-innocent daily life.
6 This 'story' was recounted in a recent book entitled 'Blacklash', by a remarkable black woman by the name of Deneen Borelli; who knows whereof she speaks. She grew up in the black-ghetto dependency culture, and escaped from it, by sheer personal integrity and guts, and is doing her best to alert her fellow American citizens to the dangers going on, of (as her book's subtitle puts it) 'How Obama and the Left Are Driving Americans to the Government Plantation'. She doesn't want that for her 'racial' people, OR for her 'other' people - the American people. Or for the world, to become anyone's plantation slaves; but for the people of the world to stand on their own two feet. Like she has done. And well done, her, for it.
7 I'll tell you what is a real entitlement. A person who works hard is entitled to the fruits of his or her labor. And a person who doesn't work as hard as another person is entitled to the fruits of her or his labor as well - i.e., their own.
Yes, the society can help those who are truly in need. And it is not an entitlement. It is a gift of the heart.
Energy follows thought. if a person thinks they are 'entitled' to something, that is an entirely different mental construct than if they are appreciative for having received a gift. Let's get real here.
No comments:
Post a Comment