Posts
Unity + Liberty = Prosperity. That is the formula.
Unity does not mean uniformity or conformity, but a people who are willing (voluntarily) and able to unite around an ideal such as the American ideal in the last century. When these people share common (universal) values – stand on common ground – they are able to be self-policing and free. Liberty is the key that allows people to pursue their dreams without interference. From this environment of unity and liberty comes innovation, invention, inpiration and ultimately prosperity.
But what can kill prosperity?
Diversity. It may encourage us to respect one another, but it deletes the unity.
Relativity. When even universal values come into question, the common ground soon becomes quicksand.
Oppression: When the solution to quicksand is seen as government rules, regulation and laws, liberty dies the death of a thousand cuts.
Offense. When it appears that the wicked are not punished, either by legal or social sanctions for fear of offending someone, and
Greed. When the engines of society become the worst and lowest of motivations instead of the highest expectations – the ideal, then the good who strive to live up to the ideal cease to be rewarded. No society can long stand when the wicked go unpunished and the good go unrewarded. Ask Pavlov.
Entitlements: Work (contributing, doing your part) is a good thing which must be included in the unity (shared values). When contributing is replaced by greed, prosperity will die. And it does not matter if the greed is pursued by some corporate CEO or some third generation welfare mom who never worked and never plans to. It is greed all the same.
Indeed, entitlements of any kind are society and cultural killers. Why should one do anything at all when everything has been promised for nothing (for free)? Food, shelter, clothing, health, retirement, etc.
To succeed and prosper, aspiration must become perspiration.
Taxes: While neither directly unity nor liberty killers, taxes (with entitlements) are incentive killers. The more of a person’s hard earned money is eaten up by government and pension obligations (for some and not others), the less that person has for their family obligations, much less to pursue their dreams.
To prosper, people must be united and free to live a life worth living. The above is a short list, but certainly something to think about.
-Michael The Fiction Side:
The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
Fair: The One word that defines our generation, culture and world
Fairness. It drives the world (all but Islam) in this age. It is the reason why American politics is so rancorous – why some accuse others of being mean, heartless, cruel, evil. What is fair? There are three views (four with Islam) and they are as follows.
One side cares. The concern is for the poor, hungry, homeless, and in every way what history is calling the disadvantaged. To be sure, fairness is most often spoken of in the negative: that to apply ordinary justice to such people would not be fair. The disadvantaged need extra help, special breaks, a hand up. They need compassion, not punishment. They need access to education and real opportunities which have otherwise been denied them.
When those who think this way look at those who appear advantaged (successful), they feel it is only right (justice) that the advantaged people share. Share, like we are taught when we are infants. These caring believers see the sin inherent in the human species, but only one side.
It is greed and selfishness that oppresses others. Therefore, it is the right of the collective (government) to force the advantaged to share – to give up their advantages in order to create a more level playing field – in order to make things “equal.” And the focus is certainly on the results.
The other side… cares. But the concern here is for the people who struggle to make a good life, who try, who fight the good fight and seek to do what is right for themselves, their families and their neighbors (if not their nation). These good people make the effort in life and it is only fair that they should be rewarded and be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor. In recent years, this view of fairness is also beginning to be expressed in the negative. For the collective (government) to take that fruit and give it to others through excessive taxes and punitive rules and regulations is not fair.
When those who think this way look at those who appear disadvantaged, they point to people in similar circumstances who have become successful, or they point at themselves and say no one helped me. I worked hard and made something of myself. These people invest their lives in a job or a business and believe it is totally fair that they receive a fair return on their investment and the government should not “steal” it. These caring believers also see the sin inherent in the human species, but only one side.
It is well documented that these people are the first in line and give the most to those who are truly disabled, sick or in need; but when they look at the so-called disadvantaged, they also see the lazy people who have learned how to game the system and take advantage of the taxpayer. Helping an unwed mother is one thing, but by the third, fourth or fifth generation, it is no longer a mistake, it is a lifestyle with no end in sight.
For these hard working people, the government is not the answer, it is the problem – making a hard life all but impossible. In America (it is believed), regardless of race, creed, color, religion, gender, socio-economic level or any other qualifier, there is opportunity. One can still strive for the “American Dream.” The playing field here is essentially level at the start. It already is “equal,” but the focus here is on the starting gate, and what a person does with their life is left up to them.
On the third hand… I won’t comment significantly on Islam. That is a world unto itself. Let me just say it has historically been the case where a few clerics, scholars and strongmen (never strongwomen) have had the advantages of this world and most of the people have not. As such, caring or fairness has not much entered into the equation. It is “The Will of Allah,” and any social, political or economic discourse is subservient to the religion.
Finally, there is the older Judeo-Christian view of fairness, and while it will have to wait until the next post, let me just say it recognizes the sin inherent in the human species, both sides.
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
One side cares. The concern is for the poor, hungry, homeless, and in every way what history is calling the disadvantaged. To be sure, fairness is most often spoken of in the negative: that to apply ordinary justice to such people would not be fair. The disadvantaged need extra help, special breaks, a hand up. They need compassion, not punishment. They need access to education and real opportunities which have otherwise been denied them.
When those who think this way look at those who appear advantaged (successful), they feel it is only right (justice) that the advantaged people share. Share, like we are taught when we are infants. These caring believers see the sin inherent in the human species, but only one side.
It is greed and selfishness that oppresses others. Therefore, it is the right of the collective (government) to force the advantaged to share – to give up their advantages in order to create a more level playing field – in order to make things “equal.” And the focus is certainly on the results.
The other side… cares. But the concern here is for the people who struggle to make a good life, who try, who fight the good fight and seek to do what is right for themselves, their families and their neighbors (if not their nation). These good people make the effort in life and it is only fair that they should be rewarded and be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor. In recent years, this view of fairness is also beginning to be expressed in the negative. For the collective (government) to take that fruit and give it to others through excessive taxes and punitive rules and regulations is not fair.
When those who think this way look at those who appear disadvantaged, they point to people in similar circumstances who have become successful, or they point at themselves and say no one helped me. I worked hard and made something of myself. These people invest their lives in a job or a business and believe it is totally fair that they receive a fair return on their investment and the government should not “steal” it. These caring believers also see the sin inherent in the human species, but only one side.
It is well documented that these people are the first in line and give the most to those who are truly disabled, sick or in need; but when they look at the so-called disadvantaged, they also see the lazy people who have learned how to game the system and take advantage of the taxpayer. Helping an unwed mother is one thing, but by the third, fourth or fifth generation, it is no longer a mistake, it is a lifestyle with no end in sight.
For these hard working people, the government is not the answer, it is the problem – making a hard life all but impossible. In America (it is believed), regardless of race, creed, color, religion, gender, socio-economic level or any other qualifier, there is opportunity. One can still strive for the “American Dream.” The playing field here is essentially level at the start. It already is “equal,” but the focus here is on the starting gate, and what a person does with their life is left up to them.
On the third hand… I won’t comment significantly on Islam. That is a world unto itself. Let me just say it has historically been the case where a few clerics, scholars and strongmen (never strongwomen) have had the advantages of this world and most of the people have not. As such, caring or fairness has not much entered into the equation. It is “The Will of Allah,” and any social, political or economic discourse is subservient to the religion.
Finally, there is the older Judeo-Christian view of fairness, and while it will have to wait until the next post, let me just say it recognizes the sin inherent in the human species, both sides.
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Thursday, November 4, 2010
The New Dark Ages: The Beggars; the Permanent Underclass
These days we consider ourselves more civilized than the middle ages.
Hark! Hark! The dogs do bark,
The beggars are coming to town.
Some in rags,
And some in tags,
And one in a velvet gown!
Then again there’s Monty Python
“How can you tell he’s the King?”
“He doesn’t have any shit on his shoes…”
###
Welcome to the New Dark Ages
And you thought homelessness was a recent phenomenon…
In the first dark ages there were refugees – whole migrations of refugees, and disabled from one war or another. There were criminals, and people thrown from their land because the church wanted it or some noble lord wanted a new hunting preserve. There were people in debt who could not pay who ended up in debtor’s prisons, as indentured servants (virtual slaves) or in the poor house. People were regularly reduced to begging as well as the normal lazy vagabonds who for whatever reason were content to beg for their bread and depend on the poor box in the local parish. What do you think made up Robin Hood’s band of merry men? It was not the rich and famous.
Today, we are a much more compassionate society, or so we think. We have public housing, welfare, food stamps. No one needs to beg, though some still do. And this is compassionate, but is it wise? You see, back then there was a real incentive (granted a negative incentive) to work hard, stay in good graces with the church and the lord of the manor, deal honestly (against criminality) with your neighbors, live frugally, save what you could against the rainy day, and be charitable with the understanding that you might end up there, but for the grace of God,
Today, the incentive is turning on its head. We are already seeing some results (and riots) in certain parts of the globe, like Europe where this “entitlement” thinking has taken a firm hold. Yes, I know it is very politically incorrect to think this through, but here is the truth of it: entitlement = government promises = taxpayer money = STEALING from your neighbor…
I am not saying we were better off in the first dark ages when people got thrown out into the street. I am saying we have to find a different way of being compassionate to the poor and needy because the way we are doing it is not working.
The bureaucratic class needs a permanent underclass to be their power base, but that class cannot be allowed to get too big. Someone has to pay for it and to be blunt, there just are not that many rich people.
Our current system kills the incentive to work hard. Young people are asking why they should work their butts off when they can do almost as well not working at all. It kills the incentive to stay in good graces with the owners and bureaucrats. Cheating on taxes, for example, is becoming a way of life to where you are considered a fool if you don’t cheat. And the same goes for neighbors. Thought for neighbors and charity in general are entirely out the window. Our current system of entitlement thinking inspires us to ask, “What’s in it for me?” There is no incentive at all to live frugally or save. Even massive debt is no sweat given the big bailouts we have all seen.
We have to find a better way, because otherwise that word “unsustainable” will rear its ugly head and then the bureaucratic class will have to impose a litmus test for “help.” When that happens, the millions who don’t pass that test better find work mighty quick. If they don’t, we will soon enough be right back in nursery rhyme land: Hark, hark! The dogs do bark. The beggars are coming to town…
-Michael The Fiction Side:
The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Hark! Hark! The dogs do bark,
The beggars are coming to town.
Some in rags,
And some in tags,
And one in a velvet gown!
Then again there’s Monty Python
“How can you tell he’s the King?”
“He doesn’t have any shit on his shoes…”
###
Welcome to the New Dark Ages
And you thought homelessness was a recent phenomenon…
In the first dark ages there were refugees – whole migrations of refugees, and disabled from one war or another. There were criminals, and people thrown from their land because the church wanted it or some noble lord wanted a new hunting preserve. There were people in debt who could not pay who ended up in debtor’s prisons, as indentured servants (virtual slaves) or in the poor house. People were regularly reduced to begging as well as the normal lazy vagabonds who for whatever reason were content to beg for their bread and depend on the poor box in the local parish. What do you think made up Robin Hood’s band of merry men? It was not the rich and famous.
Today, we are a much more compassionate society, or so we think. We have public housing, welfare, food stamps. No one needs to beg, though some still do. And this is compassionate, but is it wise? You see, back then there was a real incentive (granted a negative incentive) to work hard, stay in good graces with the church and the lord of the manor, deal honestly (against criminality) with your neighbors, live frugally, save what you could against the rainy day, and be charitable with the understanding that you might end up there, but for the grace of God,
Today, the incentive is turning on its head. We are already seeing some results (and riots) in certain parts of the globe, like Europe where this “entitlement” thinking has taken a firm hold. Yes, I know it is very politically incorrect to think this through, but here is the truth of it: entitlement = government promises = taxpayer money = STEALING from your neighbor…
I am not saying we were better off in the first dark ages when people got thrown out into the street. I am saying we have to find a different way of being compassionate to the poor and needy because the way we are doing it is not working.
The bureaucratic class needs a permanent underclass to be their power base, but that class cannot be allowed to get too big. Someone has to pay for it and to be blunt, there just are not that many rich people.
Our current system kills the incentive to work hard. Young people are asking why they should work their butts off when they can do almost as well not working at all. It kills the incentive to stay in good graces with the owners and bureaucrats. Cheating on taxes, for example, is becoming a way of life to where you are considered a fool if you don’t cheat. And the same goes for neighbors. Thought for neighbors and charity in general are entirely out the window. Our current system of entitlement thinking inspires us to ask, “What’s in it for me?” There is no incentive at all to live frugally or save. Even massive debt is no sweat given the big bailouts we have all seen.
We have to find a better way, because otherwise that word “unsustainable” will rear its ugly head and then the bureaucratic class will have to impose a litmus test for “help.” When that happens, the millions who don’t pass that test better find work mighty quick. If they don’t, we will soon enough be right back in nursery rhyme land: Hark, hark! The dogs do bark. The beggars are coming to town…
-Michael The Fiction Side:
The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
The New Dark Ages: The Employment (Peasant) Class
Sir Brian, a small land owner stepped out of his house to check on the work. “Giles,” he shouted. “Get that wagon packed. Success in the market depends on timely arrival.” Giles nodded.
He stepped over to Mary’s table where she was looking over the crop situation. She had to figure out what went to various overlords in taxes and tithe, what went to the owner, what got divided between the workers and what, if any, might be left over to save for the proverbial rainy day.
“It is barely enough to make ends meet,’ she said. Sir Brian smiled to encourage her. He knew it was barely enough.
He stepped to the field where the workers, tools in hand were hard at it. They looked up at him when he spoke. “Do a good job, people. We will need the winter harvest to make it to the other side of spring.
###
Brian, a small business owner stepped out of his office to check on the work. “Giles,” he shouted. “Get that box packed. Success in the market depends on timely arrival.” Giles nodded.
He stepped over to Mary’s desk where she was looking over the financial situation. She had to figure out what went to various governments in taxes and regulatory fees, what went to the owner, what got divided between the workers, and what, if any, might be left over to save for the proverbial rainy day.
“It is barely enough to make ends meet,” she said. Brian smiled to encourage her. He knew it was barely enough.
He stepped to the room where the workers, tools in hand were hard at it. They looked up at him when he spoke. “Do a good job, people. We will need the Christmas sales to make it to the other side of spring.
###
Welcome to the New Dark Ages.
The employee (peasant) class comes in many forms: middle and lower management, small business owners, merchants, accountants and bookkeepers and workers (not far from serfs). People need to work, and to be sure, some do well enough and perhaps very well. Most, though, just make a living, and many of them only if both spouses are working. Children are more on their own these days than ever – apart from the middle ages.
Some workers have to belong to unions – not unlike the guilds in the first dark ages. If you were not a member of the local but did that work, your property would be vandalized and threats would be made against your person and maybe even your family back then, too.
True, there is theoretically more movement these days. People are not tied to their companies the way they were tied to the land, but the truth is many feel they are tied, especially in poor economic times when they feel lucky to have a job. For those who do make a move, it is generally lateral movement and only some rare upward mobility. Auto mechanics, burger flipping, used car selling, assembly line work are all valid skills, but where can you really go with them?
These days, the better paying jobs require education, certification, even licensing that puts them out of reach of most people. While licenses and certifications might help protect the public from average cranks, it makes it hard to become a doctor, lawyer, teacher, or any profession. The cost of the education alone is prohibitive for most, so the numbers have not increased significantly for the population and it will not be long before certain professions will be lean or wanting in a variety of times and places, just like the first time the dark ages came around.
Yes, promotions still happen up to a point, but even in the first dark ages if a serf showed the right skills and some leadership qualities, they could get promoted out of the fields as well.
For our Dark Ages there are two things to consider which in some ways will make our Dark Ages worse that the first time around. They will have to wait until the next post, however, when we talk about the Beggars: the Permanent Underclass.
-Michael The Fiction Side:
The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
He stepped over to Mary’s table where she was looking over the crop situation. She had to figure out what went to various overlords in taxes and tithe, what went to the owner, what got divided between the workers and what, if any, might be left over to save for the proverbial rainy day.
“It is barely enough to make ends meet,’ she said. Sir Brian smiled to encourage her. He knew it was barely enough.
He stepped to the field where the workers, tools in hand were hard at it. They looked up at him when he spoke. “Do a good job, people. We will need the winter harvest to make it to the other side of spring.
###
Brian, a small business owner stepped out of his office to check on the work. “Giles,” he shouted. “Get that box packed. Success in the market depends on timely arrival.” Giles nodded.
He stepped over to Mary’s desk where she was looking over the financial situation. She had to figure out what went to various governments in taxes and regulatory fees, what went to the owner, what got divided between the workers, and what, if any, might be left over to save for the proverbial rainy day.
“It is barely enough to make ends meet,” she said. Brian smiled to encourage her. He knew it was barely enough.
He stepped to the room where the workers, tools in hand were hard at it. They looked up at him when he spoke. “Do a good job, people. We will need the Christmas sales to make it to the other side of spring.
###
Welcome to the New Dark Ages.
The employee (peasant) class comes in many forms: middle and lower management, small business owners, merchants, accountants and bookkeepers and workers (not far from serfs). People need to work, and to be sure, some do well enough and perhaps very well. Most, though, just make a living, and many of them only if both spouses are working. Children are more on their own these days than ever – apart from the middle ages.
Some workers have to belong to unions – not unlike the guilds in the first dark ages. If you were not a member of the local but did that work, your property would be vandalized and threats would be made against your person and maybe even your family back then, too.
True, there is theoretically more movement these days. People are not tied to their companies the way they were tied to the land, but the truth is many feel they are tied, especially in poor economic times when they feel lucky to have a job. For those who do make a move, it is generally lateral movement and only some rare upward mobility. Auto mechanics, burger flipping, used car selling, assembly line work are all valid skills, but where can you really go with them?
These days, the better paying jobs require education, certification, even licensing that puts them out of reach of most people. While licenses and certifications might help protect the public from average cranks, it makes it hard to become a doctor, lawyer, teacher, or any profession. The cost of the education alone is prohibitive for most, so the numbers have not increased significantly for the population and it will not be long before certain professions will be lean or wanting in a variety of times and places, just like the first time the dark ages came around.
Yes, promotions still happen up to a point, but even in the first dark ages if a serf showed the right skills and some leadership qualities, they could get promoted out of the fields as well.
For our Dark Ages there are two things to consider which in some ways will make our Dark Ages worse that the first time around. They will have to wait until the next post, however, when we talk about the Beggars: the Permanent Underclass.
-Michael The Fiction Side:
The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
The New Dark Ages: The Bureaucratic (Church) Class
The Baron sat on his throne and spoke openly to the Archbishop. “We are agreed, then. We recommend Charles to the King for appointment to the Bishopric.”
“Charles will do well.” The Archbishop nodded. “The Bishopric really controls nothing but a few insignificant parishes and a monastery. He won’t be able to screw anything up.”
“Of course, Rome will have to approve.”
“But that is a given. Rome never seriously objects on these lesser positions.”
###
The CEO sat behind his desk and spoke openly to the Cabinet Assistant Secretary. “We are agreed, then. We recommend Charles to the President for appointment to the department.”
“Charles will do well.” The Assistant Secretary nodded. “The department controls nothing but a few insignificant offices and a technology center. He won’t be able to screw anything up.”
“Of course the Senate will have to approve.”
“But that is a given. The Senate never seriously objects on these lesser positions.”
###
Welcome to the New Dark Ages
The Owner class – those elected to power – will appoint ministers, cabinet secretaries and heads of departments out of their own ranks like the Nobility of old appointed Bishops, Archbishops and the like. Sadly, like their Medieval counterparts, these appointments are and will be more concerned with enriching themselves than they will with seeing to the system. The reasons will be the same as before.
For one, the government departments, like the Bishoprics will be too large and unwieldy to get everywhere and examine everything. The idea of visiting every office (parish) will be too time consuming to be worthwhile. The “head” will not even know all of the work for which his people are responsible until some other department (bishopric) tries to take it away . Then there will be a fight for territory.
For two, the bureaucrats, like parish priests will be lifetime positions (especially as the unions exert more and more hold on the work). Even if a “head” becomes aware of utter incompetence in some office, it will be impossible to get rid of the person or persons. They may be shifted around, but that will just spread the incompetence elsewhere.
To be fair, many bureaucrats, like many a priest of old, will do their best to do a credible job in the position. But their hands will be tied by the very rules and regulations they are to uphold and enforce. They will not be able to do anything about something that even they see as an injustice without being branded a rebel (heretic) – and then they can be gotten rid of…
One of the chief occupations of the bureaucratic (church) class, of course, will be to keep the coffers full. There was always a poor box, and the peasants (employment class) were and will be told over and over to consider the poor and destitute. Some of it will go up the ladder and enrich the upper bureaucrats and department heads, but some of it will be used to actually help the poor: by which I mean the needy, yes, but also thieves, beggars, prostitutes, and the terminally lazy even as it does now. Still, the bureaucratic class will harp on the poor and destitute because they understand that much of their power, not to mention many of their jobs, will be directly tied to this permanent, non-productive underclass. The peasants (the employed) will be squeezed for their money. Oh wait, we already are.
###
-Michael The Fiction Side:
The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
“Charles will do well.” The Archbishop nodded. “The Bishopric really controls nothing but a few insignificant parishes and a monastery. He won’t be able to screw anything up.”
“Of course, Rome will have to approve.”
“But that is a given. Rome never seriously objects on these lesser positions.”
###
The CEO sat behind his desk and spoke openly to the Cabinet Assistant Secretary. “We are agreed, then. We recommend Charles to the President for appointment to the department.”
“Charles will do well.” The Assistant Secretary nodded. “The department controls nothing but a few insignificant offices and a technology center. He won’t be able to screw anything up.”
“Of course the Senate will have to approve.”
“But that is a given. The Senate never seriously objects on these lesser positions.”
###
Welcome to the New Dark Ages
The Owner class – those elected to power – will appoint ministers, cabinet secretaries and heads of departments out of their own ranks like the Nobility of old appointed Bishops, Archbishops and the like. Sadly, like their Medieval counterparts, these appointments are and will be more concerned with enriching themselves than they will with seeing to the system. The reasons will be the same as before.
For one, the government departments, like the Bishoprics will be too large and unwieldy to get everywhere and examine everything. The idea of visiting every office (parish) will be too time consuming to be worthwhile. The “head” will not even know all of the work for which his people are responsible until some other department (bishopric) tries to take it away . Then there will be a fight for territory.
For two, the bureaucrats, like parish priests will be lifetime positions (especially as the unions exert more and more hold on the work). Even if a “head” becomes aware of utter incompetence in some office, it will be impossible to get rid of the person or persons. They may be shifted around, but that will just spread the incompetence elsewhere.
To be fair, many bureaucrats, like many a priest of old, will do their best to do a credible job in the position. But their hands will be tied by the very rules and regulations they are to uphold and enforce. They will not be able to do anything about something that even they see as an injustice without being branded a rebel (heretic) – and then they can be gotten rid of…
One of the chief occupations of the bureaucratic (church) class, of course, will be to keep the coffers full. There was always a poor box, and the peasants (employment class) were and will be told over and over to consider the poor and destitute. Some of it will go up the ladder and enrich the upper bureaucrats and department heads, but some of it will be used to actually help the poor: by which I mean the needy, yes, but also thieves, beggars, prostitutes, and the terminally lazy even as it does now. Still, the bureaucratic class will harp on the poor and destitute because they understand that much of their power, not to mention many of their jobs, will be directly tied to this permanent, non-productive underclass. The peasants (the employed) will be squeezed for their money. Oh wait, we already are.
###
-Michael The Fiction Side:
The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Wednesday, October 13, 2010
The New Dark Ages: Servants of the Nobility (Owner Class).
“I know.” The Baron had a thought and grinned because of it. “I’ll take the King’s representative out on a hunt in the game preserve. I’ll get him riding all day, and then have a banquet in his honor with plenty of wine. Make sure there is plenty of wine. When he is in the right frame of mind, we can feed him the information we want him to take back to the King. Do you think?”
###
“I know.” The CEO had a thought and grinned because of it. “I’ll take the assistant treasury secretary out on the golf course. I’ll get him walking all day, and then take him to the club house for dinner with plenty of wine. Call the club and make sure they have plenty of the kind he likes. When he is in the right frame of mind, we can feed him the information we want him to take back to Washington. Do you think?”
###
Welcome to the New Dark Ages.
So, the Barron had his jester, treasurer, court magician and astrologer, physician and chamberlain. So also the owner class has its entertainers, accountants, lawyers (to cast spells or spins to keep off the dreaded bureaucrats and the tax man), the best medical care money can buy, and a personal secretary to keep track of it all.
As the government or bureaucratic (church) class strives to take over more and more of the private sector, the owner class will strive to resist. There will be and already are massive compliance departments in the corporations, not to be sure the company is in compliance with all the oppressive rules and regulations of the bureaucratic class, but to find ways to get around those rules and regulations. Compliance lawyers, accountants and public relations (spin) people will command premium prices in the New Dark Ages to defend and build up the company the way engineers, architects and military experts in the Middle Ages commanded premium prices to defend and build up cities.
What is important for the owner class to understand is when their people of a liberal or socialist perspective are elected, like the days of a weak monarchy and weak nobility, the bureaucratic class (church) will grow in power, thus further eroding the owner class’s ability to resist. Conversely, when owner class people of a more moderate or conservative perspective are elected, like the days of a strong monarchy and strong nobility, the power of the bureaucrats (church) will be limited and the power of the owner class will be strengthened.
NOTE: No matter which end of the political spectrum is elected, the employment (peasant) class will not be helped. Wait, that is already true.
Ultimately, the owner class’s ability to appoint ministers, cabinet secretaries and department heads, like the monarchy and nobility of old appointing Bishops and Archbishops, and sometimes even Cardinals and Popes will have little effect on the daily grind of the Bureaucratic class. Next time…..
###
-Michael The Fiction Side:
The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
###
“I know.” The CEO had a thought and grinned because of it. “I’ll take the assistant treasury secretary out on the golf course. I’ll get him walking all day, and then take him to the club house for dinner with plenty of wine. Call the club and make sure they have plenty of the kind he likes. When he is in the right frame of mind, we can feed him the information we want him to take back to Washington. Do you think?”
###
Welcome to the New Dark Ages.
So, the Barron had his jester, treasurer, court magician and astrologer, physician and chamberlain. So also the owner class has its entertainers, accountants, lawyers (to cast spells or spins to keep off the dreaded bureaucrats and the tax man), the best medical care money can buy, and a personal secretary to keep track of it all.
As the government or bureaucratic (church) class strives to take over more and more of the private sector, the owner class will strive to resist. There will be and already are massive compliance departments in the corporations, not to be sure the company is in compliance with all the oppressive rules and regulations of the bureaucratic class, but to find ways to get around those rules and regulations. Compliance lawyers, accountants and public relations (spin) people will command premium prices in the New Dark Ages to defend and build up the company the way engineers, architects and military experts in the Middle Ages commanded premium prices to defend and build up cities.
What is important for the owner class to understand is when their people of a liberal or socialist perspective are elected, like the days of a weak monarchy and weak nobility, the bureaucratic class (church) will grow in power, thus further eroding the owner class’s ability to resist. Conversely, when owner class people of a more moderate or conservative perspective are elected, like the days of a strong monarchy and strong nobility, the power of the bureaucrats (church) will be limited and the power of the owner class will be strengthened.
NOTE: No matter which end of the political spectrum is elected, the employment (peasant) class will not be helped. Wait, that is already true.
Ultimately, the owner class’s ability to appoint ministers, cabinet secretaries and department heads, like the monarchy and nobility of old appointing Bishops and Archbishops, and sometimes even Cardinals and Popes will have little effect on the daily grind of the Bureaucratic class. Next time…..
###
-Michael The Fiction Side:
The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
The New Dark Ages: Nobility or the Owner Class.
Once upon a time, a Baron brooded in his hall. “Lord,” the Chamberlain spoke up, but the Baron just shuffled his papers.
“I don’t get these accounts,” the Baron complained. “The harvest is in and our sales have been made, plus the taxes have been collected, but it doesn’t make any sense.” He waited for an explanation, but the Chamberlain wisely remained silent. “Send for my treasurer, and while you are at it, send in my court jester. I could use some entertainment.”
“Lord,” the Chamberlain tried again and spoke when the Baron looked up. “The Archbishop has come for the tithe.”
“Tell him to wait.”
“And the bishop is with him.”
The Baron blanched. “Tell him to sit on it.”
“And the King’s representative is coming here in the morning with a group of priests to check the books for the taxes.”
The Baron jumped to his feet. “Quick. Get my court magician, my sage, my court astrologer. I need a spell against these dreaded men. And while you’re at it, cancel my jester and get my physician. I have a headache.”
###
Once upon a time, a CEO brooded in his office. “Sir,” the Secretary spoke up, but the CEO just shuffled his papers.
“I don’t get these accounts,” the CEO complained. “The product is in port and our sales have been made, plus the taxes have been collected, but it doesn’t make any sense.” He waited for an explanation, but the secretary wisely remained silent. “Send for the CFO, and while you are at it, turn on some music. I could use some entertainment.”
“Sir,” the secretary tried again and spoke when the CEO looked up. “The EPA has come for the carbon credits.”
“Tell him to wait.”
“And the FDA is with him.”
The CEO blanched. “Tell him to sit on it.”
“And the Treasury assistant secretary is coming here in the morning with a group of accountants to check the books for the taxes.”
The CEO jumped to his feet. “Quick. Get my lawyers, accountants and PR people from the compliance department . I need a spin against these dreaded men. And while you’re at it, turn off the music and get my doctor. I have a headache.”
###
Welcome to the New Dark Ages
In our day, the owner class might not actually own anything outright, but they run things. They function as chief officers in the corporations, sit on each other’s boards as directors, and make money from having money. What they own are investments and with interest and dividends they constitute the top one or two percent or so of wage earners (covering maybe two to three million people in the United States).
Curiously, like the medieval lords, the harder you and I work, the more money they make in bonuses and increased stock values. Too bad we don’t (generally) make more as well. Also, in case you haven’t noticed, when one of these people does such a terrible job they ruin a company, they don’t stay unemployed for long. They get another CEO or CFO or COO job quickly.
Now, these are the people who could retire after working only one or two years. They would have enough money to buy a modest house, travel when they want, buy a new car every year, pay all their own medical expenses as they age, and still have some left to leave to their descendants – and after only one or two years of work. Of course, these people don’t think this way. And they will tell you, honestly enough based on what they consider “work” that they have worked hard for all they have gotten. Then comes the fib: “And you can too.”
Sure. I mean the son of a serf can join the army and through good service be granted lands, be knighted, maybe even given a real title, and though appropriate marriages perhaps see a great-grandchild on the throne…but not likely. These days, these things are more by blood than you might think, and they are also by networking: who you know, not necessarily what you know. And most of all, the old adage is true. It takes money to make money.
True, an entrepreneur might have the greatest idea in the world, but they still need financing. If you ever saw that show “The Shark Tank,” you might have noticed that the people with money can command a controlling interest in the product or service. Then, with success of those products or services, the children, grandchildren and even great-grandchildren of those sharks might not have to work a day in their lives; but as I said, these people don’t think this way.
The Owner Class is appropriate because these people make so many decisions about the products and services available to us they affect all of our lives. This is even more true when they are elected to office. And don’t be fooled, most of the people who run for “public office” are part of the Owner Class. And, once in office, they can appoint people to head various departments and such, like the nobility of old appointed second sons and the like to various high church offices. The point of that, however, will have to wait, because first I need to explain about the various servants of the Owner Class.
The Barron had his jester, treasurer, court magician and astrologer, physician and Chamberlain. Owners have entertainers, accountants, lawyers and physicians at their call as well. Next time…
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
“I don’t get these accounts,” the Baron complained. “The harvest is in and our sales have been made, plus the taxes have been collected, but it doesn’t make any sense.” He waited for an explanation, but the Chamberlain wisely remained silent. “Send for my treasurer, and while you are at it, send in my court jester. I could use some entertainment.”
“Lord,” the Chamberlain tried again and spoke when the Baron looked up. “The Archbishop has come for the tithe.”
“Tell him to wait.”
“And the bishop is with him.”
The Baron blanched. “Tell him to sit on it.”
“And the King’s representative is coming here in the morning with a group of priests to check the books for the taxes.”
The Baron jumped to his feet. “Quick. Get my court magician, my sage, my court astrologer. I need a spell against these dreaded men. And while you’re at it, cancel my jester and get my physician. I have a headache.”
###
Once upon a time, a CEO brooded in his office. “Sir,” the Secretary spoke up, but the CEO just shuffled his papers.
“I don’t get these accounts,” the CEO complained. “The product is in port and our sales have been made, plus the taxes have been collected, but it doesn’t make any sense.” He waited for an explanation, but the secretary wisely remained silent. “Send for the CFO, and while you are at it, turn on some music. I could use some entertainment.”
“Sir,” the secretary tried again and spoke when the CEO looked up. “The EPA has come for the carbon credits.”
“Tell him to wait.”
“And the FDA is with him.”
The CEO blanched. “Tell him to sit on it.”
“And the Treasury assistant secretary is coming here in the morning with a group of accountants to check the books for the taxes.”
The CEO jumped to his feet. “Quick. Get my lawyers, accountants and PR people from the compliance department . I need a spin against these dreaded men. And while you’re at it, turn off the music and get my doctor. I have a headache.”
###
Welcome to the New Dark Ages
In our day, the owner class might not actually own anything outright, but they run things. They function as chief officers in the corporations, sit on each other’s boards as directors, and make money from having money. What they own are investments and with interest and dividends they constitute the top one or two percent or so of wage earners (covering maybe two to three million people in the United States).
Curiously, like the medieval lords, the harder you and I work, the more money they make in bonuses and increased stock values. Too bad we don’t (generally) make more as well. Also, in case you haven’t noticed, when one of these people does such a terrible job they ruin a company, they don’t stay unemployed for long. They get another CEO or CFO or COO job quickly.
Now, these are the people who could retire after working only one or two years. They would have enough money to buy a modest house, travel when they want, buy a new car every year, pay all their own medical expenses as they age, and still have some left to leave to their descendants – and after only one or two years of work. Of course, these people don’t think this way. And they will tell you, honestly enough based on what they consider “work” that they have worked hard for all they have gotten. Then comes the fib: “And you can too.”
Sure. I mean the son of a serf can join the army and through good service be granted lands, be knighted, maybe even given a real title, and though appropriate marriages perhaps see a great-grandchild on the throne…but not likely. These days, these things are more by blood than you might think, and they are also by networking: who you know, not necessarily what you know. And most of all, the old adage is true. It takes money to make money.
True, an entrepreneur might have the greatest idea in the world, but they still need financing. If you ever saw that show “The Shark Tank,” you might have noticed that the people with money can command a controlling interest in the product or service. Then, with success of those products or services, the children, grandchildren and even great-grandchildren of those sharks might not have to work a day in their lives; but as I said, these people don’t think this way.
The Owner Class is appropriate because these people make so many decisions about the products and services available to us they affect all of our lives. This is even more true when they are elected to office. And don’t be fooled, most of the people who run for “public office” are part of the Owner Class. And, once in office, they can appoint people to head various departments and such, like the nobility of old appointed second sons and the like to various high church offices. The point of that, however, will have to wait, because first I need to explain about the various servants of the Owner Class.
The Barron had his jester, treasurer, court magician and astrologer, physician and Chamberlain. Owners have entertainers, accountants, lawyers and physicians at their call as well. Next time…
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Wednesday, September 29, 2010
The New Dark Ages: Class Structure.
Thank God we live in America, right? In America we are free and equal, aren’t we? Anybody can achieve the dream. Isn’t that so?
Long, long ago in Europe, in a land not so far away, there was a kingdom called Amorica. The people there fretted because the Glory that was Rome was gone, and now the Franks stood on their doorstep and threatened invasion. The people of Amorica trembled, because the Germans, that is the Angles and Saxons, already overwhelmed their cousins across the water and now the Franks were threatening them. What could the people do?
The Priest stood up to say some comforting words to the people. Unfortunately, because of the Glory that was Rome he said everything in Latin so none of the people understood what he was saying. That language was already dead as far as the people were concerned.
Then the King stood up and gave a rousing speech in High Britain because of the Glory that was Arthur, but that was not much better, though the people caught a few of the words. Their own language was more closely related to Welsh than Britain. Still, the King roused some of the nobles and perhaps that was a good thing, but what could the people do?
One of the beggars, the lowest of the low stood up last and looked at all the people. “Go back to your homes, ye idiots. At least ye got homes,” he yelled. And so that was what the people did because they figured life would just go on as it had and, as far as they knew, it would go on the same forever. So the Franks came and the people were right.
The King and his nobles owned the actual land and ruled the kingdom, except for the land owned and ruled by the church. The King passed decrees. The Church passed decrees. But the people just went on like the land itself. They were peasants, the serfs who worked the land, some merchants and craftsmen in town, perhaps guild members, and artisans of a sort, but all of them really peasants. They got up with the sun, worked until dark, had families before they died so their families could do the same thing after they were gone. And the beggars, the lowest of the low, still hung around the fringes of all this and…begged.
Let me be the first to say, welcome to the New Dark Ages.
Today the chief commodity isn’t land, it is industry, and the nobility is money-made, but this makes sense because today conquest is not by the sword. Instead it is by mergers and acquisitions. I call it the Owner Class, but a more detailed description of how medieval it really is will have to wait for a future post.
The Church, of course, has been neutered in our present society, but it has not gone away. It has been replaced by Federal, State and local bureaucracies. Trust me, for every decree your CEO hands down, the government is handing down three. Again, the details will have to wait, but I might say that the more actual daily power our elected officials hand over to the bureaucracy, the more medieval we are becoming.
We, or most of us anyway, are the peasants, what I call the employment class. Some of us live paycheck to paycheck. Some of us do well enough, but only as long as we have a job. Lose the job and we risk losing our house, all our perks and benefits, and becoming part of the group that lives paycheck to paycheck. Note: when someone in the owner class loses their job they get a package generally worth more than what you or I would make in our whole working careers.
Serfs: workers, laborers, artists, craftsmen, small businessmen (merchants) entrepreneurs (for the most part) and etc. Most of us, anyway.
Then, of course, there are the beggars. We treat them better these days. We have welfare and plenty of other programs, but they remain a drain on the rest of us, a useless, non-working, permanent underclass of people. Again, more on that to come
-MichaelThe Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Long, long ago in Europe, in a land not so far away, there was a kingdom called Amorica. The people there fretted because the Glory that was Rome was gone, and now the Franks stood on their doorstep and threatened invasion. The people of Amorica trembled, because the Germans, that is the Angles and Saxons, already overwhelmed their cousins across the water and now the Franks were threatening them. What could the people do?
The Priest stood up to say some comforting words to the people. Unfortunately, because of the Glory that was Rome he said everything in Latin so none of the people understood what he was saying. That language was already dead as far as the people were concerned.
Then the King stood up and gave a rousing speech in High Britain because of the Glory that was Arthur, but that was not much better, though the people caught a few of the words. Their own language was more closely related to Welsh than Britain. Still, the King roused some of the nobles and perhaps that was a good thing, but what could the people do?
One of the beggars, the lowest of the low stood up last and looked at all the people. “Go back to your homes, ye idiots. At least ye got homes,” he yelled. And so that was what the people did because they figured life would just go on as it had and, as far as they knew, it would go on the same forever. So the Franks came and the people were right.
The King and his nobles owned the actual land and ruled the kingdom, except for the land owned and ruled by the church. The King passed decrees. The Church passed decrees. But the people just went on like the land itself. They were peasants, the serfs who worked the land, some merchants and craftsmen in town, perhaps guild members, and artisans of a sort, but all of them really peasants. They got up with the sun, worked until dark, had families before they died so their families could do the same thing after they were gone. And the beggars, the lowest of the low, still hung around the fringes of all this and…begged.
Let me be the first to say, welcome to the New Dark Ages.
Today the chief commodity isn’t land, it is industry, and the nobility is money-made, but this makes sense because today conquest is not by the sword. Instead it is by mergers and acquisitions. I call it the Owner Class, but a more detailed description of how medieval it really is will have to wait for a future post.
The Church, of course, has been neutered in our present society, but it has not gone away. It has been replaced by Federal, State and local bureaucracies. Trust me, for every decree your CEO hands down, the government is handing down three. Again, the details will have to wait, but I might say that the more actual daily power our elected officials hand over to the bureaucracy, the more medieval we are becoming.
We, or most of us anyway, are the peasants, what I call the employment class. Some of us live paycheck to paycheck. Some of us do well enough, but only as long as we have a job. Lose the job and we risk losing our house, all our perks and benefits, and becoming part of the group that lives paycheck to paycheck. Note: when someone in the owner class loses their job they get a package generally worth more than what you or I would make in our whole working careers.
Serfs: workers, laborers, artists, craftsmen, small businessmen (merchants) entrepreneurs (for the most part) and etc. Most of us, anyway.
Then, of course, there are the beggars. We treat them better these days. We have welfare and plenty of other programs, but they remain a drain on the rest of us, a useless, non-working, permanent underclass of people. Again, more on that to come
-MichaelThe Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Rewritten History, Orwellian Style.
Here is an example: Sept = 7, oct = 8, nov = 9, dec = 10 (decimal/tenth). So why is September the 9th month, October the 10th, November the 11th and December the 12th. December should be the 10th month, shouldn’t it?
Let’s see, that would make the New year around March first – or most likely March 21st at the Spring Equinox. Whoever decided the New Year should be in the middle of winter? Obviously, at some point in history things got changed, and these days I bet most people never thought that dec means 10.
The important thing to note about the calendar is this cannot have happened by accident or evolution. People did not suddenly wake up one morning and all decide to move the time for the New Year. Some person or persons in power had to make the change. In this case, it was Pope by the name of Gregory the Great.
So, the question for the day: Is this kind of rewriting of life happening today? Yes.
First, an obvious one that some people still understand:
False: The Civil War was a war to free the slaves.
True: The Civil War was fought because many southerners believed their states, communities and individual rights were being trampled on by a national government out of control. The Southern answer was to separate from that national government. The Northern answer was to “preserve the union.”
Slavery was deliberately not discussed for two years of the war because of the hope that the Southern states might yet be reunited peacefully. When the Emancipation Proclamation was finally passed and signed, it was done with the hope that it would cause a spontaneous uprising of slaves in the south that would cripple the southern economy. It did not happen…
False: European colonialism was perpetrated by aggressor nations and greedy men who oppressed people and suppressed local cultures in order to gain economic advantage, steal the native resources and enrich the looting nations
True: In the thinking of the time, the world was seen as progressing from worse to better, from primitive societies to civilization. It was the same kind of progressive thinking that produced the theories of Marx and Darwin and caused the founding fathers of the United States to want to “form a more perfect union.”
Far from being exploitative, the Europeans believed they were giving the people of the world, some of whom were still living a stone age existence, the best that they had. It was their moral imperative to bring the benefits of civilization to “backwards” nations. They believed the spread of western, Christian civilization was right, good and true and for the benefit, not detriment of the world. And this colonialization, though far from perfect, was always driven, not by greed, but by the highest ethical standards. Indeed, Ghandi himself was clear when he said his passive resistance would be utterly ineffective against anyone who held to a lower moral ground than the British.
False: Food, clothing, shelter and (now) healthcare are human rights.
True: Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the original word that was taken out because of the slavery issue, that is, property are rights. You own your thoughts, your beliefs, your labor, your things and (yes) your money, and what you do with them is your decision. The United States Constitution spelled out some rights for all to understand: freedom of conscience – to assemble with others and worship as you please, freedom of speech and the press, freedom to defend yourself, your family and your property against tyranny. These are rights. Why? Because they depend only on you to do with what is yours as you see fit.
Food, clothing, shelter, education and healthcare are not rights. They are entitlements according to our current rulers, but they are not rights. Why? Because they depend upon others, specifically stealing from others in order to insure them to you!
You can see, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Life is being rewritten by those with power and influence, and it is being rewritten under our very noses. Perhaps the second question should be, why?
-MichaelThe Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Let’s see, that would make the New year around March first – or most likely March 21st at the Spring Equinox. Whoever decided the New Year should be in the middle of winter? Obviously, at some point in history things got changed, and these days I bet most people never thought that dec means 10.
The important thing to note about the calendar is this cannot have happened by accident or evolution. People did not suddenly wake up one morning and all decide to move the time for the New Year. Some person or persons in power had to make the change. In this case, it was Pope by the name of Gregory the Great.
So, the question for the day: Is this kind of rewriting of life happening today? Yes.
First, an obvious one that some people still understand:
False: The Civil War was a war to free the slaves.
True: The Civil War was fought because many southerners believed their states, communities and individual rights were being trampled on by a national government out of control. The Southern answer was to separate from that national government. The Northern answer was to “preserve the union.”
Slavery was deliberately not discussed for two years of the war because of the hope that the Southern states might yet be reunited peacefully. When the Emancipation Proclamation was finally passed and signed, it was done with the hope that it would cause a spontaneous uprising of slaves in the south that would cripple the southern economy. It did not happen…
False: European colonialism was perpetrated by aggressor nations and greedy men who oppressed people and suppressed local cultures in order to gain economic advantage, steal the native resources and enrich the looting nations
True: In the thinking of the time, the world was seen as progressing from worse to better, from primitive societies to civilization. It was the same kind of progressive thinking that produced the theories of Marx and Darwin and caused the founding fathers of the United States to want to “form a more perfect union.”
Far from being exploitative, the Europeans believed they were giving the people of the world, some of whom were still living a stone age existence, the best that they had. It was their moral imperative to bring the benefits of civilization to “backwards” nations. They believed the spread of western, Christian civilization was right, good and true and for the benefit, not detriment of the world. And this colonialization, though far from perfect, was always driven, not by greed, but by the highest ethical standards. Indeed, Ghandi himself was clear when he said his passive resistance would be utterly ineffective against anyone who held to a lower moral ground than the British.
False: Food, clothing, shelter and (now) healthcare are human rights.
True: Life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the original word that was taken out because of the slavery issue, that is, property are rights. You own your thoughts, your beliefs, your labor, your things and (yes) your money, and what you do with them is your decision. The United States Constitution spelled out some rights for all to understand: freedom of conscience – to assemble with others and worship as you please, freedom of speech and the press, freedom to defend yourself, your family and your property against tyranny. These are rights. Why? Because they depend only on you to do with what is yours as you see fit.
Food, clothing, shelter, education and healthcare are not rights. They are entitlements according to our current rulers, but they are not rights. Why? Because they depend upon others, specifically stealing from others in order to insure them to you!
You can see, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Life is being rewritten by those with power and influence, and it is being rewritten under our very noses. Perhaps the second question should be, why?
-MichaelThe Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Anger, Hate, Divisiveness and Vitriol
I think there is something wrong with the human ear – some of them, anyway. Lord Acton suggested that power corrupts but I rather think power interferes with the ears. Elitism in general, but elitism empowered in particular makes hearing a lost art.
To be fair, it isn’t just elitists. I have counseled numerous couples in their marriages and I have guided several boards through their decision making processes. I heard one spouse say calmly and sincerely, “You are right. I was wrong in that and I am sorry.” But all the other spouse heard was spit, spit, criticize attack. And when board members disagreed, I have gotten from both sides, instead of constructive words, complaints that the other side is being negative and obstructionist. To be sure, on a grander, national scale it is much worse.
People are concerned in this nation that all humane discourse has ceased, and in some ways they are correct, but it is not because people have ceased to try. It is, I believe, because the ears are clogged. I honestly feel that apart from a very few on the far left and far right, Americans are willing to reach out reasonably across the aisle, share their perspective and position and calmly discuss the issues. First, though, we have to fix the ears.
I think it depends in one part on how strongly we feel about our side of the issue, how important we believe it to be and how likely we are (the power part) to implement our point of view if we can just overcome the opposition. Thus, discussing the issue to find a reasonable solution takes a backseat to overcoming the opposition. In that case, we no longer hear the reasonableness of the words presented. We look only for mistakes and loopholes to overcome those words, and when we find none it often becomes spit, spit, criticize, attack for real.
When people on the right hear someone on the left express a legitimate concern about (for example) an environmental issue, the only thing the people on the right hear is loony, environmental whacko. Conversely, when people on the left hear someone on the right express a legitimate concern about (for example) immigration, the only thing the people on the left hear is divisive, hate-filled bigot. Neither characterization is correct. But how can I say what people will not hear?
I think this problem with the ears also depends in part on the discussions themselves. I know those on the left will find this hard to believe, but people on the right, including the infamous talk show hosts, present passionate (to be sure) but extremely reasonable and well thought out positions on the issues. Sadly, those on the left only seem to hear anger, hate and vitriol (spit, spit).
On the other side, people on the left tend to talk, not in reasonable arguments, but in conclusive statements, often assuming that any educated person has read the same books and studied the same reports they have – those books and reports where these arguments have all been dealt with in length. Sadly, all that people on the right hear is this lefty is an idiot with no reasonable argument to support their position and no leg to stand on.
To be fair, people on the right could read the books even if they are disagreeable from premise to conclusion. At least you will know where the other side is coming from. And people on the left could make more effort to frame their positions in a reasonable way, backing up the ideas with a few facts might not be a bad idea, and maybe stop treating conservatives like backward, ignorant rubes simply because they have not read (or not been convinced by) the same books you read in college.
I think a final part of this problem depends on how we view life, the universe and everything. The liberal worldview or mindset sees things one way, and though not all liberals think alike or see things exactly the same, the underlying foundation is equivalent Likewise, the conservative worldview or mindset may be equally equivalent though non-universal. Those foundations, the place where all discussions and arguments must begin, the place where all ideas originate and the foundation on which those ideas stand are obviously incompatible, liberal to conservative. What is true, and any psych 101 student can tell you this, is anything that challenges our foundational beliefs is seen as threatening.
If you believe that individuals are the problem, and especially individuals with power like private company executives or the rich, and that the collective (government) is the only fair and just way to keep such individuals in check, you will react vehemently if not violently against any words that threaten that way of thinking.
If, on the other hand, you believe that government is the problem, and especially when it caters to certain groups or attacks liberty with bureaucratic rules, regulations and punitive taxes, and that individuals by voice, vote and in exercising their liberties are the only way to keep government in check, you will react equally badly against any words that threaten that point of view.
Thus liberals claim conservatives hate all people (groups) who are not like them. Thus conservatives claim that liberals hate everyone (the whole nation). Thus liberals see conservatives as practical anarchists who don’t care if a few get rich and everyone else suffers. Thus conservatives see liberals as practical tyrants who don’t care if no one gets rich and everyone suffers. So it goes.
We don’t hear each other. And we won’t as long as we perceive the other side to be threatening our most deeply held and cherished beliefs about life, the universe and everything. And we won’t, as long as we are virtually speaking different languages: one presenting reasonable argument and the other presenting conclusions as if they are foregone conclusions. And we won’t, as long as our focus is not on what the other person is saying but on how we can overcome this opposition and accomplish our agenda.
Now, one final note would be this: this is not a new phenomenon. The Prophet Elijah had to run for his life when Queen Jezebel did not like what he was saying. She did not want to hear it! Likewise, Jeremiah was held in prison because the king said he always prophesized such negative, hateful things. Generally, people have never wanted to hear the other side of the story when it cuts to the core. King George and the British Parliament were offended and angered by what the Continental Congress had to say. And sometimes it comes to war.
I re-read the Barmen declaration not long ago, drafted in Nazi Germany by Barth and Bonheoffer (and others). Essentially, all it said was Jesus Christ is the Lord of all life. Adolf Hitler is not. Of course Barth was a neutral Swiss, but Bonheoffer was easy to throw in jail. He died in jail for his angry, hate-filled, divisive and vitriolic words………
-Michael The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
To be fair, it isn’t just elitists. I have counseled numerous couples in their marriages and I have guided several boards through their decision making processes. I heard one spouse say calmly and sincerely, “You are right. I was wrong in that and I am sorry.” But all the other spouse heard was spit, spit, criticize attack. And when board members disagreed, I have gotten from both sides, instead of constructive words, complaints that the other side is being negative and obstructionist. To be sure, on a grander, national scale it is much worse.
People are concerned in this nation that all humane discourse has ceased, and in some ways they are correct, but it is not because people have ceased to try. It is, I believe, because the ears are clogged. I honestly feel that apart from a very few on the far left and far right, Americans are willing to reach out reasonably across the aisle, share their perspective and position and calmly discuss the issues. First, though, we have to fix the ears.
I think it depends in one part on how strongly we feel about our side of the issue, how important we believe it to be and how likely we are (the power part) to implement our point of view if we can just overcome the opposition. Thus, discussing the issue to find a reasonable solution takes a backseat to overcoming the opposition. In that case, we no longer hear the reasonableness of the words presented. We look only for mistakes and loopholes to overcome those words, and when we find none it often becomes spit, spit, criticize, attack for real.
When people on the right hear someone on the left express a legitimate concern about (for example) an environmental issue, the only thing the people on the right hear is loony, environmental whacko. Conversely, when people on the left hear someone on the right express a legitimate concern about (for example) immigration, the only thing the people on the left hear is divisive, hate-filled bigot. Neither characterization is correct. But how can I say what people will not hear?
I think this problem with the ears also depends in part on the discussions themselves. I know those on the left will find this hard to believe, but people on the right, including the infamous talk show hosts, present passionate (to be sure) but extremely reasonable and well thought out positions on the issues. Sadly, those on the left only seem to hear anger, hate and vitriol (spit, spit).
On the other side, people on the left tend to talk, not in reasonable arguments, but in conclusive statements, often assuming that any educated person has read the same books and studied the same reports they have – those books and reports where these arguments have all been dealt with in length. Sadly, all that people on the right hear is this lefty is an idiot with no reasonable argument to support their position and no leg to stand on.
To be fair, people on the right could read the books even if they are disagreeable from premise to conclusion. At least you will know where the other side is coming from. And people on the left could make more effort to frame their positions in a reasonable way, backing up the ideas with a few facts might not be a bad idea, and maybe stop treating conservatives like backward, ignorant rubes simply because they have not read (or not been convinced by) the same books you read in college.
I think a final part of this problem depends on how we view life, the universe and everything. The liberal worldview or mindset sees things one way, and though not all liberals think alike or see things exactly the same, the underlying foundation is equivalent Likewise, the conservative worldview or mindset may be equally equivalent though non-universal. Those foundations, the place where all discussions and arguments must begin, the place where all ideas originate and the foundation on which those ideas stand are obviously incompatible, liberal to conservative. What is true, and any psych 101 student can tell you this, is anything that challenges our foundational beliefs is seen as threatening.
If you believe that individuals are the problem, and especially individuals with power like private company executives or the rich, and that the collective (government) is the only fair and just way to keep such individuals in check, you will react vehemently if not violently against any words that threaten that way of thinking.
If, on the other hand, you believe that government is the problem, and especially when it caters to certain groups or attacks liberty with bureaucratic rules, regulations and punitive taxes, and that individuals by voice, vote and in exercising their liberties are the only way to keep government in check, you will react equally badly against any words that threaten that point of view.
Thus liberals claim conservatives hate all people (groups) who are not like them. Thus conservatives claim that liberals hate everyone (the whole nation). Thus liberals see conservatives as practical anarchists who don’t care if a few get rich and everyone else suffers. Thus conservatives see liberals as practical tyrants who don’t care if no one gets rich and everyone suffers. So it goes.
We don’t hear each other. And we won’t as long as we perceive the other side to be threatening our most deeply held and cherished beliefs about life, the universe and everything. And we won’t, as long as we are virtually speaking different languages: one presenting reasonable argument and the other presenting conclusions as if they are foregone conclusions. And we won’t, as long as our focus is not on what the other person is saying but on how we can overcome this opposition and accomplish our agenda.
Now, one final note would be this: this is not a new phenomenon. The Prophet Elijah had to run for his life when Queen Jezebel did not like what he was saying. She did not want to hear it! Likewise, Jeremiah was held in prison because the king said he always prophesized such negative, hateful things. Generally, people have never wanted to hear the other side of the story when it cuts to the core. King George and the British Parliament were offended and angered by what the Continental Congress had to say. And sometimes it comes to war.
I re-read the Barmen declaration not long ago, drafted in Nazi Germany by Barth and Bonheoffer (and others). Essentially, all it said was Jesus Christ is the Lord of all life. Adolf Hitler is not. Of course Barth was a neutral Swiss, but Bonheoffer was easy to throw in jail. He died in jail for his angry, hate-filled, divisive and vitriolic words………
-Michael The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Dear General Patraeus,
I understand the actions of the pastor and his little flock – to burn a copy of the Quran – is insensitive and offensive to Muslims. I understand how it might make our job in Afghanistan harder. But I also understand these two points worth remembering.
First, we are at war. I know given the present rules of engagement it is hard to remember that. I also know that there are many people in Afghanistan and across the Muslim world who are biding their time, waiting to see how things turn out, and waiting for America to get the H*** out. Some of these are closet jihadists. We all know this.
As I said, I understand how this pastor’s burning of the Quran might make your job harder, but it might also bring some of these Jihadists out of the closet. Instead of fighting this pastor, I recommend fighting the administration who has your military hands tied. That way, when these closet jihadists show themselves you can do some serious butt kicking. Yes, lives will be lost. Lives are lost in war as you know, but if you can see your enemy out in the open, you might be able to bring things to a close more quickly and thus save lives.
Do you think that maybe the continuing violence in Iraq after we “finished our work” is because we left too many jihadists in the closet there?
Second, this pastor’s self-expression is precisely what a free America allows and what you are supposed to be defending: His right to be stupid. The constitution does not say you have freedom of speech as long as it is sensitive and inoffensive. Your job is not to criticize this pastor but to defend him. Your enemy is not this American Citizen but those very people who want to force this citizen to shut-up.
Look, I am in no way condoning the acts of this person, but I will defend to the death his right to do it – as should you. So, here is a suggestion. Maybe this pastor could fly to New York and on 9-11 he can burn his Quran on the site of the ground zero mosque. Hey, this is America! Every stupid, insensitive, offensive act deserves another.
-MichaelThe Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
First, we are at war. I know given the present rules of engagement it is hard to remember that. I also know that there are many people in Afghanistan and across the Muslim world who are biding their time, waiting to see how things turn out, and waiting for America to get the H*** out. Some of these are closet jihadists. We all know this.
As I said, I understand how this pastor’s burning of the Quran might make your job harder, but it might also bring some of these Jihadists out of the closet. Instead of fighting this pastor, I recommend fighting the administration who has your military hands tied. That way, when these closet jihadists show themselves you can do some serious butt kicking. Yes, lives will be lost. Lives are lost in war as you know, but if you can see your enemy out in the open, you might be able to bring things to a close more quickly and thus save lives.
Do you think that maybe the continuing violence in Iraq after we “finished our work” is because we left too many jihadists in the closet there?
Second, this pastor’s self-expression is precisely what a free America allows and what you are supposed to be defending: His right to be stupid. The constitution does not say you have freedom of speech as long as it is sensitive and inoffensive. Your job is not to criticize this pastor but to defend him. Your enemy is not this American Citizen but those very people who want to force this citizen to shut-up.
Look, I am in no way condoning the acts of this person, but I will defend to the death his right to do it – as should you. So, here is a suggestion. Maybe this pastor could fly to New York and on 9-11 he can burn his Quran on the site of the ground zero mosque. Hey, this is America! Every stupid, insensitive, offensive act deserves another.
-MichaelThe Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Tuesday, August 31, 2010
Common Sense: Islam for the Masses
“There is no blindness as dark as willful blindness and no ignorance as dangerous as willful ignorance” ------ MGK
The following ought to concern every American, every person in the West and East, or at least every person who is still a Christian. This is not criticism, but a simple telling of three facts about Islam, facts that we should all know.
1. Islam means submission to God. A Muslim is a person who submits to God. Specifically, Muslims conform themselves to the Quran and to the Sunnah, the writing as well as the teachings and sayings of the Prophet, Mohammed. Okay, but on a practical level, what does that mean?
It means that Muslims see themselves as the people of God and everyone else as either deluded by Satan (the devil) or working for Satan against God. As such, Islam will never be tolerant, multi-cultural or open to diversity. No matter what administration in what Islamic state says, it ain’t gonna happen.
You see, Mohammed stands in the long line of the Prophets that began with Abraham. When the last and greatest of the Jewish Prophets was rejected (Jesus, and in Islam he is simply one of the Prophets), God rejected the Jews—the children of Isaac, and selected the children of Ishmael in their place. Through Mohammed, he gave the final and complete revelation for humanity until the time of the end of the world.
Thus, if all other religions, systems, ideologies are inherently deluded or satanic, then Islam leaves no room for them. And, let me be clear about this, this is not the radical idea of a few Muslims. It is the nature of the faith. But Christians and Jews see themselves in much the same way, as the people of God. So what’s the difference? Jihad.
2. Jihad means striving (to conform to God’s will). For the individual to strive to be closer to God’s will (to be a jihadist) is laudable. For a Muslim community or nation Jihad is not a bad thing, but it gets complicated when not everyone in the community or nation is Muslim. But there is one more thing that Jihad means, and that is striving to impose God’s will on the whole world. That is the fundamental drive—to overcome Satan in this world and bring God the victory. And that can be pursued by any means, including the sword.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for any Muslim to be tolerant of other faiths. Equally don’t hold your breath waiting for any Muslim to condemn Hamas, the Taliban or Al-Qaida. It ain’t gonna happen, either. Most Muslims might not be willing to pick up the sword themselves, but they are not going to speak against those who do. The imposition of Islam on the world is considered by some (scholars) to be one of the pillars of the faith. To deny it would be like a Jew denying circumcision or a Christian denying Baptism or the Lord’s Supper. Of course, when dealing with Satan, it is not wrong to cheat, steal and lie, so I suppose some Muslims might say the words they believe the non-Muslim world wants to hear.
Please understand. Jihad is not the invention of Radical Islam, Islamic fanatics or anything of the kind. It is foundational to the faith, and the example is Mohammed himself, who in his last ten years or so in Medina did everything from sending out hit squads against anyone who insulted him to holding an all out military crusade against the Byzantines. But what does it mean to impose Islam on the whole world because there will always be Christians and other faiths, won’t there? Not necessarily under Sharia.
3. Sharia is the perfect expression of God’s will – even if various schools of Islamic thought and teaching vary on the fine points of the law. Ultimately, Muslims do not have to conquer by the sword. All they have to do is get the nations to come into conformity with Sharia. But again, on a practical level, what does that mean?
It means women and children are little better than property. Women can own property, they can inherit and do not have to share their fortune with their husbands, but they are restricted in their appearance, movements, associations: no school, no driving, whatever, depending on the location and local interpretation. It is always restrictive—less than men. Women can be beaten and effectively raped by their husbands with little recourse, if any. Their voice in court carries only half the weight of a man. A man can accuse his wife of adultery and though she protest, she is guilty, and that can carry a brutal death penalty.
Likewise Christians (and Jews believe it or not) as “People of the Book,” (and others added to the list since Mohammed’s day) have some limited protection but are second-class citizens (dhimmi) at best. They cannot build churches, or in some cases cannot even repair their existing buildings, and they dare not speak their faith in public. The simple accusation of proselytizing was enough for the Muslim world to justify the murder of medical missionaries in Afghanistan. And for any Muslim who converts, that is an automatic death penalty.
You see, Islam, Mohammed, the Quran and Sharia are above debate. To criticize, critique or in any way suggest another way might be better is considered insulting to God, and to insult God is to receive the death penalty. Go ask Rushdie. Go ask the Danish cartoonist.
So With that, here is what Christians have to look forward to: Watch yourself become a second class citizen with heavy, extra taxes. Watch your secular, nominal Christian neighbors and friends fall away from the faith – attracted to where the power is and they won’t want to pay the heavy burden of extra taxes. Watch your daughters (potentially) raised in ignorance, restricted in what they can do and (potentially) brutalized. Watch your sons be proselytized in school and turned toward Islam while you dare not talk about Jesus in public on threat of death.
And that is just scratching the surface of the expectations of normative Islam. You should see what the fanatics have in mind.
Will the East survive? Yes, for a time at least, and they will defend their borders. India has an army and Nukes on the border like a wall. Is it against Pakistan? Not exactly. It is against Islam.
Will the West survive? Not at this time, and here is why: “But we are better people than that, aren’t we? We believe in freedom regardless of race, creed or religion. Surely we can make room in our nation (society, culture) for Islam. We are a tolerant people and if we show tolerance and respect for Islam, surely the Muslims will return tolerance and respect for us, won’t they?” Let me just say this: When a group of American Jewish tourists with cameras swinging from their necks stop for a beer in Mecca at the pub across the street from Islam’s Holy of Holies, then I will say yes.
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
The following ought to concern every American, every person in the West and East, or at least every person who is still a Christian. This is not criticism, but a simple telling of three facts about Islam, facts that we should all know.
1. Islam means submission to God. A Muslim is a person who submits to God. Specifically, Muslims conform themselves to the Quran and to the Sunnah, the writing as well as the teachings and sayings of the Prophet, Mohammed. Okay, but on a practical level, what does that mean?
It means that Muslims see themselves as the people of God and everyone else as either deluded by Satan (the devil) or working for Satan against God. As such, Islam will never be tolerant, multi-cultural or open to diversity. No matter what administration in what Islamic state says, it ain’t gonna happen.
You see, Mohammed stands in the long line of the Prophets that began with Abraham. When the last and greatest of the Jewish Prophets was rejected (Jesus, and in Islam he is simply one of the Prophets), God rejected the Jews—the children of Isaac, and selected the children of Ishmael in their place. Through Mohammed, he gave the final and complete revelation for humanity until the time of the end of the world.
Thus, if all other religions, systems, ideologies are inherently deluded or satanic, then Islam leaves no room for them. And, let me be clear about this, this is not the radical idea of a few Muslims. It is the nature of the faith. But Christians and Jews see themselves in much the same way, as the people of God. So what’s the difference? Jihad.
2. Jihad means striving (to conform to God’s will). For the individual to strive to be closer to God’s will (to be a jihadist) is laudable. For a Muslim community or nation Jihad is not a bad thing, but it gets complicated when not everyone in the community or nation is Muslim. But there is one more thing that Jihad means, and that is striving to impose God’s will on the whole world. That is the fundamental drive—to overcome Satan in this world and bring God the victory. And that can be pursued by any means, including the sword.
Don’t hold your breath waiting for any Muslim to be tolerant of other faiths. Equally don’t hold your breath waiting for any Muslim to condemn Hamas, the Taliban or Al-Qaida. It ain’t gonna happen, either. Most Muslims might not be willing to pick up the sword themselves, but they are not going to speak against those who do. The imposition of Islam on the world is considered by some (scholars) to be one of the pillars of the faith. To deny it would be like a Jew denying circumcision or a Christian denying Baptism or the Lord’s Supper. Of course, when dealing with Satan, it is not wrong to cheat, steal and lie, so I suppose some Muslims might say the words they believe the non-Muslim world wants to hear.
Please understand. Jihad is not the invention of Radical Islam, Islamic fanatics or anything of the kind. It is foundational to the faith, and the example is Mohammed himself, who in his last ten years or so in Medina did everything from sending out hit squads against anyone who insulted him to holding an all out military crusade against the Byzantines. But what does it mean to impose Islam on the whole world because there will always be Christians and other faiths, won’t there? Not necessarily under Sharia.
3. Sharia is the perfect expression of God’s will – even if various schools of Islamic thought and teaching vary on the fine points of the law. Ultimately, Muslims do not have to conquer by the sword. All they have to do is get the nations to come into conformity with Sharia. But again, on a practical level, what does that mean?
It means women and children are little better than property. Women can own property, they can inherit and do not have to share their fortune with their husbands, but they are restricted in their appearance, movements, associations: no school, no driving, whatever, depending on the location and local interpretation. It is always restrictive—less than men. Women can be beaten and effectively raped by their husbands with little recourse, if any. Their voice in court carries only half the weight of a man. A man can accuse his wife of adultery and though she protest, she is guilty, and that can carry a brutal death penalty.
Likewise Christians (and Jews believe it or not) as “People of the Book,” (and others added to the list since Mohammed’s day) have some limited protection but are second-class citizens (dhimmi) at best. They cannot build churches, or in some cases cannot even repair their existing buildings, and they dare not speak their faith in public. The simple accusation of proselytizing was enough for the Muslim world to justify the murder of medical missionaries in Afghanistan. And for any Muslim who converts, that is an automatic death penalty.
You see, Islam, Mohammed, the Quran and Sharia are above debate. To criticize, critique or in any way suggest another way might be better is considered insulting to God, and to insult God is to receive the death penalty. Go ask Rushdie. Go ask the Danish cartoonist.
So With that, here is what Christians have to look forward to: Watch yourself become a second class citizen with heavy, extra taxes. Watch your secular, nominal Christian neighbors and friends fall away from the faith – attracted to where the power is and they won’t want to pay the heavy burden of extra taxes. Watch your daughters (potentially) raised in ignorance, restricted in what they can do and (potentially) brutalized. Watch your sons be proselytized in school and turned toward Islam while you dare not talk about Jesus in public on threat of death.
And that is just scratching the surface of the expectations of normative Islam. You should see what the fanatics have in mind.
Will the East survive? Yes, for a time at least, and they will defend their borders. India has an army and Nukes on the border like a wall. Is it against Pakistan? Not exactly. It is against Islam.
Will the West survive? Not at this time, and here is why: “But we are better people than that, aren’t we? We believe in freedom regardless of race, creed or religion. Surely we can make room in our nation (society, culture) for Islam. We are a tolerant people and if we show tolerance and respect for Islam, surely the Muslims will return tolerance and respect for us, won’t they?” Let me just say this: When a group of American Jewish tourists with cameras swinging from their necks stop for a beer in Mecca at the pub across the street from Islam’s Holy of Holies, then I will say yes.
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Saturday, May 8, 2010
The Truth About Social Security
The truth about social security is you and I got snookered. Madoff could not have planned it better. The planners sold the scheme to the American people on the idea that the money would be invested and untouched in a so-called “lock box.” When we retired, we would reap the benefits according to what we paid in. It sounded fair. But the whole thing died on the day the government voted the money into the general treasury. Died, dead, gone.
You may be receiving benefits at the present time, but remember, Madoff paid his early investors a good return out of the money his new investors were throwing at him. He did this to make the scheme look good—to entice those new investors into coughing up the big bucks. So you are living off the backs of your children and grandchildren. Do you feel good about that?
That is the reality. There is no money for you other than what you can steal from your children and grandchildren (or honestly, what the government can steal from then on your behalf). I’m 56. There is and will be no money for me, either, other than what the government can steal and put my kids in the poor house before my age. And just to be clear, I have no other pension and never made great gobs of money. I will need help when I reach retirement, only the money isn’t there!
No, no no! Don’t say you are just getting back what you invested. That is not true. You did not invest anything, despite what you were told. To be blunt: You were lied to, and so was I. Social security taxes are just that—another tax, another revenue stream for the government to spend any way they see fit. Social security taxes have nothing to do with an investment on your part. You just got TAXED, and so did I. You got lied to. I got lied to. There is no social security money, and there should be no social security benefits. Why? Because we are ruining and bankrupting our children and grandchildren by insisting on our “entitlement.”
“But I paid into the system all those years. I only want my investment. I only want what I am entitled to. That is only fair…”
Wrong, wrong, wrong! There is no system. You and I were merely taxed under a government version of the Madoff pyramid scheme. You and I got snookered. You and I sincerely should not be getting any money because there isn’t any money available to get. We may technically be owed the money, but you can’t sue a man who is broke! Don’t you get it? What? Do you think there is a secret stash of money in Washington somewhere? There isn’t any social security money. No matter how much you think you deserve it, no money means there should be no benefits either. After all who is paying for those benefits? The future…
The only way you or I can be paid our “social security benefits” is to bankrupt the future and ruin our children’s lives. You may not care about the future or our children and grandchildren, but I do. The only decent thing to do is stop social security now. Just stop it. Stop lying about investment and returns and retirement funds. And stop paying it out. Just call it the tax that the government turned it into and be done with it!
You might also want to dig up the graves of those congressmen and senators who voted the social security money out of the “lock box” and into the general fund in the first place and shoot them, hang them or fry them. That might make you feel better. But as for benefits, there are none so we should just stop this pyramid before it destroys our future and our nation. Just stop. It was all a lie. Accept that truth and move on.
Now, can the government help people set up a retirement fund that will be there for their old age? Yes, by all means, but only if the government keeps their filthy stinking hands off of it. Once they get hold of your money, you know you will never see it again. Like now, they are paying you by stealing out of your children’s pockets, by making your grandchildren “depression poor.” Do you feel good about that? I don’t. Just stop the payments, now! Find another way to help those who need help, but stop the payments now before it is too late.
And as for Medicare, the same goes for you, too!
-MichaelThe Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
You may be receiving benefits at the present time, but remember, Madoff paid his early investors a good return out of the money his new investors were throwing at him. He did this to make the scheme look good—to entice those new investors into coughing up the big bucks. So you are living off the backs of your children and grandchildren. Do you feel good about that?
That is the reality. There is no money for you other than what you can steal from your children and grandchildren (or honestly, what the government can steal from then on your behalf). I’m 56. There is and will be no money for me, either, other than what the government can steal and put my kids in the poor house before my age. And just to be clear, I have no other pension and never made great gobs of money. I will need help when I reach retirement, only the money isn’t there!
No, no no! Don’t say you are just getting back what you invested. That is not true. You did not invest anything, despite what you were told. To be blunt: You were lied to, and so was I. Social security taxes are just that—another tax, another revenue stream for the government to spend any way they see fit. Social security taxes have nothing to do with an investment on your part. You just got TAXED, and so did I. You got lied to. I got lied to. There is no social security money, and there should be no social security benefits. Why? Because we are ruining and bankrupting our children and grandchildren by insisting on our “entitlement.”
“But I paid into the system all those years. I only want my investment. I only want what I am entitled to. That is only fair…”
Wrong, wrong, wrong! There is no system. You and I were merely taxed under a government version of the Madoff pyramid scheme. You and I got snookered. You and I sincerely should not be getting any money because there isn’t any money available to get. We may technically be owed the money, but you can’t sue a man who is broke! Don’t you get it? What? Do you think there is a secret stash of money in Washington somewhere? There isn’t any social security money. No matter how much you think you deserve it, no money means there should be no benefits either. After all who is paying for those benefits? The future…
The only way you or I can be paid our “social security benefits” is to bankrupt the future and ruin our children’s lives. You may not care about the future or our children and grandchildren, but I do. The only decent thing to do is stop social security now. Just stop it. Stop lying about investment and returns and retirement funds. And stop paying it out. Just call it the tax that the government turned it into and be done with it!
You might also want to dig up the graves of those congressmen and senators who voted the social security money out of the “lock box” and into the general fund in the first place and shoot them, hang them or fry them. That might make you feel better. But as for benefits, there are none so we should just stop this pyramid before it destroys our future and our nation. Just stop. It was all a lie. Accept that truth and move on.
Now, can the government help people set up a retirement fund that will be there for their old age? Yes, by all means, but only if the government keeps their filthy stinking hands off of it. Once they get hold of your money, you know you will never see it again. Like now, they are paying you by stealing out of your children’s pockets, by making your grandchildren “depression poor.” Do you feel good about that? I don’t. Just stop the payments, now! Find another way to help those who need help, but stop the payments now before it is too late.
And as for Medicare, the same goes for you, too!
-MichaelThe Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Saturday, May 1, 2010
For Government Workers Everywhere:
A great deal has been said on the right that the government is getting too big—poking its nose into every nook and cranny of individual lives and making decisions best left to the people.
The counter from the left has been that the government is us—that it is only made up of people and so it is people making these decisions after all.
Actually, the former is a matter of opinion as to what is too big. (Too big to fail)? The latter is not at all correct. No government is people. Government is (hopefully) based on law, but in practical action it is applied rules and regulations. It is only people in so far as it is people “doing their job,” which is applying the rules and regulations.
Auschwitz and Buchenwald were staffed by government people doing their job. That was the chief excuse at Nuremburg after the war. “I was just doing my job.” It wasn’t a good defense.
Rules and regulations, applied. That is what government is. And some will always say government is too big, though I suppose it could be a bit smaller. Still, as long as it is as big as it is, allow me to make this suggestion:
For anyone working in any sort of bureaucratic, governmental work, my suggestion is: WORK PERSONALLY… I mean, take it personally.
DMV, IRS, EPA, etc., before you decide anything, adjudicate anything, approve or disapprove anything ask what if this was me? What if this was my grandparents, parents, children, home, job in the balance? If I do this (or don’t do this) what if it was my life at stake here? How would I want someone to decide if it was me?
I am not advocating breaking the law, just finding a human way around the rules and regulations for the sake of humanity.
WORK PERSONALLY. Make it personal. Take it personal. Do nothing without consideration.
True, ideologues on the left will be unhappy when, for example, their environmental regulations can no longer ruin human lives or destroy jobs or keep people from using the bountiful resources of this great land or the IRS stops fining people who are barely making ends meet as it is.
And, people on the right will no doubt still think government has gotten too big and intrusive.
But whether you are on the left or the right, think of this: When the next Nuremburg comes, “I was just doing my job” won’t be an acceptable excuse then, either.
-MichaelThe Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
The counter from the left has been that the government is us—that it is only made up of people and so it is people making these decisions after all.
Actually, the former is a matter of opinion as to what is too big. (Too big to fail)? The latter is not at all correct. No government is people. Government is (hopefully) based on law, but in practical action it is applied rules and regulations. It is only people in so far as it is people “doing their job,” which is applying the rules and regulations.
Auschwitz and Buchenwald were staffed by government people doing their job. That was the chief excuse at Nuremburg after the war. “I was just doing my job.” It wasn’t a good defense.
Rules and regulations, applied. That is what government is. And some will always say government is too big, though I suppose it could be a bit smaller. Still, as long as it is as big as it is, allow me to make this suggestion:
For anyone working in any sort of bureaucratic, governmental work, my suggestion is: WORK PERSONALLY… I mean, take it personally.
DMV, IRS, EPA, etc., before you decide anything, adjudicate anything, approve or disapprove anything ask what if this was me? What if this was my grandparents, parents, children, home, job in the balance? If I do this (or don’t do this) what if it was my life at stake here? How would I want someone to decide if it was me?
I am not advocating breaking the law, just finding a human way around the rules and regulations for the sake of humanity.
WORK PERSONALLY. Make it personal. Take it personal. Do nothing without consideration.
True, ideologues on the left will be unhappy when, for example, their environmental regulations can no longer ruin human lives or destroy jobs or keep people from using the bountiful resources of this great land or the IRS stops fining people who are barely making ends meet as it is.
And, people on the right will no doubt still think government has gotten too big and intrusive.
But whether you are on the left or the right, think of this: When the next Nuremburg comes, “I was just doing my job” won’t be an acceptable excuse then, either.
-MichaelThe Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/ The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
This One’s for Glenn Beck
Abraham Lincoln was the best thing to ever happen to America, and the worst thing.
Because the North won the Civil War, slavery came to an end. Granted, it was not the issue going into the war but perhaps it needed to be. Slavery is without a doubt the most cruel and dehumanizing institution ever devised by corrupt humanity. Many would see prison or even death as preferable. Thank God that slavery ended when the North won the war.
Having said that, though, we must also consider this: Because the Union (Federalists) won the war, our nation ceased to exist. All at once, the federal (central) government broke free of the restraints our founders so carefully crafted. At that point in history, the Fed could tell the states what they could do and not do with regard to everything and everyone, and it could tell individuals what they could and could not do with their own property which as we now see stretches to cover our own bodies and (politically incorrect) minds. (can you say “hate crime?”) (Can you say “McCain-Finegold?”)
If the states object at any point on any level, the federal government, thanks to winning the war, can enforce their decisions if necessary by force. Individual citizens have even less hope than the states now that they have the cowed states enforcing the federal mandates. Object? Ha! What are you going to do about it? Yeah? You and what Confederate army?
The idea that we need a return to the Constitution is a lovely, impossible ideal. We haven’t been a constitutional nation since reconstruction. Some have suggested that we need a second American Revolution as alluded to in the name “Tea Parties.” I think what we may need is a second Civil War, one where slavery is no longer an issue. It is the states who need to put the federal government back into the very small and limited place where it belongs, assuming the genie can be put back into the bottle. Then the citizens of the various states need to rise up and tell their state governments “Don’t tread on me.”
Of course, if you need some moral motivation, how about all of the hard working taxpayers who have become little more than slaves to the entitlement class. We ought to end slavery, don’t you think?
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Because the North won the Civil War, slavery came to an end. Granted, it was not the issue going into the war but perhaps it needed to be. Slavery is without a doubt the most cruel and dehumanizing institution ever devised by corrupt humanity. Many would see prison or even death as preferable. Thank God that slavery ended when the North won the war.
Having said that, though, we must also consider this: Because the Union (Federalists) won the war, our nation ceased to exist. All at once, the federal (central) government broke free of the restraints our founders so carefully crafted. At that point in history, the Fed could tell the states what they could do and not do with regard to everything and everyone, and it could tell individuals what they could and could not do with their own property which as we now see stretches to cover our own bodies and (politically incorrect) minds. (can you say “hate crime?”) (Can you say “McCain-Finegold?”)
If the states object at any point on any level, the federal government, thanks to winning the war, can enforce their decisions if necessary by force. Individual citizens have even less hope than the states now that they have the cowed states enforcing the federal mandates. Object? Ha! What are you going to do about it? Yeah? You and what Confederate army?
The idea that we need a return to the Constitution is a lovely, impossible ideal. We haven’t been a constitutional nation since reconstruction. Some have suggested that we need a second American Revolution as alluded to in the name “Tea Parties.” I think what we may need is a second Civil War, one where slavery is no longer an issue. It is the states who need to put the federal government back into the very small and limited place where it belongs, assuming the genie can be put back into the bottle. Then the citizens of the various states need to rise up and tell their state governments “Don’t tread on me.”
Of course, if you need some moral motivation, how about all of the hard working taxpayers who have become little more than slaves to the entitlement class. We ought to end slavery, don’t you think?
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Monday, March 22, 2010
Tyranny, it isn’t just for governments anymore…
Tyranny is a word bandied about all too often these days, and by many people who don’t understand what they are talking about. I would rather this post was not necessary, but the truth is it is important for us to discuss. Why? Because too many people are suffering and I cannot see any relief on the horizon. So, to begin an honest discussion, we must first understand what tyranny is or at least how it works so we don’t also stumble in misunderstandings.
Tyranny deletes freedom. This is a given by definition. It limits or eliminates choices. Others make decisions on your behalf: what you must do, where you can go, and at times even what you must wear. German Jews in the thirties wore the Star of David. There was no debate. The face of democracy in Myanmar got put under house arrest with no appeal — at least through the next election.
Now, the military is a tyrannical system (perhaps by necessity). People with rank tell those without rank where to go and what to do and even what to wear. But the fact that the military is often successful in its missions must be noted. Tyranny is not necessarily cumbersome or inefficient – not like democracies. Mussolini made the trains run on time, and the people of Italy rejoiced.
But to succeed, there are two things tyranny must do: First, it must dehumanize people, and Second, it must insulate (or isolate) those at the top so their decisions are not touched (or influenced) by the people (common humanity).
First: Sometimes, tyranny may go so far as to demonize people, like the Jews in Nazi Germany or like the Nobility in the early days of the French Revolution. It is not uncommon, historically, to demonize the perceived enemies of the prevailing tyrannical order. To be sure, enemy lists are common: keep that in mind all of you wacko-liberals and conservative, right-wing extremists!.
Yet for most people – those not actively engaged in some form of dissent – at the least, tyranny must dehumanize. This is the only way to insure that “a few people” can make those hard decisions that may mean life or death for “most of the people.” It might be hard to deny Bob or Mary their daily bread. It is not so hard to deny 276-B and 617-M.
For example: The military is well known for name, rank and serial number. That the men and women have names is nice, but what really matters is the rank and serial number. In the military, people are not people, they are numbers; and if you doubt the dehumanization that the military does in order to function effectively, try some basic training.
Second: It is imperative that those at the top be isolated in order to make the hard decisions without being swayed by genuine human considerations. This follows like night and day from the need to dehumanize. Those at the top and also those on the job need to live in a psychological bubble, if not a real one. This is the way bureaucrats have worked successfully since the beginning of time. The chief defense for death camp prison guards at Nuremburg was “I was just doing my job.” It did not matter to them that people were being gassed and thrown into ovens. “I was just paid (required) to do my job, and that is all I did.” The bubble is imperative for any tyrannical system to operate effectively.
Tyranny through the last century and into this one has come in many forms. One primary form has been in the board room and the upper reaches of the corporate world, and it is particularly apparent when a company becomes “Too big to fail.” Hundreds of thousands of jobs have been lost over the past year, and at an alarming rate. Do you think anyone has lost any sleep over that fact? Corporate Executives generally cannot even name a person on the “front lines” in their own business. It’s just numbers. We had 50 in that department. Now we have 30. (And to be clear, those 30 now have to work like slaves for fear of their own job). Meanwhile, 20 more have joined the ranks of people who through no particular fault of their own have been discarded. Yet the company goes on, telling people what to do, where to go (if they want to keep their job) and even what to wear (dress code).
And, of course, there is the government. Now, you knew this was coming so don’t get your partisan knickers in a twist. Instead, let’s go back a bit in time. One (if not the) primary purpose of the United States Constitution was to guard against tyranny. The Great Experiment, so-called, was to have a severely limited and deliberately restricted central government which would be responsible for the minimum duties deemed necessary for unity. The central government was to keep its hands off and fingers out of everything else…everything. Life was to be in the hands of the states, the local communities and with certain individual liberties guaranteed. I don’t believe anyone would argue with the fact that we are a long way from the American, constitutional ideal. These days, it is nearly impossible to find any aspect of life where the federal government does not have some stake – a finger if not a whole hand. So what happened?
A debatable history, but just as fast as I can put it:
I believe the tipping point came when the Federal forces beat the States (we called it the Civil War). The big central government won... and Lincoln was a Republican! By the time of Herbert Hover (another Republican) things had slid so far (and the central government had become so big and isolated) the answer perceived for the stock market crash was MORE regulation and HIGHER taxes. (Can you say, “Let them eat cake?”).
Of course, this led to the election of FDR, (a Democrat) who, far from pulling the government back from intervention in life, actually accelerated the process. (Crisis you know: Depression and then the war). The agricultural business in this country was socialized so long ago by price supports and subsidies, we don’t even question it. Likewise steel, railroads, well… etc.
Then, LBJ (another Democrat) further accelerated the process by designing federal programs that actually encouraged dependency which, to speak plainly, encouraged the tyranny of the central government to tell people what to do, where to go, where to live and how much they were worth!
I believe both Kennedy and Reagan (in their own ways) did try to slow down the growth of tyranny, but more recently, Clinton sped it back up again, and so did Bush.
So now we have Obama and we find we are going to be told what kind of cars we can drive, what our salary will be, how much money we can make with the warning that if we make too much, it will be taken from us. We are to be told what doctor we can see, what treatment we can get if we get ill, how we can heat or cool our homes, what energy we are allowed to use, and how much it will cost us… And what can you do with your own property without getting nine million permits and plan approvals first, not the least from the EPA?
With all of this, do I blame Barak Obama? Absolutely not. He is the conclusion, not the premise. So what then, is the Great experiment over? Despite all of the safeguards built into the system by the founders, have we slid into tyranny anyway? Perhaps we have. What I really want to know, though, is what our uniform is going to be. It can’t be brown shirts. That’s been done. Personally, I vote for green shirts. That would seem to fit the current culture and climate.
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Tyranny deletes freedom. This is a given by definition. It limits or eliminates choices. Others make decisions on your behalf: what you must do, where you can go, and at times even what you must wear. German Jews in the thirties wore the Star of David. There was no debate. The face of democracy in Myanmar got put under house arrest with no appeal — at least through the next election.
Now, the military is a tyrannical system (perhaps by necessity). People with rank tell those without rank where to go and what to do and even what to wear. But the fact that the military is often successful in its missions must be noted. Tyranny is not necessarily cumbersome or inefficient – not like democracies. Mussolini made the trains run on time, and the people of Italy rejoiced.
But to succeed, there are two things tyranny must do: First, it must dehumanize people, and Second, it must insulate (or isolate) those at the top so their decisions are not touched (or influenced) by the people (common humanity).
First: Sometimes, tyranny may go so far as to demonize people, like the Jews in Nazi Germany or like the Nobility in the early days of the French Revolution. It is not uncommon, historically, to demonize the perceived enemies of the prevailing tyrannical order. To be sure, enemy lists are common: keep that in mind all of you wacko-liberals and conservative, right-wing extremists!.
Yet for most people – those not actively engaged in some form of dissent – at the least, tyranny must dehumanize. This is the only way to insure that “a few people” can make those hard decisions that may mean life or death for “most of the people.” It might be hard to deny Bob or Mary their daily bread. It is not so hard to deny 276-B and 617-M.
For example: The military is well known for name, rank and serial number. That the men and women have names is nice, but what really matters is the rank and serial number. In the military, people are not people, they are numbers; and if you doubt the dehumanization that the military does in order to function effectively, try some basic training.
Second: It is imperative that those at the top be isolated in order to make the hard decisions without being swayed by genuine human considerations. This follows like night and day from the need to dehumanize. Those at the top and also those on the job need to live in a psychological bubble, if not a real one. This is the way bureaucrats have worked successfully since the beginning of time. The chief defense for death camp prison guards at Nuremburg was “I was just doing my job.” It did not matter to them that people were being gassed and thrown into ovens. “I was just paid (required) to do my job, and that is all I did.” The bubble is imperative for any tyrannical system to operate effectively.
Tyranny through the last century and into this one has come in many forms. One primary form has been in the board room and the upper reaches of the corporate world, and it is particularly apparent when a company becomes “Too big to fail.” Hundreds of thousands of jobs have been lost over the past year, and at an alarming rate. Do you think anyone has lost any sleep over that fact? Corporate Executives generally cannot even name a person on the “front lines” in their own business. It’s just numbers. We had 50 in that department. Now we have 30. (And to be clear, those 30 now have to work like slaves for fear of their own job). Meanwhile, 20 more have joined the ranks of people who through no particular fault of their own have been discarded. Yet the company goes on, telling people what to do, where to go (if they want to keep their job) and even what to wear (dress code).
And, of course, there is the government. Now, you knew this was coming so don’t get your partisan knickers in a twist. Instead, let’s go back a bit in time. One (if not the) primary purpose of the United States Constitution was to guard against tyranny. The Great Experiment, so-called, was to have a severely limited and deliberately restricted central government which would be responsible for the minimum duties deemed necessary for unity. The central government was to keep its hands off and fingers out of everything else…everything. Life was to be in the hands of the states, the local communities and with certain individual liberties guaranteed. I don’t believe anyone would argue with the fact that we are a long way from the American, constitutional ideal. These days, it is nearly impossible to find any aspect of life where the federal government does not have some stake – a finger if not a whole hand. So what happened?
A debatable history, but just as fast as I can put it:
I believe the tipping point came when the Federal forces beat the States (we called it the Civil War). The big central government won... and Lincoln was a Republican! By the time of Herbert Hover (another Republican) things had slid so far (and the central government had become so big and isolated) the answer perceived for the stock market crash was MORE regulation and HIGHER taxes. (Can you say, “Let them eat cake?”).
Of course, this led to the election of FDR, (a Democrat) who, far from pulling the government back from intervention in life, actually accelerated the process. (Crisis you know: Depression and then the war). The agricultural business in this country was socialized so long ago by price supports and subsidies, we don’t even question it. Likewise steel, railroads, well… etc.
Then, LBJ (another Democrat) further accelerated the process by designing federal programs that actually encouraged dependency which, to speak plainly, encouraged the tyranny of the central government to tell people what to do, where to go, where to live and how much they were worth!
I believe both Kennedy and Reagan (in their own ways) did try to slow down the growth of tyranny, but more recently, Clinton sped it back up again, and so did Bush.
So now we have Obama and we find we are going to be told what kind of cars we can drive, what our salary will be, how much money we can make with the warning that if we make too much, it will be taken from us. We are to be told what doctor we can see, what treatment we can get if we get ill, how we can heat or cool our homes, what energy we are allowed to use, and how much it will cost us… And what can you do with your own property without getting nine million permits and plan approvals first, not the least from the EPA?
With all of this, do I blame Barak Obama? Absolutely not. He is the conclusion, not the premise. So what then, is the Great experiment over? Despite all of the safeguards built into the system by the founders, have we slid into tyranny anyway? Perhaps we have. What I really want to know, though, is what our uniform is going to be. It can’t be brown shirts. That’s been done. Personally, I vote for green shirts. That would seem to fit the current culture and climate.
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
An atheist nation by default?
Why must these United States be made an atheist nation by default?
The Constitution says the federal government will not establish a national religion. OK, I get that part. But then it says the federal government will not prohibit the free exercise of religion, and that restriction includes the actions of the federal courts and the Supreme Court.
It seems to me the courts have been violating the free exercise clause for some fifty years now, and should be ashamed.
I read Thomas Jefferson’s letter to that man where he assured the man that the national government would not impose a religion on everyone. He suggested the constitution makes something like a wall of separation, and it does as I have stated. It says nothing, however, about state, county or local governments. Yet the atheist community has seized on the idea of “separation of church and state” like it is the gospel, and I mean gospel, and with it, they are forcing the majority of Americans to live in an atheist world. Why is this nonsense happening?
As long as it isn’t mandatory—so it doesn’t interfere with a person’s free exercise of a non-praying religion or even no religion at all--is there anything unconstitutional with a local school board instituting prayer before every school day? No. the board is local, not federal.
What is unconstitutional about posting, even referring to the 10 commandments in a local, county or state court? Nothing. Such a posting cannot be construed as the federal government imposing a national religion. Which religion anyway? Judaism, Christianity or Islam?
So what if a church wants to build a nativity scene on a public park at Christmas time. Do church people not have access to public lands just like anyone else? The state of Massachusetts collected taxes to support the Congregational Church in Massachusetts until the 1920s, for crying out loud, and no one ever said that was unconstitutional.
Nor does anyone (yet) claim constitutional violation when the Congress and the Supreme Court itself opens each session with prayer.
Yet, in the last 50 years or so, the federal courts and Supreme Court have systematically shredded the free exercise cause and removed every vestige of religion from public life. Thus, faith is diminished and atheism is empowered. Why have we allowed this?
Something close to the truth: We have ceased to be a democratic republic of one person, one vote and majority rule. We have become a tyranny of the one, where one “offended” person can decide for and control the entire community, state and even nation, trumping the majority.
So how about this: I am offended by the removal of religious expression from all of these areas of life. Maybe I should sue. Maybe I should take it all the way to the Supreme Court.
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Constitution says the federal government will not establish a national religion. OK, I get that part. But then it says the federal government will not prohibit the free exercise of religion, and that restriction includes the actions of the federal courts and the Supreme Court.
It seems to me the courts have been violating the free exercise clause for some fifty years now, and should be ashamed.
I read Thomas Jefferson’s letter to that man where he assured the man that the national government would not impose a religion on everyone. He suggested the constitution makes something like a wall of separation, and it does as I have stated. It says nothing, however, about state, county or local governments. Yet the atheist community has seized on the idea of “separation of church and state” like it is the gospel, and I mean gospel, and with it, they are forcing the majority of Americans to live in an atheist world. Why is this nonsense happening?
As long as it isn’t mandatory—so it doesn’t interfere with a person’s free exercise of a non-praying religion or even no religion at all--is there anything unconstitutional with a local school board instituting prayer before every school day? No. the board is local, not federal.
What is unconstitutional about posting, even referring to the 10 commandments in a local, county or state court? Nothing. Such a posting cannot be construed as the federal government imposing a national religion. Which religion anyway? Judaism, Christianity or Islam?
So what if a church wants to build a nativity scene on a public park at Christmas time. Do church people not have access to public lands just like anyone else? The state of Massachusetts collected taxes to support the Congregational Church in Massachusetts until the 1920s, for crying out loud, and no one ever said that was unconstitutional.
Nor does anyone (yet) claim constitutional violation when the Congress and the Supreme Court itself opens each session with prayer.
Yet, in the last 50 years or so, the federal courts and Supreme Court have systematically shredded the free exercise cause and removed every vestige of religion from public life. Thus, faith is diminished and atheism is empowered. Why have we allowed this?
Something close to the truth: We have ceased to be a democratic republic of one person, one vote and majority rule. We have become a tyranny of the one, where one “offended” person can decide for and control the entire community, state and even nation, trumping the majority.
So how about this: I am offended by the removal of religious expression from all of these areas of life. Maybe I should sue. Maybe I should take it all the way to the Supreme Court.
-Michael
The Fiction Side: The Storyteller http://mgkizzia.wordpress.com/
The Non-Fiction Side: Word & Spirit http://michaelkizzia.wordpress.com/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)