February 23, 2017

Phil Beaver works to establish opinion when the-objective-truth has not been discovered. He seeks to refine his opinion by learning other people’s experiences and observations. The comment box below invites sharing facts, opinion, or concern.
Note:  I often connect words in a phrase with the dash in order to represent an idea. For example, frank-objectivity represents the idea of candidly expressing the-objective-truth without addressing possible error or attempting to balance the expression.

The Advocate:

Our Views. Somebody (on the committee or other interested persons) help me get child education into this major civic-duty: Civic Security. Acquiring public integrity begins during childhood.

 

Most people opine that civic-morality begins with education to both inform the child and motivate him or her to take interest in his or her person within the first 2 to 3 decades. In other words, to transition from feral newborn to civic adult is an astounding challenge almost-no-one explicitly publicizes. H. A. Overstreet, in his book, The Mature Mind, 1949, gives the details in plain language. I’m looking for an update but do not know of it (the excellence is 68 years old and perhaps was “politically corrected” or commandeered to “adult education”).

But to my point, for about two years, we have been promoting a $1 billion/year program that asserts to the Louisiana child: “You are a person of major interest to your state. We offer you incentives to take charge of your personal education, understanding, and intent to live a full life in the real-no-harm happiness you may determine. In return for our intent to stake you in partial ownership of American assets, we request your collaboration for civic-morality as broadly-defined-civic-safety-and-security, hereafter Security. You hope you accept and maintain our encouragement. If so, we will deliver accrued funds at your age 30.5.”

The proposal is explained, perhaps without some of the word and phrase revisions I wrote above. Please Google “Phil Beaver + Child incentives brief,” read, improve, and help make a better program happen. Just now, it was the first URL, the one that starts cipbr.

 
BTW, the program begins with an incentive for family planning, but at first grade or child’s age six springs to focus on the child as person and future civic-adult. The state encourages the civic child regardless of other events.

Today’s thought. Dean’s interpretation, “Anger will hurt you,” is pretty much true whether you impose or receive the offense. On that I agree.

I doubt the “will” and would replace it with “You may be glad.” When anger may produce real-harm, defense may be called on. In some cases, hesitation brings loss and misery.

Sorry if I seem to disagree with Dean’s lessons; I look forward to the day I post, “I agree.”

  

Nice Trump (Sellen). Marcus, without debating due process, I’m interested in your qualification, "can usually be counted on." I think you make a critical point most people overlook.

 
What court opinions in the last decade do you find erroneous? I especially oppose Greece v Galloway (I'm a niggling sovereign citizen) and Windsor v US (a case without opponents should not be staged) and consequences.

To Tony Dorsa: Chapman addressed the liberal democrats' fallacy "supposed to."

 
America is dedicated to Security for citizens as well as immigrants and tourists.

 
Trump is pursuing the will of the civic people---those who want Security. That enrages the liberal democrats who want continual conflict for as far into the future as they are able to shout.

Obamacare (Kemp). Like Nolan, I was disappointed with Cassidy's bid for states to keep Obamacare.

A doctor-Senator may create a plan that encourages citizens to contribute to their personal health care by behaving. Thereby, a culture of mutual appreciation may be established.

 

Obamacare (Collens). Durbin, I agree with your opposition to “Our country owes it to citizens to provide affordable healthcare.”

 

I understand pain and loss and making the most of a bad deal---cards you don’t really want to play. However, absolutes like that are products of liberal democracy: There’s no thought to viability of demands.

Catastrophic medical insurance is a free-market commodity and those who do not purchase are not entitled, even though they are victims of biology.

 

Also, in a civic culture, those who practice risky behavior may bear the liability. But the liberal-democrat demands: I want to misbeave and share the liability---abortion for fun, STD cure-research, free contraceptives, drug cures, etc. A civic people understandably respond, “No.”

Unbelievably, Chief Justice John Roberts, part of President George W. Bush’s lasting-folly, alone opined but got four liberal-democrat votes, “OK, people who don’t buy insurance will pay a tax for their non-purchase.” Good grief; tax on something you did not purchase! Obama-legislation from the bench!

 

The Congress should have stepped in and negated Robert’s folly. Thank goodness, President Trump perhaps has corrected it: reason.com/blog/2017/02/14/irs-blow-to-obamacare-individual-mandate .

Cal Thomas column. Top of his game today.

“I laughed . . . sales strategy. They spend time with colleagues who share similar secular-progressive views and believe government is best when it is led by liberal Democrats.”

“Trump voters hate an establishment that has done far more for itself than it has for the country.” Alinsky-Marxist organizers (AMO) led by priest Jeremiah Wright and prince Barack Obama come to mind.

“Virtuous people and noble professions usually don’t have to convince others of their virtue and nobility.” Here, Thomas and I need to collaborate: The religion-government-partnerships are civically immoral, IMO, as pointed out by Chapter XI Machiavelli. Also, for people who don’t want religion, a new profession I dub “civic practitioner” would be welcomed. Their principle tack might be to help people discover and want fidelity to the-objective-truth and consequential fidelities.

Lastly, at “White House press conferences, virtue and nobility are in short supply.” Let tourists to New Orleans always find Lee Circle still there.

James Gill column. “Sexually unorthodox” beyond monogamous partnering is self-discrimination by infidelity to both the-objective-truth and civic morality.

Thomas Sherry guest column.  Nothing does more to discredit “scientist” than fear mongering and political correctness. Sherry labels Trump and Putin as somehow partners as well as deniers. Sherry is the denier and his victims are the-objective-truth and human-viability: the potential for the human work force to control the earth’s atmosphere.

 

The earth is in a typical, non-maximum, reversible temperature-swing, and nothing reliably predicts that what-goes-up-eventually-goes-down will not hold. Additionally, there is some evidence that once the earth reached a particular population and industrialization a relatively small anthropogenic contribution became detectable. The logical response is to reduce, even reverse global population rates; global groups are working on that project, but denier Sherry did not mention it.

 

Nations that focus on human-viability with appreciation for the-objective-truth are global leaders. The Trump administration is emerging a well-functioning operation to establish broadly-defined-civic-safety-and-security, hereafter Security, rather than dominant opinion such as liberal democracy and religions such as global warming, environmentalism, and applications to receive from the money-trough.

 

I encourage writers who want to appeal to a civic people---those who are contributing to Security---to make certain they do not try to imagine danger beyond what the people already deal with. Thereby, they will help restore “scientist” to its former status of civic-appreciation rather than suspicion.

Michael Gerson column.  I oppose writer's emotionalism projected onto a civic people’s purpose just as adamantly as I oppose the imposition of civic-theism.

 

The American purpose is stated in the preamble to the constitution for the USA. It divides the country between citizens who want the aims and purpose and those who are dissidents: ignorant, criminal, infidel and traitor. I view Gerson’s claims as dissident against a civic people. The preamble states:

“We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

 

There is no appeal for the worlds’ poor, downtrodden, refugees or any other of Gerson’s claims. IMO, what is promised in that sentence is willing people who collaborate for and contribute to broadly-defined-civic-safety-and-security, hereafter Security, for each other and for personal children and grandchildren and so on (posterity).

 

Respecting posterity, if the procreation rate falls below 2.1 child per spouse, there may be a need for immigration to maintain the population if a decline is not desirable. Also, if too many of inhabitants are unable to work, there may be need for immigration. If the work force is not competitive, the education and motivation system needs reform; immigration is an alternative.

 

Gerson may wake up to the unattainability of liberal democracy anytime he stops word-arranging long enough to think. Liberal democracy promises conflict into the foreseeable future, as we have seen from 45 years of Saul Alinsky’s Marxist radicalism, converted by his Chicago neighbors, Jeremiah Wright, Barrack Obama, and Rohm Emmanuel, into Alinsky-Marxist organization (AMO).

The best way for a country to speak for human rights is to practice civic-integrity rather than dominant-opinion and let other countries mimic the consequential civic-justice. American has never approached this greatness yet has held the promise in the voluntary civic agreement stated in the preamble.

 

Most of all, I find Gerson’s attempt to impose Russian aspirations onto the President of the United States, duly elected by a civic people, to be the work of a civic infidel and perhaps worse. Gerson write against the people and is thus a dissident. It is hard to imagine how far off track the liberal-democratic-mind can take a writer like Gerson.

Protesters (Page 1A). The left needs to appreciate and join a civic people: Security.

  

When Obama won I thought, well at least the left will get its chance. When he beat Romney I thought, I did not like him anyway, yet it is hard to believe the voters have not had enough. So, the left had eight years of dominance. However, during that time there emerged a new breed that proudly answers to liberal democracy. They have not thought it through: Liberal democracy means chaos now, tomorrow, and forever.

What the liberal democrats don’t realize is that a civic people of the United States have always marched ineluctably toward civic-justice. Now that 8 years under Alinsky-Marxist organization (AMO) has been experienced, it has had its day and will never return. It really does not matter how long AMO recruits try to dominate the public scene: They will be ignored.

On the other hand, iterative collaboration for civic-morality and public-integrity will always be appreciated. What’s required to accomplish that is first Security and second candid talk. In candid talk there are no lie and no competition for dominant opinion. There is only the work to discover the-objective-truth and compromises that comport to the interrelated theories when the discovery has not occurred.

Pruitt (Page 2A). Pruitt’s nomination was resisted because of his past, and was well reported. The Associated Press demonstrates that it thinks its business plan is served by pseudo-news. It seems ultra-liberal-democrat or intent on conflict. See molonlabemedia.com/2016/05/06/media-ap-reuters-owned/# .

Flood victims (Page 3A). I gave cash for flood victims immediately. Now, my heart bleeds because of the betrayal being reported daily. How can anyone give money for Gov. John Bel Edwards re-election? He has abused the people of Louisiana, especially our neighbors who suffered the flood.

Planets (Page 7A). I hope human life there is viable.

Planets (Page 7A). When people stonewall communications, all a civic person can do is keep doing the best possible and wait for them to realize they need to talk rather than disrupt in order to iteratively-collaborate; that does not imply subjugate, compromise or dominate.

Broome (Page 7A). IMO, the caption expresses a contradiction. What Broome promised is church and racism---dialog on race---rather than necessary behavioral-reform.

Budget (Page 1A). I request Gov. John Bel Edwards to start to own up to his claim that the people of Louisiana are number 1 for him by immediately moving $3 million out of the rainy day fund to restore the $2 million he and the legislature took away yesterday and increase the legislative auditor's staff. Daryl Purpera does a fantastic job and should be given more funds, not less.

 

Even the governor’s abject incompetence respecting help in the $8.7 billion costs to last summer’s flood victims and his mystery-laden Vatican-Edwards-partnership do not compare in outrage with defunding the people's champion against fraud and waste by the legislature and the administration. Notice I omitted the Cain/LeBlanc can of worms as at least on par.

 

I have written to my representatives and encourage readers to do the same.

Tenure law (Page 3A, Feb 22). To Scuddy Leblanc: Louisiana should consider Wisconsin Act 10, which now allows cities to grade teachers on performance and pay higher salaries or not. It's still a political conflict: See ://madison.com/.../collection_66ea3487-a88a-5c0a-aa13... .

Kip Holden (Online). To Dayne Sherman:  Claims like yours come under the category of opinion-based opinion. Here's some evidence: ://wdsu.com/.../watch-mayor-kip-holden-speaks-on.../3239379 .
 
Kip stepped forward the day after the event saying, "We are an inclusive city." He behaved far more responsibly than Gov. John Bel Edwards, who seemed to convict the officers without an indictment. After, that, since the governor turned the matter over to the federal justice department.
 
Kip did the right thing: admitted to himself it was then out of his hands. I attest to my view that Kip always conducted himself with exemplary civic-morality. I'll need some facts to be moved to other opinion.

  

Other dialogues:

 

quora.com/If-strong-AI-begins-to-take-over-human-jobs-what-changes-will-need-to-be-made-for-society-to-hold-together/answer/Phil-Beaver-1 
 
Recently, I answered a question with background for how I hope to answer your question. So please, read quora.com/Does-this-world-need-equality-or-equity/answer/Phil-Beaver-1 . It ends, “Each human life is like a few moments, and in those moments the person may seize and perfect fidelity and thereby perfect his or her unique person. If so, personal equity has been achieved.” IMO, with strong AI, more people may experience personal equity—-self discovery, if and only if an overall culture of Security and fidelity has been established.
 
I think strong AI is merely a future phase of human development, which is the process for macro perfection of humankind. Humankind’s development creeps with the collection of individual development, excepting the outliers who push the envelop. In other words, humankind perfects its discovery and use of the-objective-truth faster than the newborn can. Yet some newborns follow choices that lead them to explore new limits, and by their contributions humankind advances.
 
Strong AI will relieve some people of the mundane tasks of living, allowing them more time to pursue personal interests. This will accelerate humankind’s progression toward its destiny.
 
Cultural constrains prevent individuals from beholding the body of knowledge humankind has developed in such a way that an individual can, in the course of a lifetime, perfect himself or herself according to personal preferences, let alone according to the-objective-truth. The constraints have produced cultures that are more advanced than others and the diversity causes war. Relatively soon, humankind or at least part of inhabitants may discover and establish and overall civic culture—-one wherein members iteratively-collaborate for broadly-defined-civic-safety-and-security, hereafter Security. Security is required in order for humans to pursue their personal perfection.
 
If one country—-my candidate is the USA because of the preamble to its constitution—-if one country can establish free-enterprise so that most of the inhabitants are participants and pursue private equity as described in my earlier post, the stage is set for AI. That is each person supplies a wanted service or product and receives pay for living as well as building ownership in the free-enterprise system, yet with people who contribute more receiving more, the culture would be ready for AI.
 
The key to human success is willing fidelity: Fidelity to the-objective-truth, to self, to family, to extended family, to the people, to the nation, to the world, and to the universe, both respectively and collectively. In the ideal life, a person educates himself or herself enough to start making wise choices in early life, being cautious not to make commitments without wisdom. The end is appreciation of life because of the wonder of human perfectibility.
 
In summary, humankind has not yet discovered the importance of Security that would allow most persons to discover fidelity to the-objective-truth as the route to appreciation of every civic human. An overall culture of Security and fidelity must emerge before strong AI becomes dominant. Otherwise future wars may be terminal.

Phil Beaver does not “know”. Phil trusts and is committed to the-objective-truth of which most is undiscovered and some is understood. Phil Beaver is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, an education non-profit. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.