Phil Beaver seeks to collaborate on the-objective-truth, which can only be discovered. The comment box below invites readers to write.
"Civic" refers to citizens who collaborate for individual happiness with civic integrity more than for the city, state, nation, or society.
Consider writing a personal paraphrase of the preamble, which offers fellow citizens mutual equality: For discussion, I convert the preamble’s predicate phrases to nouns and paraphrase it for my proposal as follows: “Willing citizens collaborate, communicate, and connect to provide 5 public institutions—integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity—so as to encourage responsible human liberty to living people.” I want to collaborate with the other citizens on this paraphrase and theirs yet would preserve the original, 1787, text, unless it is amended by the people.
It seems no one has challenged whether or not the preamble is a legal statement. The fact that it changed this independent country from a confederation of states to a union of states deliberately managed by disciplined fellow citizens convinces me the preamble is legal. Equity in opportunity and outcome is shared by the people who collaborate for human justice.
Every citizen has equal opportunity to either trust-in and collaborate-on the goals stated in the preamble or be dissident to the agreement. I think 2/3 of citizens try somewhat to use the preamble but many do not articulate commitment to the goals. However, it seems less than 2/3 understand that “posterity” implies grandchildren. “Freedom of religion,” which fellow citizens have no means to discipline, oppresses freedom to develop integrity.
Selected theme from this week
When I was a toddler, no one encouraged me to suspect that “the Christian thing to do” was politically correct identity politics. Nevertheless, I suspected exhortation that did not seem consistent with behavior I observed.
A half-century later I was developing trust-in and commitment-to the-objective-truth. Another quarter century later, I articulate that the-objective-truth is the ineluctable evidence by which truth is measured.
I think fidelity-to the-objective-truth is the standard by which politically-correct identity politics can be measured.
Columns
Political identity with illegal aliens (Michael Gerson) (https://pilotonline.com/opinion/columnist/guest/article_f8f350a2-6e4c-5aa1-a8f4-f251712f1966.html)
Michael Gerson indicts both himself and social science in his column “Trump undermines a belief in truth itself.”
First, he seems to imply that he is a journalist rather than an opinion writer. He uses the phrase “opinion journalist” as though subjectivity somehow completes objectivity. It’s a false idea, no matter where it is expressed. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_journalism for example. Gerson illustrates the inadequacy of the word “truth.” It must be measure by the-objective-truth, the ineluctable evidence. Maybe the-objective-truth is a new expression, but the concept of verifying the truth should not be new in this age.
Second, he indicts himself by faulting President Trump for independently leading the people with 1) direct messages using distribution tools he chooses and 2) being first to express what most people may be wondering. President Trump, like the rest of us wonders about Bill Clinton’s trips perhaps on Jeffrey Epstein’s generosity.
Self-styled “social scientists” will cringe at the generalization of Gerson’s statements: “This presents a problem for social scientists. Since they can't even ask questions . . . without influencing the answers, how do they measure the true influence of [human reasoning]?”
Political identity with illegal aliens (Alanah Odoms Hebert) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_cd67a49a-ba22-11e9-b9ed-9b480106dab7.html)
The Advocate editors create the captions for letters. Their opinion “Anti-immigrant policies will not keep Louisiana safe” combined Hebert’s falsehoods “undocumented immigrants make our communities safer” and “Anti-immigrant fear mongering will not make Louisiana safer.”
Legal immigration is an American identity politics.
The evaluative phrase “political correctness,” peaked in about 2005, giving way to “identity politics.” Suddenly, advocates and writers make their political identities plain. In this case, both The Advocate and the local ACLU executive director choose illegal aliens over both civic fellow citizens and legal immigrants and against Louisiana’s elected Attorney General, Jeff Landry. Both The Advocate and the local ACLU choose opposition to the USA.
Individuals have two tools by which to order their personal, civic integrity or assess their identity politics: the U.S. preamble as civic proposition and the-objective-truth as standard for justice. The proposition is to provide five public institutions---Unity, Justice, Tranquility, defense, and Welfare---in order to secure responsible human liberty for living citizens in the USA.
The-objective-truth is the ineluctable evidence by which truth is measured. Converting “illegal aliens” to “undocumented immigrants” does not meet the standard of justice (the-objective-truth). Both The Advocate and the local ACLU promote falsehood.
The U.S. preamble encourages citizens to assess their individual identity politics.
Quora
https://www.quora.com/Which-culture-seems-to-be-the-most-restrictive-regarding-freedom?
Culling the top 100, my first choice is freedom of religion, which discourages development of integrity.
The human individual has the power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity but without encouragement and coaching may develop infidelity unto habits.
Fortunate is the person who accepts HIPEA and chooses fidelity to the-objective-truth, the ineluctable evidence by which truth is measured and on which justice is founded.
Many people want freedom of religion but few imagine “freedom of integrity,” a contradiction. The standard of integrity is the-objective-truth, which exists, may be discovered, and cannot be refuted by reason, revelation, doctrine, coercion, force, and other human constructs.
However, if a culture encouraged and coached its youth to accept HIPEA and employ HIPEA to develop integrity, an achievable better future might become evident.
I added three paragraphs including this one after thinking about the original post.
https://www.quora.com/How-will-you-personally-help-to-improve-the-civic-discourse-in-the-US?
I will first learn if the other party wants to talk, and accept “no” if that is their message. If “yes,” I will assert that when I use the word “civic” I am referring to collaboration for each other more than for the municipality. The municipality will benefit if individuals reject the old adage “never talk politics or religion.”
Then, I will listen to the other party in order to learn from them. If his or her concerns are similar to mine, I will explore mutually beneficial solutions.
If I perceive the possibility, I will introduce my ideas for an achievable better future in the U.S. so as to improve on them from the other party’s views of his or her experiences and observations.
I promote the U.S. preamble’s proposition not knowing its possible outcomes under the-objective-truth, most of which I do not know. However, I perceive that fellow citizens have much to teach about the civic tools from my identity politics.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Will-the-world-be-better-if-the-world-is-just?
The world would be better if it was just.
The question is, what is the standard for justice? The standard is the-objective-truth, the ineluctable evidence by which truth is measured.
See the essay on the-objective-truth at https://promotethepreamble.blogspot.com/2017/08/the-objective-truth.html.
https://www.quora.com/If-the-world-eventually-becomes-a-one-world-government-would-the-world-still-be-divided-by-different-cultures-and-practices-or-would-people-mold-them-together?
Perhaps a successful world government would require the preservation of the civic cultures some people want.
I’ll never forget the conversation with my favorite person, my wife’s Aunt Margaret. None of my ideas ever made her emotional. Escorting her and my wife to a wedding she asked my latest idea, and I said, “I’ve been thinking humankind does not need religion at all.”
She responded, “Maybe so, but I want religion.”
I appreciate civic people, and that includes individuals who want religion.
I think most people want mutual, comprehensive safety and security; in other words, civic integrity. Religion can be compatible with civic integrity.
The preamble to the U.S. Constitution presents a controversial proposition to the individual citizen: civic citizens collaborate for five public institutions---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity so as to encourage responsible human liberty to living people. It is a proposition for civic discipline rather than self-government, which easily corrupts.
Religion is not mentioned, because pursuing-religion-or-not is an individual choice. In other words, religion-or-none is part of responsible human liberty.
Despite the disparaging ideas that have been written about humankind, each individual has the power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity or infidelity to the-objective-truth: the ineluctable evidence by which truth is measured. Some individuals are either unaware or don’t accept HIPEA. Some who accept HIPEA develop integrity and some choose infidelity. Individuals who develop integrity cannot be coerced into cooperation, subjugation, or submission. They can be constrained by force or killed yet will do all they can to resist.
The U.S. preamble’s proposition under the-objective-truth as civic, civil, and legal standard seems adequate to develop a culture of mutual, comprehensive safety and security. Development of those two tools for that purpose is possible in the USA or elsewhere. Whichever nation develops it might lead the world to nationalism with civic integrity.
(I read and liked Lynn Muskat’s U.S. history but stopped at the description of the world government.)
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/How-are-astronomical-events-relevant-to-society
My comprehension is woefully inadequate to respond to this question, yet I will share my thoughts.
Starting with Merriam-Webster online we see that astronomy means “the study of objects and matter outside the earth's atmosphere and of their physical and chemical properties.” Wikipedia adds “[The study] uses mathematics, physics, and chemistry to try and explain their origin and evolution.”
I think that Einstein’s general relativity, E=mC-squared, informs us that everything evolves from physics, the object of study more than the research for discovery. Thus, mathematics and chemistry are offspring of physics. Likewise, biology and psychology are offspring of evolution, and thereby, the study of the object called physics is the study of everything. Even fiction and religion are speculations derived from what has not been discovered about physics.
For example, it is broadly accepted that “the sun’ll come out tomorrow.” From that mirage, some people had the impression that the sun is like a god, traversing the sky by day and sinking below the horizon at night. However, we know that each evening the earth’s rotation on its axis hides the sun then un-hides it again each morning. To protect children from the waste of unlearning false impressions, adults have the duty to put aside traditional expressions for updates, in this case, adults can observe at daybreak, “The earth’s rotation un-hides the sun again.” From this observation, the child’s mind can then progress to the rotation as the day progresses to the hiding again before dusk. Next, he or she may wonder how fast his or her spot is rotating on earth’s axis: some 1,000 mph.
With these bases, the idea of an intelligent being having created everything can be regarded as an un-disproven speculation. Thus, the mystery of whatever-God-may-be can be discussed from the posture “I do not know” rather than in defense of reason, revelation, doctrine, tradition, and other human constructs.
In a culture with most people separating hopes about whatever-God-is from communication, collaboration, and connection for mutual, comprehensive safety and security, the chances for peace are higher than humankind experiences today.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Is-grassroots-media-the-way-forward-in-our-socially-dominated-world
I don’t think grassroots media can compete in a heavily dispersed, conflicted world. As always, an alternative approach is to reform the education of human beings for individual happiness with civic integrity.
I’ll start with why I don’t think grassroots media is the answer.
First, individuals are too busy trying to live as they think they want to live to educate themselves on how to live with optimal benefits. Most people seek individual happiness by trying to accomplish what another entity has in mind for them.
Second, the individuals who educate themselves for optimal living already know how to tap actual reality rather than fake news.
Third, once someone knows the happiness they seek, they realize it is so unique most other people would not lend aid. This problem could be lessened by revising “Maslow’s hierarchy of needs,” to a hierarchy of responsibilities to integrity.
Fourth, in time, the leadership of a grassroots organization corrupts.
In reformed education, the moral excellence of humankind is emphasized and encouraged, as in the revision to “Maslow’s responsibilities.”
First, from infancy to adolescence, the individual is inculcated with human, individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity to the-objective-truth (or better expression of ineluctable evidence and how to benefit from its discovery) or infidelity. By young adulthood, the person comprehends and intends to practice his or her choice: integrity or infidelity.
Second, an online journal or timeline of discovery of the-objective-truth and how to benefit is maintained. Wikipedia is supported by voluntary contributions (I am an annual contributor), and I use it as a first resource for confirmation of information. If the Wikipedia information is critical, I follow up with further work. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lie, gives no clue that Albert Einstein wrote, “This means that the rule ‘Thou shalt not lie’ has been traced back to the demands: ‘Human life shall be preserved’ and ‘Pain and sorrow shall be lessened as much as possible.’” https://samharris.org/my-friend-einstein/ Youtube also has a catalogue of videos about lying, such as the delightful https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbftlDzIALA.
Every individual may participate in the revolution from habitual lying to fidelity to the-objective-truth by collaborating, communicating, and connecting for civic integrity.
I am writing during preparation for our sixth annual September 17 public library meeting to celebrate Constitution Day in the USA, an unheralded federal observance. I have no expectation for attendance but hope for a pleasant surprise.
https://www.quora.com/What-does-social-equality-at-its-finest-look-like
The human species is the only one wherein each individual has the power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to either develop integrity or not.
In a civic culture, most adults develop integrity, and dissidents may reform on evidence rather than exhortation, coercion, force, or violence. Dissidents remain fellow citizens unless he or she invited the death penalty.
In integrity, most adults recognize that, due to HIPEA, the consequences of a person’s life are directly related to choices made under either fidelity to the-objective-truth or infidelity. Because each person is unique, equality of consequences is not possible.
Moreover, the single cell from which a human may develop, the ovum, is unequal to other ova. It is unique. However, adults may choose to do all they can to provide each ovum equality and dignity of care. In a civic culture, citizens collaborate, communicate, and connect.
The woman, in assuring her personal well-being accounts for some 400 ova she may deliver during her fertile decades. She is attentive to both physical and psychological well-being.
In like fashion, the man cares for his well-being with more ubiquitous spermatozoa in mind. Furthermore, he regards a woman as a group---herself and the viable ova she may be carrying. There is no way he would threaten her welfare nor the welfare of an embryo she could gestate and deliver.
Similarly, there is no way a couple would form a family to which they are not committed for life---their lives, the lives of their children, and the lives of their grandchildren.
In a culture that intends social equality most families’ best intentions anticipate the parent’s grandchildren and beyond, and the journal of tradition reminds the parents not to promote past errors.
https://www.quora.com/What-kind-of-dormant-or-unprecedented-activism-do-you-believe-may-arise-in-the-next-decades
Perhaps the people will establish a civic and civil culture in the USA. Here’s how it may happen.
The greatest political sentence ever written, the U.S. preamble’s proposition, is only 52 words of controversy. It has been falsely suppressed as “secular” ever since the people’s representatives of nine former British colonies, then individual states in the world, effected legal establishment on June 21, 1788. The U.S. preamble’s proposition legally ended the 1774 Confederation of States, and the opportunity remains for the proposition’s civic and civil establishment.
Unfortunately, the First Congress, 1789-1793, made the preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the U.S. preamble) ineffective by restoring colonial British traditions in the eastern seaboard states, eleven in 1789 and increasing to fourteen by 1791 when Congress imposed the Bill of Rights.
Most offensive is the First Amendment, which in its religion, speech, and press clauses defends religious institutions above human integrity. Integrity is the practice of obtaining ineluctable evidence that a concern is not a mirage; comprehending the evidence so as to benefit from the facts; understanding how to benefit from the discovery; collaborating, communicating, and connecting with fellow citizens so as to listen to their ideas for improvement; and remaining alert for ineluctable evidence that change is required.
The civic culture will develop when most citizens consider, adopt, and practice, under the-objective-truth, the proposition that is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. The-objective-truth is the ineluctable evidence by which truth is measured. It is acceptable for dissidents to the proposition to learn either by observing a civic people’s individual happiness under civic integrity or by suffering the rule of law.
The U.S. preamble’s proposition is necessarily abstract, because the authors accepted each: that they did not know the-objective-truth, could not bind the continuum of living citizens to 1787 understanding, and had no idea what successive generations’ civic culture should be. In other words, the authors wrote a civic, civil, and legal proposition that, together with provisions to amend unjust laws, might serve the continuum of living citizens.
Our collective citizenship may form a civic culture if most individuals interpret the U.S. preamble’s proposition so as to responsibly order the happiness each individual pursues. Just now, my continually examined interpretation is this: Civic citizens collaborate, communicate and connect so as to provide five public institutions---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---so as to encourage responsible human liberty in the USA. I write these ideas so as to receive suggestions for improvement from fellow citizens.
The former eastern-seaboard, colonial-British colonies (about 13% of today’s contiguous land area) won political independence from England. They became free and independent states in the world. Controversially, about 2/3 of the states established the USA on June 21, 1788. However, the First Congress, with a population that had predominantly colonial-British psychology, re-establish English tradition.
Today, 231 years later, most Americans are not attracted to colonial-English tradition. The time to establish the U.S. preamble’s proposition (originally with six formative nouns: providing Union, Justice, Tranquility, defense, and Welfare to secure liberty) under the-objective-truth has arrived.
There is so much public apathy that these ideas are met with “That’s very noble, Mr. Beaver, but it will never happen.” However, all it takes is for individuals who like the ideas to nourish them for personal use and practice their political identity. For example, a believer in one of the Abrahamic religions may recognize that while spiritual hope is not included in the proposition’s six nouns, the option to believe or not is included by the five provisions to secure liberty. Under individual happiness with civic integrity there is no restriction beyond responsible human liberty: civic integrity.
The USA can establish a civic culture under the U.S. preamble’s proposition if most citizens want to apply the-objective-truth.
https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-biggest-problems-facing-the-United-States-of-America
Assuming you have asked for the top 100, my first thought is preservation of colonial-English traditions.
The remedy is for each citizen to consider, adopt, and practice under the-objective-truth the proposition that is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. The-objective-truth is the ineluctable evidence by which truth is measured. It is acceptable for dissidents to learn by suffering the rule of law.
I can’t prioritize the other 99 problems.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-is-the-relationship-between-human-rights-and-human-development
The human individual has the power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity to the-objective-truth or infidelity. Fidelity requires the self-discipline to individually discover and apply the ineluctable evidence on which truth is measured.
Most cultures inculcate a search for higher power---spirituality or governance---which inevitably proves insufficient and unreliable to the individual.
In the human condition, equality may be questioned at the single-cell level—the ovum. Ova are unique and thus unequal. Fertilization by a spermatozoon does not impart equality. As a conception is gestated to fetus and delivered uniqueness and thus inequality does not lessen. Therefore, the best a new born can hope for is equity and justice.
The newborn has the right to encouragement and coaching toward acceptance of HIPEA and its use to develop integrity rather than infidelity. Unfortunately, most newborns are equally denied the right to develop integrity.
Recognition and acceptance of these observations for collaboration, communication, and connection among civic citizens could develop an achievable better future. Dissident citizens could be encouraged to reform by the examples set by people who accept HIPEA to develop integrity rather than infidelity: exhortation, coercion, and force seem insufficient to establish human equity and justice.
https://www.quora.com/Do-you-think-it-is-ok-for-a-person-to-be-mistreated-based-solely-on-their-political-beliefs
A Greek recorded some 2500 years ago that, in my modern interpretation, a human may collaborate, communicate, and connect for equity under statutory justice.
It seems self-evident that of the earth’s living species, only human individuals may accept the power, the energy, and the authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity or infidelity. Those who develop infidelity often do not grasp the concept: equity under justice.
Thereby, they invite opposition from statutory law, the imperfect progress toward statutory justice. They naturally oppose the law and face the consequences, intentionally or not.
The individual who insists on un-just law by stonewalling persons who both express concern and propose reform have chosen inequity by not collaborating, communicating, and connecting. (BTW, politicizing whatever-God-is exemplifies a dominant inequity older than 2500 years.)
The un-faithful actor may face woe and usually feels mistreated.
https://www.quora.com/Why-do-people-feel-compelled-to-define-themselves
Unfortunately, the world’s conflicted cultures inculcate in their youth the tendency to seek higher authority to order their lives. However, humankind does not approve of and encourage election of the-objective-truth as standard for advantageous living.
The-objective-truth is the ineluctable evidence by which truth is measured. For example, the earth is like a globe rather than flat. Again, the earth’s rotation on its axis un-hides the sun each morning.
Each human being has the individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity to the-objective-truth or infidelity. Fortunate is the adolescent who accepted HIPEA and is developing the integrity required for fidelity to his or her responsible human liberty.
These principles are reflected in humankind’s innate collaboration for equity under civic justice. The proposition for justice in the USA seems stated in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution as approval-of and encouragement-to responsible human liberty under the-objective-truth.
However, so far, the U.S. preamble’s proposition is bemused by a civilization founded on the mystery of whatever-God-may-be as a civil norm rather than a private belief. The First Congress, 1789-1791, lessened the U.S. preamble’s proposition for equity in justice by falsely labeling it “secular” even though it is intentionally neutral to religion (and race and gender and other political identities).
In the human condition, the individual is too powerful to accept compromise, subjugation, or submission. Individuals who accept HIPEA may either develop integrity or pretend infidelity pays. The individual’s day to day experiences inform him or her to choose integrity.
No matter where the individual stands on his or her quest for responsible human liberty, HIPEA, recognized or not, compels him or her to never stop pursuing integrity. Human loss and misery may lessen at an accelerated pace by encouraging all youths as well as adults to accept HIPEA and use it to develop integrity.
Next day: Mr. Maher, thank you for your upvote. My writing attempts to be direct for my thoughts. Did you notice word changes that would better align with your thoughts?
https://www.quora.com/What-might-happen-if-the-current-U-S-Senate-started-each-daily-meeting-with-the-unison-recitation-of-the-peoples-proposition-for-equity-under-justice-the-preamble-to-the-U-S-Constitution my question, from last week
Answer:
Michael Lee, Public Policy Analyst
Michael Lee, Public Policy Analyst
Very few people watch the
Senate’s opening each day anyway.
76 views · View Upvoters
That’s true. The observers might take interest.
Note that, 100 civically engaged voices expressing
the U.S. preamble’s proposition is an awesome experience. Some of the 100
senators might be reminded that they can be, first, members of We the People of
the United States.
On the preamble’s proposition citizens divide
themselves: civic collaborators, communicators and connectors against
dissidents.
How many senators have considered the proposition
and written their own interpretation? As they spoke the 52 words, they’d be
expressing their interpretation or nothing.
I always hate these sorts
of stunts that pretend as if some made-up ritual is magically going to solve
decades of partisan combat.
I especially dislike the actual Senate meeting
beginnings: a prayer and the pledge of allegiance, neither of which is
consistent with the U.S. preamble’s proposition.
The U.S. preamble’s proposition accepts that no
one has the responsible human liberty to impose on fellow citizens the mystery
of whatever-God-may-be if there is anything but chaos. In Chapter XI
Machiavellianism, only a few citizens rebel or leave the nation.
Scene: a town hall meeting.
Congressman: “I had to vote it
down! They read the preamble to the Constitution!”
Curb Your Enthusiasm theme plays.
What might
happen if the current U.S. Senate started each daily meeting with the unison
recitation of the people's proposition for equity under justice: the preamble
to the U.S. Constitution?
Nothing.
Requiring people to recite certain words every day is an
effective way of making those words meaningless.
That’s funny. Some Senators probably think they
are saying “for Richard Stans” during their current daily recitation.
Kent G. Budge,
Staff Scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory (2012-present)
They’ve
been starting their proceedings with a prayer for over two hundred years, and
this appeal to a higher authority than the Constitution seems not to have
helped.
Mike Jones,
Worked in technology for over 30 years.
Nothing.
Some Senators would make a show of their recitation, others would mumble along,
but it wouldn’t make a bit of difference once it was done.
Gary Porter,
I teach Saturday Seminars on the U.S. and Virginia Constitutions.
Seriously, they have already taken an oath to support and
defend the Constitution, what further is required? Why not have them read the
entire document at the start of each day? Would that help? In think not.
Congress is going to do
whatever they think We the People will let them get away with.
First, some senators might consider and realize
for the first time that the preamble to the U.S. Constitution is a civic,
civil, and legal agreement.
Most citizens do not have a personal
interpretation of the preamble’s proposition, but each senator should know his
or hers and be collaborating, communicating, and connecting for acceptance of
that interpretation or its improvement. The interpretation ought to reasonably
reflect the consensus of his or her constituency.
Over the course of six years, the senator’s voting
could indicate his or her interpretation of the U.S. preamble’s proposition.
In my interpretation, the preamble proposes to
encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens. For example adults
would not create debt for their children to inherit.
Second, the articles that follow the U.S.
preamble’s proposition ought to work for it’s ultimate goal, which I think is
statutory justice. That is, statutory law is amendment when injustice is
discovered.
I share my interpretations only as an example of
engaging the U.S. preamble’s proposition. My hope is to witness most people
using the preamble to order civic, civil, and legal life so that the worthy
pursuit of statutory justice is noticeable more than the struggle for dominant
opinion.
If the U.S. Senate took the bold step of declaring the members are first members of We the People of the United States as defined by the preamble’s proposition, the other branches of government would be encouraged to follow suit. Moreover, citizens might pay closer attention to their duty to hold elected and appointed officials accountable to the preamble’s proposition.
Your goals are indeed noble - preserving the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity should be the objective of every elected official, at every level of government. Yet I’m not convinced that today’s Senators’ behavior will be influenced by a daily recitation of, well, anything.
It would likely turn into
an empty ritual recited by a minimal number of Senators, therefore rendering it
meaningless. I am sorry to have to say that, but I believe it to be true.
What WOULD be better is,
if possible, at each and every public meeting of the members of his/her state
the Senator would be required to answer questions about how what he/she has
done in the Senate could be demonstrated to have furthered the purposes of the
Preamble. That would be interesting.
Phil Beaver
Excellent recommendation, and I’ll act on it . . . and.
And, the fellow citizens who organized the meeting would first need to understand the preamble’s proposition and reflect the expectations of the political party.
In my experience, the people are so busy trying to live the life they think they want, they don’t care to challenge the Machiavellian suppression of the preamble’s civic, civil, and legal power.
The First Congress, 1789–1793, rendered the preamble “secular” and thereby ineffective for the 1790s and beyond. However, the preamble is neutral to religion, gender, and race and has not been weakened in the 231 years since its ratification on June 21, 1788.
It is appropriate that the Senate, in particular this Senate, encourage the establishment of the U.S. preamble’s proposition in the USA.
Getting the horse before the cart, the individual who reads this could accelerate the public support to motivate the Senate to take the lead on establishing the preamble’s proposition to living people.
Law professors
https://www.lawliberty.org/2019/04/05/how-classicists-undermine-the-case-for-classics (continued)
Ms. Barnhizer, I think you misconstrue Wilson's plea. She wants classics sold as journals of mistaken "truths" of the past so that living people (a continuum) may observe mistakes without experiencing them.
Quoting McGinnis' quote of Wilson, "I think we should stop selling classics as, “These are the societies that formed modern America, or that formed the Western canon” — which is a really bogus kind of argument — and instead start saying, “We should learn about ancient societies because they’re different from modern societies.”
In support of Wilson's "bogus kind of argument," we may observe that "the societies that formed modern America" is an overt claim to identity politics.
That the "Western thought" proponent objects to the stonewalling he or she currently receives is perhaps a new, covert experience.
What's happened in the last 25 years is that the older phrase "political correctness" yielded to "identity politics." I was reared in the identity politics of "the Christian thing to do," and realized only on studying Joshua Mitchell's "What is Identity Politics?", in the current issue of National Affairs, that not only Christianity but monotheism is identity politics that spawns many violent factions---the Abrahamic top three factional religions to cite a few of the thousands.
By accepting that "Western Civilization" is 17th-19th century British dominated political correctness, reform to an achievable better future may accelerate.
The preamble to the U.S. Constitution has been proposing reform from colonial-British tradition to responsible human liberty under civic, civil, and legal authority in the USA for 231 neglectful years. This unfortunate human loss has occurred because of the determination to impose errors of the past on the continuum of living citizens.
Beware the political correctness and identity politics of preserving colonial tradition and attend to the journals of past errors.
Phil Beaver does not “know.” He trusts in and is committed to the-objective-truth which can only be discovered. Conventional wisdom has truth founded on reason, but it obviously does not work.
Phil is agent for A Civic People of the United States, a Louisiana, education non-profit corporation. See online at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com, and consider essays from the latest and going back as far as you like.
No comments:
Post a Comment