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
Restore Louisiana’s 1880 rule: 9:3 criminal jury verdicts, in order to lessen organized crime’s favor over victims and the entity We the People of the United States.
The Louisiana Legislature’s tyranny in creating a popular vote to undo non-unanimous criminal jury verdicts in non-capital cases is coming to light.
Especially egregious is the possibility that 37,000 prior criminal cases will be reviewed by Louisiana courts.
Letters to The Advocate editors
The Louisiana Legislature’s tyranny regarding 10:2 jury verdicts exposes the temporal folly of public opinion controlling policy and the press controlling public opinion (Clay Latimer) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_efa73248-0bbf-11ea-aa4d-db303b47f954.html)
On unjust unanimous jury-verdicts in response to Clay Latimer’s letter to the editor, The Advocate, November 21, 2019, Page 6B.
I appreciate Latimer’s attention to the tyranny of the Louisiana Legislature’s unconstitutional imposition of a public vote to end Louisiana’s provision of impartial criminal juries using 10:2 (non-unanimous) verdicts. The states that retain the colonial-English unanimous verdicts tolerate injustice that England terminated long after Louisiana’s brilliance.
England and most former subjects of the British empire now have majority verdicts. England allowed 10:2 verdicts in 1967 in order to lessen organized crime’s influence on criminal trials.
It is fitting that 6 of 7 justices on the Louisiana Supreme Court do not express opposition to non-unanimous jury verdicts. And it is unfortunate that one justice taints this former French colony’s 1880 brilliance with the imposition of racial words from 1898.
Furthermore, the imposition of racial issues is counter to Louisiana’s arguments in a current U.S. Supreme Court case. “. . . the state asserts, ‘all available evidence suggests that the non-unanimity rule was motivated by concerns for judicial efficiency rather than an improper racial purpose.’” See https://www. scotusblog. com/2019/09/argument-preview-court-to-consider-whether-right-to-unanimous-jury-verdict-applies-to-state-criminal-trials/.
Louisiana’s recent vote to adopt unanimous jury verdicts was unconstitutional according to both U.S. Amendment VI, which requires impartiality rather than unanimity, and U.S. Amendment XIV.1, “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.” The Louisiana Legislature had not the 2/3 majority to impose unanimous jury-verdicts after 138 years of non-unanimous jury justice.
The 2018 Louisiana Legislature under Governor John Bel Edwards surmised that they could contort the facts so as to win a 50% popular vote on the false premise “If I was accused I’d want a unanimous jury.” In reality, most fellow citizens in criminal trials occupy the victim’s seat and do not want organized crime to influence the results.
The Louisiana State Bar Association, Governor Edwards, and The Advocate ought to feel shame before We the People of the United States, especially the people of Louisiana including fellow citizens who unfortunately think crime pays.
Somehow, The Advocate seems to have bought into the business plan that polls control public opinion, public opinion controls public policy, and the press controls "social science" polls. Reform is possible.
Grandchildren will manage a future grandparents cannot imagine much less predict (David W. Earle) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/dan_fagan/?9324)
Grandparents have the option to encourage children and grandchildren to practice integrity rather than yield to other people’s dreams, including grandparents' heartfelt concerns. Children learn integrity from examples more than from exhortation.
Show us the viable option for controlling both the earth’s atmosphere and its politics! I prefer to contend with today’s interests (in civics, working to promote responsible human liberty as proposed in the U.S. Preamble).
Humanoids have been contending with the inevitable for over 3 million years, including ice-age cycles. Ice ages that swamp population-contributions to warming may be inevitable.
Human generations managing their survival does not seem new to me.
A concrete vision for the people (Louis Chapoton) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_2ed0992a-0704-11ea-9b4d-e370c4a132d9.html)
“In this time of national crisis, it would do well for all who now govern this nation, and all who desire to govern, to visit and walk among those who courageously laid down their lives defending this nation. One can only hope that they would then come to fully appreciate the value of this great nation, realize their duty, and discover the meaning of patriotism.”
This is a stirring essay until the last word, which imposed doubt to this reader. Patriotism is love for country or “nationalism.”
The proposition that is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the U.S. Preamble) is public discipline so as to encourage responsible human liberty to the living citizens. Civic citizens collaborate, communicate, and connect to develop Unity, Justice, Tranquility, defence, and Welfare so as to encourage individual happiness rather than impose national standards. It is a culture that 9 of 13 former English colonies offered on June 21, 1788 but has yet to be established anywhere.
Elected and appointed officials “would do well” to consider themselves first members of We the People of the United States, the civic citizens who by example encourage dissident fellow citizens to reform and by law enforcement constrain criminals and tyrants.
It seems the demographic is 1/3 civic citizens, 1/3 pessimists, and 1/3 dissidents. Citizens may consider the U.S. Preamble's proposition to assess their chosen or default group.
Columns
I wonder if The Advocate wrote the caption (Dan Fagan) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/dan_fagan/?9324)
The Advocate’s egregious print caption reflects Fagan’s first sentence “I was shocked to see the results unfold election night in the governor’s race,” but misrepresents the column.
I connected Fagan’s dots then affirmed my interpretation with the online caption: “Eddie Rispone . . . campaign was 'grossly incompetent'.” Perhaps Fagan feels editor-oppression.
Rispone proved that political incompetence cannot drain the swamp. The candidate must have unusual political skills and friends.
In short, Donald Trump cannot be mimicked: Trump overcomes a paucity of career officials who practice integrity. I often scratch my head about Trump’s persona but wouldn’t impose my opinions: I hope to vote for Trump/Pence a third time then a fourth time and that they win.
After that, I hope, after 231 years of repression most fellow citizens establish We the People of the United States, the factional entity that trusts-in and commits-to the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. I hope at least 2/3 of 2024’s fellow citizens celebrate each June 21 as “Responsible Human Liberty Day.”
Each U.S. citizen owes it to himself or herself to do the work to establish his or her interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s 52 words so as to order his or her civic integrity. The interpretation I have learned from library meetings now entering the seventh year is: We the People of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to establish 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, defense, and prosperity---in order to encourage responsible human liberty to living citizens. Neither this interpretation nor the original denies individual discovery of the necessary standards for the 5 disciplines and human liberty.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana has the prerogative to lead the national celebration since the June 21 proposal was developed in EBRP and other library meetings with communication by over seventy participants.
To Edward Livingston : Your comment reminds me of that egregious invocation before Edwards' acceptance speech.
To Kb Ott:
I don't know what to believe, but I get the impression that many blacks think the Trump/Pence administration is helping them.
Perhaps the nation is at that long awaited pivot from colonial-English tradition to the responsible human liberty that is proposed in the U.S. Preamble and the amendable articles that follow.
A compelling vision for the people (The Advocate) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_c85dfd6e-096e-11ea-a2b2-87f6305047f9.html)
The Advocate misrepresents some fellow citizens in “[Edwards] offers the most compelling vision for fulfilling Louisiana’s promise.”
The narrow victory shows the importance of political skill over civic reliability. (A political consultant told me I think classical liberal and conservative with no intent to herd cats. I somewhat agree.)
I voted for Rispone even though I thought introducing himself as a Trump supporter was a political mistake. Later, Trump failed Rispone by promoting Trump and the mystery of whatever-God-is.
Edwards was elected by 1) social democrats under the influence of Alinsky-Marxist organizations (AMO) and 2) civic subjugation to apathetic registered-voters. I assert that most writers for The Advocate 1) don’t understand my statement and 2) would oppose it if they comprehended it. The Advocate writers and editors don’t seem to comprehend, much less adopt, the U.S. Preamble’s proposition.
If they appreciated the U.S. Preamble’s proposition, The Advocate’s interpretation might be published on the opinion page of every edition, so as to promote the U.S. Preamble.
Here’s my interpretation of the U.S. Preamble today: We the People of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to practice 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage responsible human liberty to the living citizens.
Not every citizen wants the disciplines and the responsibility. Many think crime or tyranny pays.
The U.S. Preamble does not specify the standards by which the 5 disciplines are judged. The articles that follow the U.S. Preamble define the institutions and statutory laws that may be amended to correct known or undiscovered injustice.
We the People of the United States is the entity that is ineluctably on the march toward statutory justice---the worthy goal of conformance to the-literal-truth. The entity is the collection of civic citizens who, by example, encourage dissident fellow citizens to reform.
I think fellow citizens are divided on the U.S. Preamble’s proposition into civic, passive, and dissident groups. The basis of political dissidence changes with time, but some themes are persistent. Crime and tyranny seem inevitable, but racism seems defeasible through separation of church from state.
No one knows how successful the U.S. could be under the U.S. Preamble’s proposition, because no political regime has ever promoted an interpretation better than mine. Louis Chapoton’s stirring letter today would be enhanced by his interpretation of the U.S. Preamble.
U.S. political regimes have stood on the Chapter XI Machiavellianism of church-state partnership. President Trump disappoints in his support of church. That could change if Louisiana leads in civic integrity.
Governor John Bel Edwards has the opportunity to be the first U.S. governor to create an annual celebration of establishing the USA as a global nation on June 21, 1788 by 9 of 13 former English colonies. I suggest the title “Responsible Human Liberty Day.” Each June 21 Louisiana may promote We the People of the United States as defined by the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. We may celebrate each responsibly-liberal-person’s interpretation and thereby encourage dissident fellow citizens to reform.
PS: I do not regret my vote for Edwards four years ago.
To Kenneth E. Dorsey:
Your assessment may be correct.
I am concerned about Edwards' pride in the largest state budget ever and his will to balance the budget with sales taxes. Growing government takes money from the people, especially the poor.
I think Rispone erred to start claiming a year ago that he would help Donald Trump. He further erred by not presenting, in clear language, how he would help Louisiana out of its rating of 50th among 50 states. Lastly, President Trump erred by using his time in Louisiana to bash Washington Democrats rather than help Rispone politics. Trump unintentionally hurt both himself and Rispone.
Lastly, there is a solution to the two-party competition that enslaves us: Fellow citizens may help establish We the People of the United States, as defined in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. It is a proposition each citizen may interpret so as to order his or her civic integrity.
I shared my interpretation in my earlier post and hope your views may improve mine.
To Kermit Hoffpauir: I blame the local GOP. In each cycle, the local leaders should choose the most electable candidate a week after registration is closed.
I thought in 2016 Jay Dardenne was the best candidate and served on his phone-call schedule. However, the local GOP was undecided and let the national leaders impose David Vitter on us. My only option was to vote for John Bel Edwards. When I whispered in his ear to work with Bill Cassidy on Medicaid expansion he responded, “I can’t now. He supports David Vitter.”
Also, Edwards was blinded by his association with trial judges (and lawyers) to support the demise of a Louisiana treasure: the majority-jury verdict in criminal trials. Unanimous juries is an English tradition which England reformed in 1967 in order to lessen organized-crime's influence on criminal trials.
I commend the Louisiana Legislature to undo the harm it did in 2018 by restoring the 1880 approval of 9:3 verdicts in non-capital trials and create 10:2 verdicts in capital trials. Now, Louisiana argues that some 37,000 past verdicts are at risk, representing huge cost to a civic people of Louisiana. Edwards is now in a position to reform the harm he did.
Quora
https://www.quora.com/How-do-you-vote-for-any-candidate-when-you-find-them-all-unacceptable?
I could not articulate it before now, but I have always been influenced by my individual quest to discover the-literal-truth. (I write it with hyphens to encourage the reader not to omit any of the three word phrase.) In that quest, I have discovered these principles:
The-literal-truth is approachable through the-objective-truth, the ineluctable evidence humankind perceives ever more precisely by improving the instruments of discovery.
The human being is evolving as the leading-edge species with the awareness and grammar by which to develop integrity rather than constructs based on reason.
Each human individual has the power, the energy, and the authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity rather than drift into infidelity to the-literal-truth.
The civic citizen develops equity under statutory justice, and dissidents oppose the development of integrity.
Civic citizens are obliged to require an agreement to pursue statutory justice as a condition both for holding political office and for voting.
The U.S. Preamble is the USA’s proposition to develop statutory justice according to standards pursued by We the People of the United States, the voluntary civic faction at any moment on the journey to statutory justice.
Under these principles, I always vote in my best interest.
I’m looking for politicians who assert that he or she is foremost a member of the civic entity We the People of the United States, publish their interpretation of the U.S. Preamble, list personal accomplishments towards the U.S. Preamble’s proposition as he or she interprets it, and states intentions he or she will pursue if elected. Let each voter decide if he or she likes the candidate’s platform.
I think quora moderator disallowed, after “in my best interest” the following:
For example, I voted for Trump/Pence even though Trump seemed like a play-boy in my view, but far better than Hillary, in whose opinion I have always been a deplorable. I cannot imagine me voting for a Clinton. I voted for Edwin Edwards only once---when what’s his name was running. I voted for John Bel Edwards only once---when an apparent sex pervert was running. I hope to vote for Trump/Edwards my third time and fourth time and that they win. Faced with the DNC choice today, I would go with Gabbard, so far.
I never voted for Obama and think I never would vote for an Obama. However, for eight years I hoped for his success, not having proof that he was an American enemy.
His “leadership” since we elected Trump/Pence convinces me that he and all his associates are enemies of We the People of the United States. Therefore, it is unlikely for me to vote for a Democrat. But not impossible: I made an exception in the latest local election, holding the opinion that I was voting in my best interest and knowing I did not know.
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-meaning-of-freedom-that-you-give-it?
Freedom is acceptance of both ineluctable constraints and individual discipline.
The ineluctable constraints derive from physics, the object of study rather than the process for discovery. For example, the earth’s rotation on its axis un-hides the sun each morning. Human life begins with the viable ovum, whose responsible mom protects it from unwanted insemination. The aware human does not lie, knowing that physics facilitates discovery of the-objective-truth, which ultimately approaches the-literal-truth. The opportunity for human integrity depends on beneficial acceptance of external constraints and freedom-from personal opinion. That is, despite hard-earned opinion, the mature person accepts not knowing the-literal-truth.
Individual discipline begins with acceptance that only the human species has the awareness and grammar by which a person may develop equity under statutory justice. Acceptance includes the open-mindedness to follow opinion with the statement: But I do not know the-literal-truth.
The U.S. citizen who discovers the quest for equity under statutory justice may consider the U.S. Preamble’s proposition and interpret it to order his or her civic life. The articles that follow the U.S. Preamble provide for amendment of discovered injustice so that statutory law and its enforcement may eventually approach justice.
My U.S. Preamble interpretation just now is: We the People of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to establish then maintain 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage responsible human liberty to living fellow citizens.
Neither my interpretation nor the original 52 words specify a standard of achievement. That perhaps implies that when the majority of citizens accept and practice the 5 disciplines, responsible human liberty will be the norm. No one knows the standard, but I trust-in and commit-to the-literal-truth rather than the opinions of “the founders”.
The U.S. Preamble proposes civic discipline for freedom-from oppression so that living citizens may individually and perhaps mutually accept the liberty-to pursue individual happiness with civic integrity.
https://www.quora.com/What-morals-would-have-an-instant-impact-if-more-people-lived-by-them?
Through evolution one species is developing the awareness and grammar by which to develop integrity.
Integrity is the practice of addressing a concern so as to confirm that it is not imaginary, discovering how to benefit from the reality, behaving so as to benefit, sharing the understanding with fellow citizens, listening for any improvements in the understanding, and remaining open-minded for new discovery that requires change.
By this process, integrity employs new instruments for perception of the-objective-truth, trusting that the-literal-truth exists and may be perceived.
Some people develop integrity similar to my description or better while some people develop reasonable constructs to oppose the-objective-truth, thereby diffusing humankind’s collective approach to the-literal-truth.
If more people accepted that the-literal-truth exists and may be approached by discovering the ineluctable evidence, the-objective-truth, there would be more fidelity to responsible human liberty. Perhaps that means aiding five public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity.
https://www.quora.com/Why-is-diversity-a-good-thing?
I consider diversity an invasion of privacy. Human
beings share interest in equity under statutory justice and other wise require
the privacy to pursue individual happiness as they see it rather than conform
to someone else’s vision for them.
I would appreciate
your view on my brief comment and the essay too, if possible.
https://www.quora.com/If-people-are-counted-to-be-equal-why-are-you-not-the-same?
From my perspective, my person is similarly unique. Let me explain.
At a moment, my mom’s ovaries had provided a viable ovum and my dad’s spermatozoon joined the ovum as the single cell that had the genes (and perhaps some memes) that defined my unique person.
By age 10, I perceived psychological conflicts between Mom and Dad, Mom’s family and Dad’s family, and among our neighbors. I also perceived conflicts in the community’s “word of God.” I could not have articulated it then, but I chose a path of trust-in and commitment to the-literal-truth.
During a 35-year career, I came to realize that most people are influenced by their particular mystery of whatever-God-is, and thereby most citizens communicate, collaborate, and connect for comprehensive safety and security; in other words, they are civic citizens. I would not dare introduce doubt in a civic citizen’s source of inspiration and motivation, whether they believe in a mystery or not. I trust that they pursue and practice discernable literal-truth. I perceive that the-literal-truth is only approachable, and that the path to its comprehension is the-objective-truth or the ineluctable evidence. Ineluctable evidence exists and its perception improves with improving instruments and methods.
I do not object to fellow citizens who hope in the mystery of whatever-God-is and want to encourage their responsible human liberty. Together, we may influence dissident fellow citizens to reform.
In summary, it seems every human started as a unique ovum and has the opportunity to develop responsible human liberty. Some humans choose to develop integrity. Some are influenced-into or choose infidelity. Starting unique and developing according to choices, equality was never possible.
https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Why-do-people-require-the-government?
Humanoids have been developing awareness for some 3 million years. Humankind developed grammar perhaps 150,000 years ago, and civilizations during the last 10s of thousands of years. So far, perhaps 8 trillion person-years of observations and experiences have happened.
Both physics and psychology have had exponentially increasing discoveries during the last century. Only humankind, about 8 billion people, touches all the discoveries. The newborn is totally ignorant and if discouraged and un-coached may never surpass adolescence. Many people in the first 3 decades acquire the basic understanding and intent to live a complete human life. Few develop psychological maturity---the liberty-to responsibly pursue individual happiness rather than conform to someone else’s dream for them. People divide themselves: civic citizens vs dissidents such as criminals and tyrants.
The civic citizens agree to aid the development of statutory justice or human equity. It’s an impossible perfection yet a worthy goal for the living fellow citizens at any moment in the progress of evolution. Their hope is that dissident fellow citizens will reform by observing civic integrity.
In the USA, the agreement to develop human equity is offered in the U.S. Preamble. My interpretation today is: We the People of the United States communicate, collaborate, and connect to maintain 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage responsible human liberty to the living citizens. Since ultimate justice is undetermined, each individual is responsible to discern and promote the standards for mutually judging the 5 disciplines. Thereby, statutory law may eventually approach statutory justice.
In summary, because some citizens are either too young to agree to human equity under statutory justice or are dissident to responsible human liberty, the civic fellow-citizens maintain statutory law enforcement and other systems to maintain public disciplines like the 5 that are specified in the U.S. Preamble.
https://www.quora.com/Is-tribalism-and-collectivism-ultimately-the-real-answer-in-contrast-to-how-Ayn-Rand-might-have-one-live?
Just as a 30’ wave from a hurricane or tsunami catches people in their defiance of an evacuation order, the consequences of lies or infidelity come with ineluctable woe.
There will always be people who chase “objectivism” or tribalism or collectivism, in order to escape responsible human liberty. Each human has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity rather than drift into infidelity. Some people use HIPEA to practice crime or other dissidence.
In a culture of responsible human liberty, civic people communicate, collaborate, and connect to maintain 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage responsible human liberty to the living citizens including dissidents. The standards of performance are defined by the living individuals so as to aid mutual, comprehensive safety and security.
In the world, I know of one proposal for such a culture. The U.S. Preamble proposes responsible human liberty.
So far, the people of the USA have imposed Chapter XI Machiavellianism under the influence of colonial-English tradition. The culture proposed by the U.S. Preamble has yet to be established.
I read, write, and speak to establish the U.S. Preamble’s proposition or better somewhere on earth.
https://www.facebook.com/corteeny/posts/10158254733304068?notif_id=1574270269871498¬if_t=nf_share_story
For clarity from my view: The importance of integrity rather than honest unity.
By belonging to the Alinsky-Marxist organization (AMO), the human individual risks woe.
However, civic citizens want mutual, comprehensive safety and security to themselves and to dissident citizens who reform.
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