Democracy trashes both hope and the-literal-truth

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 interpretation of its proposal as follows: “We the People of the United States consider, communicate, collaborate, and connect to practice 5 public disciplines: integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity so as to encourage both living and future fellow citizens to practice responsible human independence.” I want to collaborate with the other citizens on this interpretation 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

Democracy trashes both hope and the-literal-truth

Aliens to the U.S. Preamble’s proposition and the supporting aversion to democracy in Article IV, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government” try to promote voting in the U.S. as democratic governance. However, the U.S. Constitution has many provisions that redirect one person one vote to protection of fellow citizens from either the majority, a minority, or a coalition.

However, there is a controlling body of people who, without articulation behave for mutual, comprehensive safety and security. We think that behavior is proposed in the U.S. Preamble according to personal interpretation by individuals who are for living and future citizens. We think the U.S. Preamble proposes 5 public disciplines to encourage responsible human independence.

Dissidents to the U.S. Preamble may reform so as to help establish individual happiness with civic integrity rather than debate someone else’s imposition. Civic integrity involves acceptance of whatever-God-is and hope to discover how to benefit from the-literal-truth.

In democracy, whatever-God-is is expected to conform to the believer’s God. This theme touched in many entries this week.

Columns

Erroneously trashing hope (Jim Grice) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_db3af3c6-6484-11ea-b275-9b476a633329.html)

I subscribe to Grice’s sentiment yet not the influence: “I will put my faith in science, not hope.”

Science is only a study/research practice, which may be applied either with integrity to the-objective-truth or with infidelity. And if the former, with the expectation that future improvements in perception could increase understanding of the ineluctable discovery. Humankind’s hope is that the-objective-truth leads to the-literal-truth, or perfect knowledge.

Our friend Albert Einstein, in attempting common word usage left us with impressions I don’t accept. For example, in “The Laws of Science and The Laws of Ethics,” I take “science” to mean the study of physics and it progeny---mathematics, chemistry, biology, psychology, fiction, religion, superstition and all the rest of what-is. And “ethics” means the journal of discovered ineluctable evidence and the approach to the-literal-truth and how to benefit from actual-reality.

More egregiously, Einstein perhaps mixed proprietary and common language in the statement, "science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." In my interpretation, our friend was saying about discovery of actual-reality: research without hope is lame, hope without research is blind. Unfortunately, Einstein wrote mysteries for the popular audience rather than writing his thoughts for the individual to understand according to his or her awareness of ineluctable evidence.

When we humans consider the-objective-truth, let alone the-literal-truth, and conclude “I don’t know,” we tend not to let that destroy us. We still have hope, and maybe nothing else. If hope leads us to one more responsible action, it may be what we needed to survive. If our knees buckle and we turn it over to personal opinion of whatever-God-is, we have maintained hope despite all impressions.

To reduce confusion I discover, I develop a civic glossary and need all the help I can get. To find it, Google: "a civic people" + glossary. Just now, on either Chrome or Edge it is the first URL.





My hope is in understanding physics and its progeny including religion (hope without ineluctable evidence) and how to benefit from the understanding as new perceptions all humankind to approach the-literal-truth. Sprituality is a private rather than civic, civil, or legal practice.

Noticing a civic concern and offering a remedy (Byron York) (http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0320/york030420.php3)

“Biden rallies often begin with the Pledge of Allegiance. It’s a brief ritual . . .”

A Bernie fan: “Our nation is rotten to the core. We need a good re-foundation. We need to have love among all people.”

“Biden . . . laid on the religion to please the African-American ministers . . .”

“A Sanders rally ... features ... the fire-breathing pols, the old socialist brothers-in-arms, the self-described ‘undocumented, queer and unashamed,’ the rappers, AOC, Ilhan Omar.”

“[T]here's a real possibility that no one can unite the party . . .”

What if Trump’s encouragement of fellow citizens to accept responsible human independence and share that acceptance with the family’s future children and grandchildren takes hold?

Posted at the above URL.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-democracy-imperfect-What-are-better-things-about-other-systems-of-government?

Democracy means each the opportunity to vote and one vote one influence, or majority rule. In a representative republic, one vote does not equal one influence. The representative has the political power and can vote his or her preference rather than represent the people who elected him or her. Most politicians have not the integrity to represent their constituents.

The 1787 framers of the U.S. Constitution had observed infidelity to the-literal-truth by Confederation of States, established in 1774 and recognized as 13 free and independent states in the Treaty of Paris, 1783. Without question, the so-called “founding fathers” had inherited many erroneous civic, civil, and legal practices as loyal British subjects, and many of them erroneously carried those traditions forward after the 1787 signing of the U.S. Constitution.

A favorite political technique is to learn the constituent’s concern and preferential remedy and if in opposition, stonewall the constituent. For example, my faith is in the-literal-truth, most of which is unknown. When I do not understand the ineluctable evidence and how to benefit from the-objective-truth, I admit to myself and to my fellow citizens, “I do not know.”

To the question, does whatever-God-is control the unfolding of events, I answer, “I don’t know,” and don’t think so. It seems to me that whatever-God-is has assigned to humankind the responsibility to develop civic, civil, and legal integrity. My intent is to express integrity to myself, to whatever-God-is, and to my fellow citizens.

My commitment to the-literal-truth leaves me an alien to most of my local, state, and national elected representatives. I do not know one elected or appointed government official who would stand for my faith in human integrity rather than religion in a civic, civil, or legal discussion.

The principle I am reasoning from come not from democracy but from my most precious possession: my interpretation of the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. It is an interpretation for my way of living, and I offer it to fellow citizens so that they may suggest civic, civil, and legal improvements I can effect. Here’s my interpretation for this moment:  We the People of the United States consider, communicate, collaborate, and connect to practice 5 public disciplines: integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity so as to encourage both living and future fellow citizens to practice responsible human independence.

My interpretation as cautions is:  We the People of the United States intentionally discipline ourselves to both avoid and discourage deceit, injustice, disruption, weakness, and poverty in order to empower responsible human independence to living and future citizens.

It is shocking that the First Congress, 1789-1793, repressed the U.S. Preamble and has continued the tyranny ever since. It is shocking that the U.S. Supreme Court debates “originalism” and “textualism” but does not consider the U.S. Preamble as having civic, civil, and legal authority. Good grief: the U.S. Preamble legally terminated the 1774 Confederation of States and specified discipline of by and for the people!

Fellow citizen and General George Washington in his 1781 farewell to the continental army gave 4 principles for a nation that could survive and excluded religious or spiritual practice. The U.S. Preamble has the same feature. However, the U.S. Congress pretends it is divine and therefore has the prerogative to rebuke the U.S. Constitution.

Mitt Romney claimed “I am a religious man.” He should resign from the Senate, and no Mormon “saint” or wife of a “saint” should ever be elected to political office. Similarly, Jimmy Carter said he could not separate church from state. Every citizen of the U.S. should consider that the U.S. Preamble requires separation of intentions for human peace from hopes for a personally desired afterdeath.

A republic under the rule of law that is continually reformed to statutory justice demonstrates that democracy is ruinous chaos. The U.S. can have an achievable better future if most citizens have a personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble by which they order their civic and spiritual lives so as to conform to the-literal-truth: Witness “I don’t know,” when that is so.

https://www.quora.com/Is-anarchism-more-likely-to-encourage-progress-than-its-law-and-order-alternatives?

Merriam-Webster online has for “anarchism; a political theory holding all forms of governmental authority to be unnecessary and undesirable and advocating a society based on voluntary cooperation and free association of individuals and groups.”

Anarchy won’t work: There must be a civic, civil, and legal agreement for human equity under statutory justice, an ultimately approachable perfection.

Humanoids have been evolving for about 3 million years, humans less, and cultures with grammar for perhaps 150 thousand years. Human cultures we appreciate have been evolving for about 10 thousand years. There’s a dominant speculative question:  Does whatever-God-is control the unfolding of events? Most cultures ignore that question to develop personal Gods and institutional Gods. That tendency, so far, spoils the chance for individual separation of spirituality from responsible human independence. That is, separation of church and state does not work when most individuals do not participate.

Few people accept the awareness and grammar that empowers responsible human independence. Even fewer accept human, individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop either infidelity or integrity to the-literal-truth. Most of the-literal-truth is unknown, so the person who develops integrity often admits to self and others, “I don’t know.”

No culture teaches these principles, so humankind is a confused, conflicted entity that nevertheless collectively works to discover the-objective-truth and continually improve instruments for perceiving its ineluctable evidence. Humankind often approaches the-literal-truth, but few living citizens are aware.

Discovery increases exponentially, and no individual can possess all of the-objective-truth. Humans who accept HIPEA and use it to develop infidelity recognize that they can abuse people who develop integrity for their reasons (whether using HIPEA or not). Infidels can reform anytime they perceive the advantages of integrity. Also, since cultures do not encourage and coach youth in these principles, the individual must discover and accept them independently. Among living humankind, few use HIPEA to develop integrity.

Because of these actual-realities, the rule of law with continual development of statutory justice is essential to the continuum of future citizens and therefore to living citizens.

I know of only one proposal that accommodates these principles. The preamble to the U.S. Constitution proposes 5 public disciplines to empower responsible human independence. (BTW, “responsible human liberty” seems a contradiction.) Every citizen owes it to self to develop a personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble to guide his or her civic, civil, and legal practices and share with fellow citizens to try to discover improvements. Once the interpretation is in use, he or she will discover it is his or her most precious of intellectual/psychological properties.

https://www.quora.com/Is-the-USA-a-democracy-or-republic-The-pledge-of-allegiance-states-to-the-Republic-for-which-it-stands?

I dislike the coercive nature of the pledge of allegiance, especially regarding the prayer “under God.” The better authority is the U.S. Constitution, Article IV, “The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government.”

Provisions to prevent democracy are many and detailed. Just how detailed may be grasped by understanding the composition of Congress, the legislative body with 2 chambers. The house has state representatives allocated per capita, keeping each citizen’s vote fairly equal. However, each state has 2 senators. Thereby, a citizen in Wyoming has more influence than one in California. If Californians’ moved to Wyoming to increase influence, the power advantage could reverse.

This difference keeps the population concentrations on the two coasts from imposing their will on the nation. The interior states are sometimes referred to as “flyover” states, and their collective political power is impressive.

The framers well knew that democracy is chaos, so they spoiled the possibility as much as they could.

An interesting consideration of this provision is that the original 13 states that supported the revolutionary war were formerly loyal British colonies substantially populated by loyal British citizens under colonial charters. Meanwhile, the rest of the country was being colonized by Spain, France, Portugal, Russia, and other mostly European countries such as Holland. For example, my state, Louisiana, was formerly a French colony, and France and England were at war at Yorktown, VA in September 1781: England surrendered to both France and the 13 free and independent colonies. Whereas Massachusetts may revere English common law, Louisiana not so much.

As a consequence, for example, Louisiana (statehood in 1812) reads U.S. Amendment VI as requiring impartial criminal jury trials, the other states accept the English tradition of unanimous jury verdicts. England revised to 10:2 majority verdicts in 1967 to lessen organized crime’s influence on criminal trials. With U.S. citizens divided 50/50, getting unanimity is statistically unlikely. The U.S. has yet to reform to majority verdicts: 7:5 would be better than 12:0. Maybe capital trials should require 11:1 or 10:2.

Greg Hebert

The Under God phrase was added in the 1950’s to try to smoke out supposed Communists who were supposedly atheist and we would be able to detect them by their muttering during the Pledge. Pretty immature. It didn’t work.

Phil Beaver

Thanks and it seems to me you are correct on both the facts and your opinion. I understand the Knights of Columbus convinced President Eisenhower. Thank you for the incentive to look it up: Why 'Under God' Was Added To The Pledge Of Allegiance.

https://www.quora.com/Is-a-military-regime-better-than-a-democratic-government?

I doubt answer-ability of this question but will take it in my direction. What is the meaning of “democratic government?” Does it mean that qualified citizens vote or does it mean rule of the majority? Rule of the majority is present and future chaos.

The U.S. is not a democratic government, much as aliens, both domestic and foreign, claim. It is a republic under the rule of law. Many U.S. laws create complicated, interconnected means of selecting elected and appointed officials so as to prevent 1 person 1 vote consequences.

For example, a Wyoming Senator has equal vote in Senate decisions, yet represents fewer citizens than a California Senator. It makes no sense for California residents to move to Wyoming for more Senate power, as the power ratio could consequentially reverse.

By all means, a military regime can be better than majority rule. The military leaders could create a government founded on a written proposition for personal discipline so as to encourage responsible human independence of by and for willing fellow citizens. They could issue statutory laws with institutions for domestic enforcement and amenability by the responsibly independent citizens when injustice is discovered. The body of law could guarantee fellow citizens the opportunity to develop individual and collective integrity with religion held to be a private pursuit by believers. In other words, separation of church from state would be the individual citizens’ responsibility. The consequences might be an achievable better future.

Without defining the military-imposed constitution that encourages responsible human independence, I hope I have suggested that a civically, civilly, and regally responsible military regime could originate a successful republic.

https://www.quora.com/How-would-you-reform-today-s-politics?

I work to reform U.S. Education Departments---local, state, and federal---into Human Encouragement Departments. Here is one of the concepts:

Each human being has the individual power, energy, and authority to develop either infidelity or integrity to the-literal-truth. The faithful human answers, “I don’t know” when asked, and he or she doesn’t know the-literal-truth. For example, “Is it true that whatever-God-is controls the unfolding of events?” is answered, “I don’t know.”

Another concept. Teachers can’t imagine what students will need to know in two decades, so encouraging and coaching them to accept HIPEA and develop integrity while exposing them to what humankind has discovered is more important than the facts, fiction, and art the students may appreciate.



https://www.quora.com/Do-you-need-to-be-obsessed-to-change-the-world?

Intention rather than obsession is needed to individually change the world. It’s a matter of acceptances that are possible during the two to three decades it takes for a feral infant to transition to a young adult with comprehension and intention to live a complete human life. Often, a person lives an entire lifetime in dissidence to human fidelity. The acceptances follow, not necessarily in personal chronological order:

Acceptance of human individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop either infidelity or integrity to the-literal-truth, unknown as it may be. (Accept “I don’t know” when that is so.)

Acceptance that, although some citizens who accepted HIPEA develop infidelity, many develop integrity.

Acceptance that only whatever-God-is justifies human fidelity, so belief in a personal God may hold humble reserve to whatever-God-is.

Acceptance that Maslow’s hierarchy of needs may be viewed as responsibilities to self. Thus, the first obligation to fellow man is to earn your humanly-adequate way of living.

Acceptance that a civic citizen neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any person or human association.

Possession of a civic, civil, and legal proposition for responsible human independence. In the U.S., that proposition is abstractly stated in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, and each citizen may interpret it to order his or her civic, civil, and legal way of living. Those who do not, are citizens without precious intellectual property they could accept.

https://www.quora.com/Freedom-of-speech-expression-and-dissent-are-being-challenged-by-democratic-governments-today-Do-you-agree?

Yes; without a doubt.

The framers, in particular the signers, (1787) did all they could to avoid colonial-English mistakes (1607-1763). Alas the First Congress foolishly restored the mistakes as “tradition.” Those ruthless politicians amended the 1787 Constitution with an English-like Bill of Rights (1791). Most egregiously, they limited all political powers---the people, the municipalities, the states, and the nation---except the power of the press.

My state, Louisiana (1812) was a French colony. Its constitution, expresses freedom of responsible expression. However, it provides no remedy for irresponsibility beyond constraint of consequences. There should be remedy for breach of civic integrity.

For example, if alien agents, be they foreign or domestic, use the media to persuade gullible citizens to fight for democracy when their native country guarantees a disciplinary republic under written law, proof of the alien intentions should be the basis for fines, restricting/prohibiting the media’s business, or other constraints.

“Democracy” implies the opportunity to vote, but does not offer equality of votes. In the USA, the value of national votes is allocated on a mixed basis: per capita and per state. The consequence is that citizens with a shared ideology cannot move to one state and dominate the national vote. Citizens who migrate to a state of their choosing have an equity weighting in their votes. For example, there is not systematic penalty for Mormons preferring to live in Utah. Mormons, both male and female, are free to pursue sainthood according to their religious doctrine as long as they conform to the U.S. Constitution.

In another example Jews who want to may responsibly follow Jewish law regarding family relationships; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beth_Din_of_America.

Following a 2,400 year old Greek suggestion that was probably commentary on someone else’s idea, we may think with evidence available to us that human individuals may pursue equity under statutory justice. Equity means appreciation according to responsible human independence. Statutory justice is perfect written-law enforcement, which humankind may approach, perhaps never fully achieving.

Some people erroneously interpret these principles as equal justice under law; see  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equal_justice_under_law. However, each human ovum is unique, and if given the opportunity to develop human adulthood may develop integrity to the-literal-truth rather than convention, civility, subjugation or anything but equitable goodwill toward fellow citizens. Also, written law being imperfect should be enforced only until the injustice is discovered and corrected.

In the U.S., each citizen may consider the U.S. Preamble and use its propositions to develop personal living that is consistent with civic integrity. The personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s abstract 52 words is a prized possession to citizens who do the work to earn it. The consequences are shocking. For example, my interpretation as cautions, which I share hoping to learn an improvement, is:  We the People of the United States intentionally discipline ourselves and encourage fellow citizens to both avoid and discourage deceit, injustice, disruption, weakness, and poverty in order to empower responsible human independence to living and future citizens.

Fellow citizens who do not consider and accept the civic, civil, and legal proposition offered in the U.S. Preamble choose to subject themselves to written-law enforcement whether We the People of the United States has approached statutory justice or not. They may speak in opposition to civic integrity, but may be held responsible for the consequences. Dissident fellow citizens deserve the encouragement to integrity that is offered in the Louisiana Constitution’s provision for expression with responsibility for the consequences.

https://www.quora.com/I-feel-historical-figures-actions-words-should-be-judged-based-on-their-periods-mores-Why-does-modern-society-feel-the-need-to-judge-the-actions-of-historic-figures-with-todays-view-of-proper-behavior?

I think it is important to do the work to understand period views in order to avoid their mistakes rather than try to preserve/repeat them.

Consider the U.S. Preamble’s phrase “Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity.” What did “liberty” mean to the authors? Considering the times and place, less than 4 years after 13 free and independent states ratified their global status stated in the 1783 Treaty of Paris. I speculate that in 1787 they meant the advantage of freedom-from oppression by Britain over We the People of the United States.

The U.S. Preamble proposes freedom from colonial British-American psychology, for example, leaving religion out of the six civic, civil, and legal goals in the proposition. However, the First Congress unconstitutionally re-established church-state partnership by hiring congressional chaplains at the expense of the people. Worse, in the First Amendment the First Congress codified religion, an institutional business, rather than encouraged civic integrity, a citizen’s duty. It’s been that way ever since. Thus, the First Congress imposed colonial British-American psychology on us, ourselves, the living citizens. (I work to end that imposition for our posterity and request your help.)

Second, liberty is a social concept that may be used to oppress the individual. For example, the author of “Give me liberty or give me death” was the father of six children and their mother’s husband. He publicly retracted his commitment to monogamy for life to seven individuals. He denied his own oath.

According to my perception of civic integrity, independence from the mob shouting “liberty, friendship, and equality” is the nobler concept. Therefore, in my prized possession---my interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition for my life with fellow citizens, “liberty” is replaced with “responsible human independence.”

I encourage every citizen to earn and maintain a personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. Living here without one is like driving a vehicle without licenses and liability insurance.

https://www.quora.com/When-is-a-mutiny-legally-justified?

Only when you have 1) the military power to overthrow the regime and 2) a plan for discipline of by and for the people so as to develop responsible human independence to living citizens.

https://www.quora.com/What-societal-norms-do-you-disapprove-of?

To most fellow citizens, the paramount association beyond family is church in one form or another. However, the U.S. intention is to encourage integrity among fellow citizens. Past generations have left it to us to effect reform to the U.S. Preamble’s proposition.

This is the consequence of a sort of bullying imposed on us by the 1787 identity fellow citizens who negotiated amendment of the 1787 Constitution as a quid pro quo for ratification. Representatives of Massachusetts, Maryland, and South Carolina[i] instigated the requirement. New York, Virginia, North Carolina and Rhode Island could have spoiled the quid pro quo but did not do so.

As a consequence, Congressional politicians imposed “freedom of religion” to lessen the preamble to the U.S. Constitution (the U.S. Preamble). It is falsely labeled “secular” whereas it is appropriately neutral to religion.

As a consequence, instead of civic citizens self-disciplining according to the U.S. Preamble’s proposition, fellow citizens are bemused by differences in fervent beliefs about whatever-God-may-be, without holding the slightest reserve for whatever-God-is, be it order or chaos, natural or supernatural, omnipotent or tolerant, omniscient or subject to human emotions.

When people arrogantly pray, “God Bless America,” I cringe before whatever-God-is. Not only that, I cringe for my country’s presumption toward whatever-God-is.

When fellow citizens stand to pledge to the flag I feel bullied---for example, by the 2020 Congress, who swore allegiance to We the People of the United States then voted under their party to impeach our duly elected President, Donald J. Trump. If I wish to express my love for the flag and the U.S. republic I am silent during the prayer “under God” so as to express appreciation for whatever-God-is.

The U.S. Preamble encourages fellow citizens to develop integrity to the-literal-truth, leaving spiritualism a private pursuit for citizens who hope for more than responsible human independence.

Among every citizen’s most precious possessions is an individual interpretation of the U.S. Preamble so as to order his or her civic, civil, and legal way of living. My interpretation in the negative to the its goals is interesting to me:  We the People of the United States intentionally discipline ourselves and encourage fellow citizens to both avoid and discourage deceit, injustice, disruption, weakness, and poverty in order to empower responsible human independence to living citizens.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-someone-say-that-democracy-is-the-best-form-of-government-when-they-have-never-experienced-any-other-forms-of-government?

I don’t know. Everybody knows democracy is chaos.

How can people live in America and fall for the alien propaganda that its’ a democracy?

Social democrats, many schooled in Europe, dominate U.S. liberal arts colleges including schools of mass media. Journalism is no longer learned in such schools. Instead, they partner with pseudo statisticians self-designated “social scientists” with an agenda: to dominate political power. 

Since statistics can be manipulated any way the researcher chooses, ideologies can be imposed on some of the public in this way: design a questionnaire to entrap innocent volunteers into answers that support the agenda; select demographic types that lean toward the ideology; conduct the subjective survey, refusing any answers that do not comport to the questionnaire; and analyze the data with statistical methods that favor the ideology. Announce the results to media partners.

With most citizens just trying to survive and compete, few explore the media enough to discover the ruse and take the report seriously. The partnership thus manipulates public opinion, and public policy is “determined” by public opinion, so aliens use democracy to ruin America. Alas, for them, it isn’t so.

We just saw this partnership work in the U.S. House of Representatives. Having a voting majority, Democrats arbitrarily impeached President Donald J. Trump, defying both the U.S. Constitution and We the People of the United States, who duly elect the president every four years. The Trump/Pence ticket was supposed to lose, and did lose by the popular vote. However, the framers (not the founders) created many laws that spoil democracy. One of the many is the Electoral College, which guarantees against a demographic wherein 50% plus one vote move to one state so as to control the 49 states and 6 territories. Trump/Pence won (the Electoral College and the presidency under the rule of law).

Maybe Hillary Clinton hated the presidential election result so much that she manipulated the Democrats to foolishly impeach Trump for doing his job. I don’t know. Nevertheless, the Democrats ignored three process facts. In two facts, another provision against democracy is that the impeachment trial 1) is held in the Senate, and 2) conviction requires a 2/3 supermajority of votes. And 3) it’s not Nancy Pelosi’s pawn “we, the people”: it’s “We the People of the United States,” who believe in the U.S. Preamble’s proposition for responsible human independence under the rule of law and encourage dissidents to reform. We encourage Pelosi and most democrats to reform to the U.S. Preamble’s proposition.

Fellow citizens who are not of We the People of the United States beg personal woe when they ignore the reality that the U.S. guarantees a republican form of government. Every U.S. citizen owes it to himself or herself to discover a personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition that positions him or her to civilly develop the civic life he or she prefers. We the People of the United States intentionally discipline ourselves and encourage fellow citizens to both avoid and discourage deceit, injustice, disruption, weakness, and poverty in order to empower responsible human independence to living citizens.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-wrong-ways-to-promote-democracy-and-human-rights?

Death is certain. I think the only practical human right is freedom-from oppression so as to develop integrity. Integrity is the individual practice of accepting the ignorance expressed by “I don’t know” until you have done the work to discover the-objective-truth.

The-objective-truth can be improved each time new instruments of perceiving the ineluctable evidence improves the discovery, and improvements may eventually lead to the-literal-truth. I do not know of a culture that promotes these principles but think it is proposed to “ourselves and our Posterity” in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution.

Not everyone develops integrity. Every human has the individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to-choose or drift-into infidelity to the-objective-truth if not the-literal-truth. The consequence is subjugation to woe until perhaps experience or observations convince the infidel to reform.

Most humans develop integrity whether they accept HIPEA or not, and they exercise the strengths of encouragement, coercion, and force to constrain, under statutory-law enforcement, fellow citizens who choose infidelity.

Such a culture is called a republic. The U.S. is a representative republic that is carefully designed to prevent democracy, or chaos. The U.S. guarantees a republican form of government.

Foreign governments and other aliens would like to end America’s republic under the rule of law. See “republic” at Merriam-Webster online: ”a government in which supreme power resides in a body of citizens entitled to vote and is exercised by elected officers and representatives responsible to them and governing according to law.”

Shockingly, the Democratic Party’s leaders, AOC, and her followers, who bully Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer, don’t accept the rule of law. Social democrats seem to think their vote means they live in a democracy where anything goes rather than a republic where written law has public authority.

The media is substantially owned by foreigners and aliens who promote democracy hoping to undo the U.S. republican rule of law. We observed the rule of law in the Congressional impeachment of President Trump. The world’s first presidential impeachment by a political party was defeated by the other party under the rule of law.

The rule of law is better than chaos. I work daily to reform unjust written law so as to develop statutory justice. In the meantime, I defend statutory law enforcement. I encourage fellow citizens to cherish the rule of law and connect with fellow citizens to pursue statutory justice.

Ryszard Rakowski

Paradoxically, “I don't know” is not ignorance. It implies knowledge and courage. Remember Socrates? “I know, that I know nothing “.

Phil Beaver

I agree. Socrates’ suggestion was recorded some 2,400 years ago and has not taken hold. That’s evidence that cultures have developed failing education systems. I hold religion responsible for the failure.

My Mom and Dad were such good lower-middle-class providers, and I am so stubborn, that it took me 5 decades and a wonderful wife of a Christianity which is damned by the competitive Southern-Baptist-Christianities each Mom and Dad pursued and vice-versa. Through my serenely-confident wife and children, I discovered myself: a person with faith in the-literal-truth, unknown as it may be.

I had help from many classic thinkers: Plato, RW Emerson, Chekhov, Flannery O’Conner’s posthumous non-fiction, on and on and on.

https://www.quora.com/What-5-actions-by-this-administration-reflect-an-authoritarian-bend-of-governing-in-a-democracy-Why?

The administration used the authority of the rule of law to defeat Democrats in the House of Representative’s unconstitutional impeachment, proving once again that the U.S. is a republic, not a democracy.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-processes-the-Church-and-society-can-apply-to-transform-their-contexts-to-create-a-better-world?

Human individuals may accept the power, the energy, and the authority (HIPEA) to develop civic integrity rather than infidelity to the-literal-truth. In other words, regardless of spiritual hopes and comforts, the human individual may develop responsible human independence.

In independence, he or she can have a personal God yet reserve appreciation for whatever-God-is, since that entity may have the omniscience and omnipotence to respond to the religious believer---with either appreciation or rejection.

In summary, human individuals may recognize that separation of church and state is a private practice from which the state should have the humility to separate: Freedom of religion, especially salvation of mysterious spirits, is none of the state’s business.

The church that cannot produce the ineluctable evidence that it represents whatever-God-is must submit to statutory law and its enforcement. In the USA, that’s the U.S. Constitution, which should not consider conforming to church doctrine.

I hope this claim takes hold among We the People of the United States enough to revise the First Amendment so as to encourage development of civic integrity rather than religion, a private concern if at all.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-something-that-you-would-protest-for?

I’ve been publicly advocating relief from “freedom of religion” for 2 decades now. See, for example, https://promotethepreamble.blogspot.com/2014/06/lets-revise-first-amendment.html.

Today, my proposal is more concrete. I advocate deleting the religion clauses in the First Amendment so as to encourage individual fellow citizens to develop civic integrity regardless of private hopes and wishes including a personally or institutionally preferred afterdeath. Some want eternal life in heaven, some want to return as a higher species, and some want to complete their unique human life. (Readers, please correct my omissions.)

https://www.quora.com/Birthright-citizenship-is-a-constitutional-right-in-the-USA-what-are-your-thoughts-on-amending-the-constitution-and-removing-birthright-citizenship?

We the People of the United States has a proposition that each citizen ought to consider, interpret, and use to order his or her civic, civil, and legal conduct. Living according to personal understanding of the U.S. Preamble is as essential as driving with the knowledge of traffic laws. If you flee the scene of a traffic accident, you can suffer enforcement of the law, even if it is unjust.

The preamble’s proposition states that the goals benefit “ourselves and our Posterity.” Our posterity is the future living citizens, which includes our children’s children and their descendants plus our future children plus legal immigrants. A child of an American can’t just change citizenship arbitrarily---neither to leave America nor to join another nation without due process.

Further, the U.S. Preamble proposes ultimate justice, which cannot be achieved without the improvements by future generations. Thus, just as “our Posterity” counts on ourselves, We the People of the United States can only achieve its purpose on continual discovery of justice under continuous written-law enforcement.

Social democrats, who want what they arbitrarily want now would destroy their own futures.

Law professors

https://www.lawliberty.org/2020/03/12/american-agonistes/

“Caldwell, though, dismisses too quickly the color-blind interpretation of the Civil Rights Act and of the Constitution itself. He makes this move according to the representations of many civil rights leaders and politicians in the aftermath of the act’s passage. This leads him to the conclusion that it wasn’t ultimately about civil rights but ‘human rights.’”

I prefer the above quote of Reinsch with “misleads” instead of “leads,” but can see it both ways. It does not seem to me that most black Americans want responsible human liberty, my view of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition. Some fellow citizens suffer a common U.S. imposition: freedom of religion rather than encouragement to human integrity.

It’s not unusual for American writers to overlook some important psychological reforms the continuum of living U.S. citizens must eventually undertake. First, “liberty” was common to the relatively bloodless English revolution of 1689; the American revolution of 1774 with victory substantially by France at Yorktown, VA in 1781; and the bloody French revolution of 1789. Patrick Henry’s “Give me liberty . . .” overlooked fidelity to his wife and six children.

When agonistes, Alinsky-Marxist organizers, or a mob yelling “liberty, equality, fraternity” is on the move, I want independence. Responsible human liberty seems contradictory, and responsible human independence expresses integrity.

Integrity to what? Integrity to the-literal-truth, often not known. When it’s so, the civic, civil, and legal citizen declares, “I don’t know.” When asked, “Does whatever-God-is control events?” The civic, civil, and legal citizen answers, “I don’t know.” He or she may or may not hope and pray for a desired afterdeath, such as in heaven or reincarnation as a higher being, yet reserves civic humility to whatever-God-is.

Slavery in America was and is a Christian war that may be redirected to responsible human independence.

The American scholar admits to himself or herself that Africans and Europeans, especially the English, populated the Americas with slaves beginning with papal bulls of “discovery”. In 1775, Visiting Englishman Thomas Paine wrote, “To Americans: That some desperate wretches should be willing to steal and enslave men by violence and murder for gain, is rather lamentable than strange. But that many civilized, nay, Christianized people should approve, and be concerned in the savage practice, is surprising.” See https://www.constitution.org/tp/afri.htm. He and Benjamin Franklin joined the Pennsylvania Abolition Society; https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aia/part3/3p249.html.

In 1852, Frederick Douglass, calling himself a fellow citizen, spoke of the neutrality of U.S. Constitution and its preamble. In 1856, Massachusetts abolitionists had settled in Lawrence, Kansas to establish a free-state; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacking_of_Lawrence. Slave-state raiders from Missouri sacked the city starting a border war labeled “Bleeding Kansas.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeding_Kansas. Clergy-misled R.E. Lee wrote to his wife about Christianity’s plan and abolitionists’ evil; https://leefamilyarchive.org/9-family-papers/783-robert-e-lee-to-mary-anna-randolph-custis-lee-1857-march-13. Abraham Lincoln lamented warring side’s prayers to the same Christian God. I doubt whatever-God-is participated: Military power prevailed.

Since 1972, America has developed the exclusive African-American Christianity; https://www.wsj.com/articles/dr-kings-radical-biblical-vision-1522970778.

In other words, the Christian agonistes dominate and ruin the U.S. quest for responsible human independence.

Every U.S. Citizens owes it to himself or herself to earn a prized possession: a personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition to living and future citizens. I think my cautionary interpretation is instructive: We the People of the United States intentionally discipline ourselves and encourage fellow citizens to both avoid and discourage deceit, injustice, disruption, weakness, and poverty in order to empower responsible human independence to living and future citizens. I want to consider fellow citizens’ interpretations so as to broaden my view.

In my opinion originalism must be based on the U.S. Preamble in order to help Supreme Court Justices and other judges stay grounded in responsible human independence rather than self-governance, a Lockean, English principle that opposes American reform. The Congress, both houses, should replace session-opening ceremony with recitation of the U.S. Preamble, each congressperson expressing his or her interpretation in the original words. K-12 students should require their teachers to so 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.

---

[i] https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/u-s-constitution-ratified