Appreciation more powerful than love?

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 fellow citizens and future citizens to take advantage of responsible human independence.” I want to improve my interpretation by listening to other citizens and their interpretations yet would preserve the original, 1787, text, unless it is amended by the people.

It seems the Supreme Court occasionally refers to it, and 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

Appreciation

Much is being written these days about love. However, love in any of its forms is often unwanted, sometimes on all accounts.

Often, people prefer privacy. However, I am not aware of times when appreciation is not appropriate. I’m listening for suggestions.

Columns

Maybe The Advocate never owned a U.S. company stock lost in bankruptcy due to intellectual property theft by China (The Advocate) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/our_views/article_046965c0-9397-11ea-8587-fb7ead072364.html)

Maybe The Advocate is naïve to intellectual property (IP). By being quick to sell your stock, you can minimize loss when an American company gives their IP to China or sees China steal it. But the long-term lesson makes U.S. stock-ownership onerous. Index-funds help but not enough. Thank goodness President Trump is addressing China’s IP aggression. It’s modern warfare.

Of course, I think The Advocates’ social democracy and blind aversion to responsible human independence is their standard attitude. A prime example is The Advocate’s failure to appreciate 5:4 judiciary verdicts and failure to promote restoration of a Louisiana treasure: the 1880s 9:3 citizens-jury verdict.

I doubt anyone on The Advocate staff owns a personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s civic, civil, and legal proposition by which they order their civic living and spiritual hopes. If some do, I’d like to read the interpretations in The Advocate.

Taking the U.S. Preamble seriously may begin with comprehending “ourselves and our Posterity” as the continuum of living citizens. In other words, as “our posterity” to the 1787 generation our families are “ourselves” to the coming generation. American families are neglecting their grandchildren and beyond. My brief U.S. Preamble interpretation (for criticism by fellow citizens) is:  We the People of the United States promote and practice 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage responsible human independence to living citizens.

Maybe it could be on the list of things to do before June 21 to commemorate the 1788 ratification of the U.S. Preamble’s replacement of the Confederation of 13 eastern-seaboard former British-American colonies with 9 states under civic, civil, and legal discipline of by and for the citizens. Today, there are 50 states and 6 territories and the entity We the People of the United States is repressed by widespread failure to hold fellow citizens in government offices to accountability to the U.S. Preamble’s proposition.

A civic people could start by amending the First Congress’s egregious error of granting absolute “freedom of the press,” when the U.S. Preamble’s framers had designed government functions that are limited by the Constitution. In other words, the states, Congress, the presidency, and the courts each have limited powers. But not the press. We the People of the United States can demand reform of the First Amendment.

I think individual appreciation is sufficient and never unwanted (Nathan Ryan) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_5f0da268-9142-11ea-9fa9-3f78c02e7b37.html)

I stay home except when I need food, a doctor for me or a family member, or need medicine not mailed to us. I wear a mask, elbow touch, wash hands often, take shoes off at the door, wear clean clothes, bathe, and shave. I feel the losses and pain I learn about and appreciate fellow citizens who supply public essentials.

Erroneous, proprietary writer (George Will) (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-1619-project-is-filled-with-slovenliness-and-ideological-ax-grinding/2020/05/05/4a91c868-8f04-11ea-9e23-6914ee410a5f_story.html)

Writers for the press seem unable to interpret ineluctable evidence as facts. In this case, preservation of colonial British-American-traditional Chapter-XI-Machiavellianism under locally preferred Christian God overrides the 1787 proposal for civic discipline of by and for U.S. citizens: the preamble to the U.S. Constitution.

Competitive Christianity is central to press-writers’ failure to journal We the People of the United States in its quest for responsible human independence, derailed in March, 1789 by the first Congress.

As U.S. founding, 1619 is indeed proprietarily prostituted (meretricious), but so is 1774: the revolution for American liberty is not the U.S. civic-integrity proposal of 1787. Factually, 39/55 representatives of 12/13 former British-American colonies proposed the United States under discipline of by and for the people on September 17, 1787. British-American tradition may ultimately give way to the U.S. proposition.

Meanwhile, some of the 16 dissidents to the 1787 Constitution helped 1789 Congress re-establish the traditional, factional-American-Protestant-church-and-state to compete with England’s constitutional reformed-Catholic seats in Parliament. Congress would be as “divine” as Parliament, at the people’s expense (Machiavelli XI).

To outdo the Times’s errant project, Will tries to establish authority using erroneous-scholar’s 3 selective histories. First, some ignore the September 6, 1774 permanent liberation of Worcester MA to cite the scholarly April 1775 insurrection at Lexington–Concord, 7 months later. See https://www.massar.org/2013/01/23/setting-the-record-straight-the-worcester-revolt-of-september-6-1774/. The purpose is to falsely cite 1776 as the U.S. founding. Second, none suggest that Lincoln accepted war rather than diplomatically resolving the South’s “great political error with the sanction of more erroneous [Christian] belief [in slavery].” See https://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp. It’s hard to imagine the American political writer who is unaware of famous abolitionists such as Thomas Paine in 1775 and Benjamin Franklin in Philadelphia or of Bleeding Kansas in 1856. Third, and most egregiously, many scholars pit so called “founders” against the 55 framers of the U.S. Constitution and moreover the 39 signers, leaving 16 dissenters against civic, civil, and legal discipline of by and for the people. World history and not just 1776 impacted the framers’ excellence and the signers’ triumph. The 13 former colonies’ Declaration of Independence from England, with its assertion that kings are first fellow citizens developing statutory integrity does not override the U.S. Constitution’s proposition for independent civic, civil, and legal justice in the U.S. based on the ineluctable evidence for justice.

Most egregiously, scholars do not consider the Civil War as aggression by fellow citizens who believed slavery is the will of their Christian God against citizens who believed abolition is the will of their Christian God. Surely, in addition to the Declaration of Secession they read R.E. Lee’s letter to his wife in December 1857 citing the Christian evil of abolitionists. See https://leefamilyarchive.org/9-family-papers/783-robert-e-lee-to-mary-anna-randolph-custis-lee-1857-march-13. Again, President Lincoln could have appreciated Frederick Douglass’s reliability and been diplomatically against war by saying that the sides each prayed to a different Christian God with no humility reserved for whatever-God-is. Instead, Lincoln relied on the free-state military odds, 27:7, in February, 1861. Once a citizen considers these historical observations, opinions of Lincoln and King pale before the indictment of civic, civil, or legal Christianity.

Lastly, Will cannot look to George Orwell for clues about whatever-God-is. It seems self-evident that “Who [manipulates] the past [begs future woe]: who controls the present [may choose integrity rather than infidelity].”

Writers for the press can lead fellow citizens in a nest of individual acceptances: I am a human being, potentially a member of the earth’s most power species; it takes 2 to 3 decades of more for an infant to transition into a young adult with intent and comprehension to be a person; it takes another 4 or more decades work for a young person to transition into a psychologically mature adult; to benefit from the observations and experiences of fellow citizens, each individual must consider, communicate, collaborate, and connect to encourage responsible human independence; the person’s individual power, energy, and authority to develop integrity or avoid infidelity is not consignable.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-ultimate-goal-of-happiness-that-a-society-should-pursue?

The U.S. Preamble proposes, in my view, 5 public disciplines in order to encourage responsible human independence to living citizens. It offers no standards or norms for either the 5 disciplines or the purpose: individual happiness with civic integrity.

Based on results since 1787, the entity We the People of the United States, as defined in the preamble seems an isolated society. With 2/3 of citizens actively ordering civic life under the preamble, individual happiness might seem achievable.

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-really-necessary-to-change-the-current-educational-paradigm?

Yes. For decades education has focused on educators rather than the nation’s children.

Education should encourage children to accept a nest of responsibilities: being human, acquiring the understanding and intent to live a complete human life, having inspiration and motivation while reserving sufficient humility toward whatever-God-is, accepting a civic agreement to develop human equity under statutory justice, and understanding that a civic citizen neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any person or institution.

Along with these principles, education systems ought to help students comprehend existing knowledge and prepare to think during exponential discovery by humankind during their adulthood.

https://www.quora.com/The-world-does-not-revolve-around-any-of-us-as-individuals-so-why-do-people-tend-to-think-they-are-more-important-than-others?

Another view is that while the world does not revolve around the individual, the individual does and the collection of individuals makes up the world. In other words, individuals hold their persons as more important to them than the world’s importance.

Tolerance is an unfortunate antonym. I often respond to a person who thinks they are tolerating me with the assertion, “My opinion is more important to me than your opinion about me.” Tolerance is perhaps the most arrogant posture I have encountered. When I am merely intolerant of the other party rather than wanting to converse, I change the topic to the weather, sports, or music.

I am an especially unwanted conversationalist, because I want to promote citizens’ interest in establishing the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. Its proposition is 5 public disciplines in order to encourage responsible human independence to living citizens. To me, the U.S. Preamble is the individual’s most promising political sentence.

https://www.quora.com/Do-you-think-we-have-the-political-class-we-deserve?

If by “we” you mean citizens of the United States, I think so and work for an achievable better future. Not enough U.S. citizens do the work to own a personal interpretation of the nation’s stated purpose and therefore many citizens live here but have no civic stake. Consequently, someone else dictates the happiness they can pursue.

The preamble to the U.S. Constitution, in my view, propose 5 public disciplines in order to encourage responsible human independence to living citizens. The proposition leaves standards for the disciplines as well as the purpose, human independence, to posterity’s posterity.

So far, political regimes have unconstitutionally imposed Chapter XI Machiavellianism to suppress the preamble’s civic, civil, and legal powers. By considering themselves too busy living to develop civic citizenship, most people leave it to whatever-God-is and government to order living. The consequence is that many people accept the happiness the church-government-partnership imposes on them when they could accept being human and responsibly pursuing the happiness they want.

I work continuously to persuade people, primarily U.S. fellow citizens, to own a most precious property: a personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-risks-in-running-the-affairs-of-your-society-If-there-is-what-will-you-do-to-resolve-it?

By “your society” do you mean my Louisiana non-profit, non-revenue foundation: A Civic People of the United States?

It is a voluntary, grass-roots effort that uses only on-line communications and public meetings at libraries. I (perhaps naively) think the idea is so good it will go viral on its own. When that happens, the officials it needs to implement the practice will step forward and volunteer.   

The idea is that the U.S. Preamble proposes 5 public disciplines by which living citizens may practice responsible human independence. In other words, it proposes self-discipline of by and for the people. There are no standards for the 5 disciplines or for human independence, so posterity’s posterity may discover or define them.

I like to think of this as an American dream but that the idea is so attractive it will manage itself through Facebook and other forums.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-core-principles-of-free-will?

The human being has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity or infidelity. It does not take many experiences and observations for a person to observe that things go better with integrity. People with the will to self-discipline develop as they choose---mastering either integrity or infidelity. Some people observe that integrity is in personal self-interest, but lack the discipline to reform from infidelity.

I think accepting being human, developing HIPEA, and choosing self-discipline are required for free-will.

https://www.quora.com/Present-knowledge-is-wholly-dependent-on-past-knowledge-Do-you-agree?

“Wholly” seems absolute, preventing spontaneous discovery:  I do not agree.

https://www.quora.com/In-50-words-or-less-what-should-the-government-perform-or-do-for-a-country?

The government should encourage responsible human independence to living citizens through 5 public disciplines: integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity. This reflects my interpretation of the preamble to the U.S. Constitution.

Tom Carey

Just curious why you qualified the answer with the word “living”?

I liked the answer.

Phil Beaver

You express astute appreciation of words. Thank you.

The object of the U.S. Preamble is “ourselves and our Posterity,” following the subject, “We the People of the United States,” or civic citizens. Fellow citizens who do not aid responsible human independence are not of We the People of the United States, but may reform at any time. Family members who are not civic may be encouraged to reform by example, by exhortation, or by law-enforcement.

Our deceased ancestors are no longer active in the U.S. Preamble’s proposition for individual independence under public discipline. Deceased aliens and dissidents cannot reform and do not collaborate with living citizens.

Families with children collaborate and connect to maintain the opportunity for responsible independence to grandchildren and descendants beyond. Thus, living families are “ourselves” to the coming generations, including our posterity.

Completing the circularity of subject and object in the U.S. Preamble’s abstract proposition, the living entity We the People of the United States appreciates and works for the opportunity to assure civic integrity to the continuum of future citizens.

In civic integrity, our descendants’ opportunities for responsible human independence cannot be sacrificed for the opinions of founding fathers, framers, signers, or any of the deceased citizens, let alone aliens such as British loyalists, living or deceased.

Tom Carey

I never read this with this much concentration and now that I have it is a little strange. It was written in the style of the time, but even taking that into consideration it is still a bit odd.

Phil Beaver responds:

My first response to your question was a densely-packed 31 words. You kindly inquired about “living.” My response is a densely-packed 137 words---340% more to explain only one of the original words.

I write patiently for patient readers as well as busy readers whose curiosities might be motivated to explore the neglected civic, civil, and legal powers of the U.S. Preamble. Your reaction is not expressive: style of what time? still? odd? What do these quips mean?

Joining the entity We the People of the United States after centuries tolerating the fruitless “we, the people” is a bit strange for U.S. citizens. Ask a specific question, and I will respond again.

Law professors

https://lawliberty.org/forum/american-socialism-and-the-sovereign-self/

In deep consideration, this essay seems appropriate for un-civic Christianity enacting liberty/license to violence so as to lessen fellow-citizens’ freedom. By un-civic Christian I mean the fellow citizen who insists that other humans must worship a particular Christian God. However, every citizen has the un-consignable sovereignty to reserve enough humility for whatever-God-is. Several times, when I have thought I was in a civic conversation, the Christian fellow citizen who heard “whatever-God-is” left after saying “I will pray for you.” Human responsibility and humility is more likely through independence rather than through liberty/license.

Quoting Melonic, “If we are defining individualism as self-centeredness, then Pinkoski’s conclusion is completely logical.” If the individual intends to non-violently develop integrity rather than tolerate infidelity to the-literal-truth, self-centeredness encourages self-interest: developing integrity is in the person’s best interest. Integrity is the practice of discovering whether a personal-concern stems from actual-reality or from a mirage; if the former, learning how to benefit, sharing the ineluctable evidence with fellow citizens, and being alert for new discovery that requires change or reform.

In this human quest, physics and its progeny---mathematics, chemistry, biology, psychology, and chance (belief without evidence)---are the objects of discovery and benefit. Opinion is subjective rather than objective and must be used sparingly if at all. When an individual does not know the-literal-truth, it is in his or her self-interest to publicly admit:  I do not know.

Returning to Melonic, “. . . this new form of Marxism . . . away from the concerns of one’s fellow man leads to the denial of community [and] changes people into barely two-dimensional characters carrying socialist slogans. Essentially, they are owned by the ideology . . .” Reminds me of the Christian sects.

Melonic again: “This kind of behavior is destructive of liberty. The objective of ideologues like those Pinkoski describes is to take away freedom of others.” I think a human culture develops freedom-from oppression so that the individual may develop his or her unique, responsible human independence during complete adulthood. No individual or institution has the license/liberty to constrain fellow citizens’ encouragement to responsible human independence. Responsible independence conforms to ineluctable evidence rather than dominant opinion.

“The Bourgeois Bolsheviks . . . self-centered autonomy . . . have sacrificed their personhood for ideology. [To] be free and sovereign . . . calls for . . . responsibility, something that does indeed go beyond the notion of individualism.” The ineluctable evidence demands civic citizenship. “[S]overeignty is [both intended] and accomplished.”

In the U.S., the commitment to civic citizenship is offered in the preamble to the U.S. Constitution. Both elected and appointed officials must demonstrate that they are first members of the entity We the People of the United States. That society practices and promotes the preamble’s proposition: civic, civil, and legal integrity.

At least 2/3 of fellow citizens must be of We the People of the United States, and 2/3 of members of domestic societies and associations must also be of We the People of the United States. Civic citizens must hold elected and appointed officials accountable to the U.S. Preamble’s proposition under the-literal-truth rather than dominant or collective opinion.

The reform to civic, civil, and legal reliability under the preamble’s proposition and the-literal-truth ought to be led by fellow citizens who are hopeful believers yet reserve enough humility to appreciate and take advantage-of whatever-God-is.

Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/groups/qayyum110

I think men don't recognize that a woman represents a potential crowd of 400 human ova she typically produces during her fertile years.

The woman naturally cares about and for her ova and seeks an authentic man to care for them for life and for their children's children and beyond.

When an authentic man beholds a woman, he sees the crowd and would not do anything to threaten its future.

Unfortunately, our cultures, mostly developed on religious dogma, do not teach these actual-realities to either youth or the chronological adults. The consequence is that many adults, especially males, who do not generate ova, remain adolescent for life.

Women know these principles and share the burdens at hair salons and elsewhere.

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.