Freedom from the media

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 equity:  For discussion, I convert the preamble’s predicate phrases to nouns and paraphrase it for my interpretation of its proposal as follows: “Civic Citizens of the United States continually develop and practice 5 domestic disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage to living citizens 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

With social forums Online, freedom to publish takes on new wrinkles for perhaps unconstitutionally constraining freedom of expression.

Social-forum owners can invite people to communicate, collect their creative thoughts, then ban them from the forum, erasing the intellectual property from the expresser's immediate access. Also, they can invite questions, distribute them to readers for comment, then ban the comment, again, keeping the expressers intellectual property.
This new development reveals the power of publishers to collect thinkers' expressions but not publish them, thereby positioning the publisher to retain the intellectual property for their use.
What's wonderful about the new media is that the writer who wants to express ideas without collecting from the public has the independence to do so, notwithstanding the media owner's proprietary trickery.

Columns

Freedom of expression constrained by the media-owner, whether the expressor likes it or not (J.R. Madden) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_0bf2b510-a41f-11ea-a962-af1c8b9d6c74.html)

J.R. may not have experienced U.S. Amendment I "freedom of the press," one of the 1789-1793 Congress’s, so far, enduring mistakes. Freedom of the press (now media and social "science") represses civic-citizen connections and thereby regresses encouragement to statutory jusice.

The expressor, including the press-hired writer writes without freedom, because the freedom of expression is reserved by the publisher. For example, The Advocate reserves the right to caption an expressor’s letter.

What's being overlooked, so far, in the online debate, is the opportunity for the owner of the forum to invite ideas from the public then use proprietary-rule revisions to delete the comments.

For example, since about 2015, I amassed well over 100 essays promoting the U.S. Preamble's proposition on the blog libertylaw. org. I continually praised the forum for its candidacy to establish civic citizens’ practice of the U.S. Preamble and its excellence in helping me develop better understanding of preamble-neglect if not repression. In 2020, suddenly my posts were greeted by "YOUR COMMENT HAVE BEEN AUTOMATICALLY APPROVED AND POSTED.”

However, my comments do not appear, and I cannot find them or most of the old ones Online. I wrote to the owners, but they did not answer.

In 2020 I discovered two evidentiary points. First, an egregious civic, civil, and legal problem is preservation of British-American precedent that opposes the public disciplines and individual-citizen purpose (I perceive) in the preamble’s abstract sentence. The citizen who does not own a personal interpretation of the U.S. Preamble seems a subjugated renter rather than owner of the responsible human independence the preamble offers.

Maybe the conservative law professors don’t like my discoveries and are not prepared to address them. Regardless, I am grateful they booked this chemical engineer as long as they did. Without the dialogue of me reading their writers’ essays and commenting and regrettably facing occasional ridicule, I could not have learned as fast as I may have learned. That is, I think I learned but reserve the right to be wrong. Thank you, libertylaw proprietors.

I experience similar problems with quora.com, which purports to be a global opportunity to share ideas. In 2020, monitors deleted some of my responses demanding documentation of what appeared to them ideas I had expressed before or erroneous reference to other thinkers’ ideas. I disagree. For example, when I write that the preamble proposes “discipline of by and for fellow citizens” it’s a stretch to think I am plagiarizing Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address: “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” My substance is discipline not government; citizens not the people; and the U.S. not the earth, and I assert that the U.S. Preamble’s proposition has not been accepted and therefore cannot perish.

Perhaps the age of censorship via copyright is being challenged by fellow-citizens-demands to consider, communicate, collaborate, and connect without imposing individual hubris toward whatever-God-is.

I think that is the point of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition and civic citizens of the U.S. have responsible human independence in their genes and memes even though local, state, and national officials under Congress strain against human justice.

It takes 3 decades to acquire the comprehension and intent to live a complete human life. The first step in appreciating civic citizenship is to accept that your person intends-to and will develop human integrity rather than tolerate infidelity toward fellow-citizens.

No recognition of civic citizens (Max Reichard) ()

The community of my primary-school-memory had a saying: Remain silent and be thought a tyrant or express arrogant opinion and remove all doubt.

I wish I could recall the teacher to thank for convincing me at Staub School to read Ralph Waldo Emersion and Thomas Paine before I was eleven years old. I could not have articulated it then, but Emerson (1838 essay) convinced me I could perfect my unique person if I acquired the intention to both discover and practice integrity. I could not have articulated it then, but Thomas Paine (1775 letter) taught me that enslaving human beings invited woe to the owner.

As one consequence, the only black man on my newspaper delivery route, on hearing that I was moving on to a more responsible, better paying avocation (my vocation was student), said, “I hate to see that. You’ve been the best on the block.” I could not have thought it then, but perhaps he was praising my dedicated service. He was old enough in 1954 for direct-sales-block-stories from living ancestors.

Earlier, on a second delivery-route I had acquired, a father of three didn’t pay his bill. When I knocked on the door he said, “I’ll have a job in three weeks, but in the meantime I must feed my children. Please wait 2 more weeks for payment. I must read the paper to search for that job.”

I granted his request but discussed it with my dad. Dad said, “I’m proud of you, and don’t let it build past his promise.”

Neither Ralph Waldo Emerson nor Thomas Paine nor Dad failed to accept their human individual power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity rather than tolerate infidelity, for example, toward fellow humans.

To effectively accept HIPEA, a person must first accept being a human being, then accept that he or she can perfect his or her unique path to integrity. Erroneous habits may accumulate infidelities that invite if not beg woe.

Civic citizens may comprehend that the U.S. Civil war seems fought by white Christians whose personal God had a schedule to punish black people’s hereditary sins versus white Christians whose personal God assigned blacks human equity under statutory justice.

To consider my warring-Christian-perception, review the declaration of secession’s phrase “more erroneous religious belief,” the 1856 anti-abolitionist-sacking of Lawrence, Kansas, and a general’s letter to his wife lamenting abolitionist-evil rather than proposing to save her by selling everything and move to a non-slave state. See online at avalon.law.yale. edu/19th_century/csa_scarsec.asp, en.wikipedia. org/wiki/Sacking_of_Lawrence, and encyclopediavirginia. org/Letter_from_Robert_E_Lee_to_Mary_Randolph_Custis_Lee_December_27_1856, respectively. The Civil War seems white people’s unheralded gift to the world:  To believe your personal/doctrinal God usurps whatever-God-is invites woe. People employ “faith” to attempt to impose a personal God on fellow citizens, too many of whom use HIPEA for integrity, even though they do not articulate it. I question the perhaps “more erroneous religious belief” of African-American Christianity: does it represent responsible human independence? If so, there’s nothing to fear from African-American Christians.

Individuals in each generation face the unfolding of reality as discovery increases. Evidence suggests the U.S. Civil War was a Christian travesty. The offending states had the unfavorable strength ratio 7:27. It is the clearest evidence that the U.S. First Amendment should be reformed to address integrity rather than religion; humanity rather than race.

It’s not too late for Max Reichard to avoid absolutes such as: all white people are guilty. He overlooks Louisiana’s preponderance of civic citizens.

No appreciation for civic citizens (EBRP Mayor-President Broome) (https://www.theadvocate.com/baton_rouge/opinion/letters/article_39440428-aa5b-11ea-9021-17fe55ae3ca1.html)

It seems to me Mayor-President Broome’s letter is political propaganda of for and by the Broome administration.

I always hope for the best and was reasonably accepting of the performance review---might have found it difficult to vote against her second term---until the last paragraph:  “Baton Rouge  . . . will not be intimidated by . . . overt expressions of racism. We will choose faith over fear for it is the only path . . .” If Broome words do not express racism, I can’t recognize the-objective-truth!

It was throw-back-Thursday: recalling Broome’s 2016 campaign on church and dialogues for racism.

Everybody feels if not knows that whatever-God-is consigned to the human individual responsible human independence. Unfortunately, too many fellow citizens oppose equity under statutory justice, hoping their personal God will protect their children and beyond. In a civic culture, most citizens develop integrity to the-objective-truth rather than infidelity to statutory justice. Baton Rouge citizens seem to accept and connect-for civic integrity, conflicted as the rest of the country may be.

I’d like to focus on the civic citizens of Baton Rouge. They were the individuals who kept outside groups from trashing our integrity after Alton Sterling was killed. National groups converged on Baton Rouge to foment damage and injury that is typical of such incidents, but the civic citizens would not allow it. Mayor Kip Holden and his law-enforcement led by assigned Chief Carl Dabadie as well as elected DA Hillar Moore created an example for the rest of U.S. civic citizens. The world’s attention was on Baton Rouge, and fellow citizens met the challenge.

The Advocate could have won its first Pulitzer Prize on the-objective-truth regarding 2016s civic unrest. Why hasn’t The Advocate extolled the photo of Philadelphian Ieshia Evans under non-violent arrest by Baton Rouge police; see https://www.huffpost.com/entry/two-years-after-going-viral-ieshia-evans-reflects-on-her-iconic-protest-photo_n_5b3bbefde4b09e4a8b28129f.

Instead, The Advocate’s hubris helped effect the misguided termination of an 1880 Louisiana treasure:  impartial criminal trials through majority jury verdicts; in 1880, the still-statistically-informed 9:3 verdicts. Louisiana citizens are beginning to accrue the bills for the tyranny the Louisiana State Bar Association, The Advocate, and the Louisiana Legislature imposed on Louisiana civic citizens. Judges and lawyers will take the money. Ironically, the US Supreme Court codified the U.S. Amendment XIV.1 unanimous-verdict-tyranny on a 6:3 majority vote! Nine self-ruled justices can have majority opinion, but a French-influenced posterity of disciplined civic citizens cannot! And the direct injustice of re-trials of past majority verdicts falls 380% disproportionally on black fellow citizens: nationally, 12% of the population commits 50% of violent crimes, 90% against their faction. Shame on the U.S. for such tyranny over civic citizens---recalling Broome’s honest, familiar sentiment, especially black [civic] citizens. Honesty is insufficient: civic citizens require integrity.

In my sixth decade as a Baton Rouge citizen, I have never, to my knowledge, met an aware dissident to justice. I know criminals and tyrants are out there and think I can tell when I see them. The civic citizens of Baton Rouge have life-time development of justice running in their veins, and neither faith nor fear can win their support for vigilantism in the name of church or race.

Shame on Broome for recognizing Baton Rouge as a target for racial fear and church faith rather than as majority civic citizens. Baton Rouge is better and deserves better.

Quora

https://www.quora.com/Should-absolutely-everything-be-done-to-give-everyone-equal-access-to-the-best-education-opportunities-there-are?

No.

Here are a few reasons. First, no one knows the best education; in fact, I think, encouraging and coaching a child to accept being a human being is a basic, ignored, education department function. Second, not every person is convinced that education is in his or her best interest when he or she is the education department’s object. More importantly, the educators have no clue as to the world the student will face and therefore cannot impart the knowledge the student needs.

On the other hand, education departments need total reform so as to impart to the student as chronologically early as possible for each, unique person, the trust that accepting that the human has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity rather than tolerate infidelity is in his or her self-interest.

The needed reform is in the education opportunities more than in the availability.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-success-of-the-universal-declaration-of-human-rights/answer/

So far, no government has met my right to know calculus.

https://www.quora.com/Dandemis-said-Do-not-condemn-the-judgement-of-another-because-it-differs-from-your-own-You-may-both-be-wrong-What-are-your-thoughts-on-this-quote-and-how-could-it-be-applied-today?

Mr. Lindsay, thank you for making me aware of Dandemis (4^th century BC). Alexander the Great was one of my favorite biographies from 5^th grade, when I was usually last to be chosen for sandlot sports teams.

Please find my discussion of iterative collaboration at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com, “A civic culture,” posted 11/1/2016 and updated. Read under the heading “Iterative collaboration . . . ”

My story:  Perhaps 2 decades ago another chemical engineer, Woody Wilson, now retired, asked me what I was doing in retirement. I replied, reading, writing, and conversing about “we, the people.” He immediately responded with the literal correction “It’s We the People of the United States.” Seven years ago, I started leading public-library meetings and now appreciate opinions from over seventy people. Only this year I discovered that the preamble’s tacit subject, by virtue of the provisional “in order to” is Civic People of the United States, or better.

Thus, by offering to discuss a heartfelt concern and grounded solution, then demonstrating an open mind, a fellow citizen can reach, in this case, an interpretation the (1787) authors of the abstract U.S. Preamble made possible.

I think the U.S. Preamble’s essence is: civic citizens maintain 5 public disciplines “in order to” encourage responsible human independence to living citizens. The preamble offers no standards of performance, implying that posterity’s posterity may discover the ultimate, human statutory-justice.

It is an interpretation I would like to discuss with each my nearest and my furthest government representatives, but I cannot open their minds---neither to give them gold nor to save my independence.

https://www.quora.com/Are-we-at-the-beginning-of-a-full-blown-revolution?

I don’t think so but don’t know.

Perhaps the U.S. is reforming to the September 12,1787 U.S. Preamble, signed on September 17, 1787 and ratified without objection on December 15, 1791.

I write constantly to promote adoption of the U.S. Preamble’s repressed proposition. For example, this morning I wrote the paragraph below, revised.

When I write that the preamble proposes “discipline of by and for fellow citizens” traditionalists may claim I plagiarize Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address: “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” My substance is discipline not government; citizens not the people; the U.S. not the earth; and enact not perish.

Writing this to you makes me realize I don’t have to invite the Lincoln issue, and I now replace “of by and for” with “to,” bringing my writing back to the U.S. Preamble. Thank you, Geritt Bernard, for your question.

The preamble’s “liberty” reminds me of revolutionary license to kill, as in England’s 1788 Glorious Revolution, America’s 1774 Revolution for Independence, and France’s 1789 Bloody Revolution. In contrast, the 12 states’ Constitutional Convention of 1787 proposed civic, civil, and legal discipline in order to encourage responsible human independence to living citizens.

The ratification conventions in the 12 represented states led to an agreement that the first Congress would amend the U.S. Constitution. The required 9 states ratified the 1787 Constitution under the agreement to amend. Fortunately, the U.S. Preamble survived Congress. Only the partially egregious Bill of Rights restored some British-American traditions, such as unanimous jury verdicts in criminal trials, freedom of the press, and freedom of religion. (Subjects for other essays, but I’ll highlight, below.)

I contend that protecting religion from civic, civil, and legal integrity is unconstitutional under the preamble’s disciplines and purpose. Further, absolute freedom of the press, while specified by Congress perhaps as an adolescent reaction to British dominance is not consistent with the framers and signers of the 1787 Constitution, who limited the powers of Congress, the President, and the courts. Statistics show that the U.S. Supreme Court must allow 5:4 verdicts, and that fellow citizens cannot expect impartiality without 7:5 verdicts when the panel numbers 12.

What’s happening in the U.S. as I write is that European and other alien influences, who have no concept of America’s unheralded dream, responsible human independence, are trying to force America into their misery and losses under social-democracy. Unfortunately for them, the President understands
America’s republic under the rule of law and is resolved to Make America Great Again, whatever it takes. With the excellence of the team he continually strengthens, I trust he will perceive the power of the U.S. Preamble when it’s interpreted for U.S. civic citizens influencing fellow citizens to responsible human independence rather than Lockean “the people” subjecting themselves to the Chapter XI Machiavellian church-state partnership.

I think most Americans have responsible human independence running in their blood, genes, and memes. Personally interpreting the U.S. Preamble can help them articulate and practice it.

I think civic, civil, and legal reform is underway and the idea of revolution is an alien bemusement fortunately being addressed by this President. Make America Great Again refers to 1787’s U.S. Preamble.

https://www.quora.com/What-do-you-think-of-the-no-justice-no-peace-slogan?

I think the slogan threatens the individual who is influenced by it.

Lots of thoughts, for example, reciprocity, have been expressed to obfuscate acceptances a human being can discover and practice in self-interest. Cultures ought to inculcate them.

The human person can help humankind develop equity under statutory justice. Also, the human person can behave so as to neither initiate nor tolerate harm to or from any person or association of persons. These two principles reflect integrity to being human within humankind rather than tolerating infidelity. Action on egocentric doctrine denies association with humankind. Entire societies may disassociate humankind, and the individual member ought to act with responsible human independence, perhaps by leaving the society.

The slogan “no justice no peace” offers no opportunity to consider humankind’s view of either justice or peace. It represents human tyranny and the perpetrator knows it, unless he or she is obsessed with his or her personal God. In that case, there is privation of sufficient humility toward whatever-God-is.

Either way, the perpetrator of the slogan invites of not begs woe, not from my opinion, but from the-literal-truth, which I do not know.

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-perfectly-okay-to-have-an-unbiased-opinion?

I don’t think so, but don’t know.

What’s important to me is to develop integrity like I had before I became aware that my community is confused and conflicted. Then, my refrain was “What’s that?” which I now consider close to “I don’t know.”

Goodness! My wonderful mom and dad had different Southern Baptist Christianities, I think, because Dad was the oldest of three children left without wealth or income when his dad died of cancer; Dad was 12 years old, and Mom was of a relatively prosperous-poor farm family.

Dad felt obligated to take care of his mom, and Mom resented Grandmother Farley’s Scots-Irish ways in Mom’s kitchen and elsewhere.

If asked, who had the erroneous Christianity, I say, “I don’t know.”

If asked, is it important to be a Christian, I say, “I don’t know but don’t think so.”

If asked if God is white, I say, “I don’t know but prefer red.”

If asked if Donald Trump is a bad guy, I say, “I don’t think so but don’t know and will vote for him my third time if I can.” When it comes to voting, I always vote my opinion, which is more important to me than another’s opinion is important to me.

https://www.quora.com/As-you-restart-society-with-five-carefully-selected-people-which-3-laws-would-be-first-on-the-book?

First, amend Amendment I to replace the religion clauses with “Congress shall enact no laws that constrain the citizen’s opportunity to develop integrity.” I think the freedom of expression clauses would need amendment to appreciation for integrity. Rules involving “so help me God,” in “God we trust” and so on might be changed to “whatever-God-is” so as to establish humility to replace hubris.

Second, amend qualifications to run for office so that anyone who has demonstrated opposition to the U.S. Preamble’s civic, civil, and legal proposition is not likely to win office.

Third, legislate licensing to vote based on a declaration-of trust-in and commitment-to the U.S. Preamble’s civic, civil, and legal proposition, in addition to existing requirements.

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-the-role-of-the-government-to-ensure-that-all-have-a-decent-house-to-live-in?

No.

Movements took us so far from the unique, U.S. opportunity that it is difficult to explain the achievable reform we can take at this moment into an accelerated better-future. I’ll describe the path-to success I perceive. It’s a commitment to several acceptances. The goal, a civic culture, seems impossible, but the means seem easily understandable and adoptable.

Accept the opportunity to be a human and a U.S. citizen.

Accept that the U.S. Preamble’s dependent predicates have the object “ourselves and our Posterity.” Living families are the “ourselves” to their descendants, and therefore, civic citizens earn and pay for their lifestyles as they develop them rather than borrow $30 trillion from the grandchildren and beyond. With this acceptance, study the U.S. Preamble so as to earn an independent interpretation of its abstract ideas so as to order civic, civil, and legal living, at least so as not to abuse the family’s grandchildren and beyond.

Accept that other citizens, few as they may be are also considering the preamble, this country’s proposal for a civic culture, abstract as the authors made it. By sharing your interpretation you can collaborate to improve it for your self-interest and theirs. Whether the collaboration changes your views or not, the discussion will help establish civic connection with a fellow-citizen. With a super-majority of civic citizens developing their personal interpretations, there will be developing incentives for elected and appointed officials to join the civic citizens of the U.S.

The September 1787 Committee of Style received a lame draft-preamble with one erroneous thought: Citizens of the 13 British-American states (naming them) enact a constitution to govern ourselves and our posterity. Whatever their motives, the committee wrote a proposition: we civic citizens develop 5 public disciplines to encourage responsible human independence to living citizens. They wrote it so abstractly as to leave it to each citizen to interpret it so as to order their civic, civil, and legal conduct. I view this opportunity---to develop individual happiness with civic integrity---as the U.S. exceptionality.

Unfortunately, 1/3 of the framers disagreed. Some of them worked after 1787 to restore British-American traditions, including the Chapter XI Machiavellian church-state-government that was created by Magna-Carta in 1215. The clergy-lords partnership would rule instead of the king, leaving the people as subjects. When the U.S. started operations with 11 of the 12 states who sent delegates to the 1787 convention, Congress hired chaplains so as to appear traditionally on par with Parliament’s constitutional “divinity.” Congress, the other two federal branches and the press have maintained this anti-preamble and therefore unconstitutional tyranny over the concerns of citizens ever since. Now, I am prepared for the next acceptance.

Accept that neither a man nor a society can specify the character and demands of whatever-God-is, and that no one should yield individual humility in order to consign his or her human authority to a doctrinal God. Even the papal hubris seems prudent to reserve sufficient humility toward whatever-God-is. That whatever-God-is consigned to humankind the responsibility to discover and enact civic integrity seems made plain to every citizen who will accept it. The individual who declines the integrity for human justice invites woe.

Thus, accept that the human being has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity to the-objective-truth (ineluctable evidence; I don’t know when that is so) or to tolerate infidelity.

Having explained these principles, I now share my interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition as of today:  Civic Citizens of the United States develop and practice 5 public disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage and take-advantage-of responsible human independence to living inhabitants.

I am anxious to learn your interpretation of the U.S. Preamble so as to have the opportunity to improve my way of living while I can.

Accepting these principles means 1) taking action right away and 2) sharing the message so that U.S. collaboration and connection for a civic culture goes viral almost overnight. Keep the momentum going until citizens hear candidates for elected office presenting their accomplishments that advance the U.S. Preamble’s proposition to fellow inhabitants.

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-USA-so-anti-socialism/answer/Phil-Beaver-1 (again)

Note: I do not want to revise this original essay but inform readers that recently I discovered that “liberty-to” is often taken as license-to and is therefore not preferred word choice. I now advocate responsible human independence.

Liberty was a principle objective in three 17th-18th century revolutions: 1688 in England, 1744 in British-colonial America, and 1789 in France. The 1787 U.S. Constitution specified a system with 5 disciplines of by and for citizens in order to encourage responsible human independence to fellow inhabitants. Phil Beaver, 6/12/2020.

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-we-need-to-study-the-past-and-the-present-relationship-of-people-in-the-society?

First, Shara Palmes, congratulations for such a profound statement of a common question: Yours is worded perfectly to prompt my creative thinking, late in my eighth decade. To put it another way, no one else will respond as I now anticipate, and http://quora.com has no justifiable cause to intervene in communication from you to me and back.

The process illustrates the civic brilliance of the http://quora.com process, intended or not: invite creative questions, freely share with potentially interested readers who expect to read the consequential response, and encourage responsible human independence. The process is at a crossroad of reform from civil and legal censorship in the name of protecting intellectual property. In this case, the lawyers are overlooking due process by challenging the originality and sincerity of responses to your question without challenging the question. In other words, the http://quora.com monitors may take advantage of your creativity with an old topic yet prevent my response on the mere belief that it is either insincere or un-original. In my view, http://quora.com is the unintended victim of its lawyers. For example, it is ludicrous to claim that my phrase “discipline of by and for citizens” should reference Abraham Lincoln, who was constrained by British obsession with the contradiction: “self-governance” and “the people” versus government; and subsequent British-American tradition. Plagiarism law-processes need to be revised so as to require proof of plagiarism before action can be taken by the media. The revision needs to protect your creative questioning from arbitrary intervention in my creative response, which draws from my numerous past posts here and elsewhere. Search on Google Chrome “Phil Beaver”+”civic people” to see what I mean. I cannot account for my posts, which I publish expecting the reader to do Internet research according to individual interest to discover my psychological path as much as possible.

If there’s my opportunity to respond without arbitrary censoring by http://quora.com, let me begin to answer you. As I write, please keep in mind that I am not writing about all of humankind, but about a few societies within humankind. Also, I am not writing about a specific gender, race, religion, or other bias excepting one: most citizens want mutual, comprehensive safety and security so that they can develop human integrity as they perceive it, even though they may not be able to articulate that desire. I refer to such people as “civic citizens.”

First, today’s children face an adulthood that no living adult can imagine. It’s obvious to the living generation that past generations did not adequately imagine today’s chaos, but the adults in the family are too busy trying to survive. On the other hand, the children are being reared more or less as human beings.

The children who accept being human may discover the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to either 1) develop integrity to the-literal-truth unknown as it may be or 2) tolerate even nourish infidelity. No culture inculcates these three acceptances including accepting integrity, so the child’s chances to discover responsible human independence are small.

The person who discovers and accepts these three principles has a chance of taking charge of the transition from infant to young adult with the comprehension and intention to live a complete human life. By “complete” I mean with longevity according to the person’s genes and body and psychological potential. The person who developed integrity of mind and body has lived a complete human life. I remind you, I write my opinion, not the-objective-truth, the humanly ineluctable evidence for approaching the-literal-truth.

To focus on your question, the coming generation studies the past in order to benefit from the present generation yet avoid repeating their mistakes, especially the ones that were embedded by tradition. For example, the hubris of the British-American view of “freedom of religion” holds the U.S. hostage from developing human integrity. Our generation, about the 12th since 1791’s Congressional ratification of the First Amendment’s tyranny over citizens’ psychology, has the opportunity to reform so as to support the human duty to develop integrity rather than institutional religions’ business interests and its Chapter XI Machiavellian partnership with governments. See Machiavelli: The Prince: Chapter XI.

https://www.quora.com/There-are-many-in-jail-who-dont-deserve-to-be-there-Thats-on-politicians-Putting-law-breakers-behind-bars-seem-necessary-Dont-understand-de-funding-police-How-when-did-this-idea-start-Over-reach?

I don’t know.

I think it is a product of Alinsky-Marxist organizations (AMO) that emerged from the 1968 pivotal events. See Alinsky answer at the very end that he condones violence when his rights are at stake; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsfxnaFaHWI. Both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are students. A modern leader is OFA, Organizing for Action; see A Biography of Jon Carson, Executive Director of Organizing for Action.

Obama influences AMO in Europe: see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WU7Byp59Elo.

Europe is in misery and would like to share with the U.S. However, Europeans can’t possibly understand the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, because many Americans can’t get past “we, the people.” Yet responsible human independence or civic discipline resides in many American genes and memes and is resilient. I hope President Trump will turn to it in time to reform the Anglo-American political regime that has dominated, repressing the American political dream, since the first adolescent Congress was seated in 1789. Congress has regressed since then.

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-we-have-rights-to-live?

Humans are constrained by physics and its progeny such as chemistry, biology, and psychology. Death can come anytime with many causes. “The right to life” is a political construct no one can deliver.

A decade or so ago, I ran across an educator who seemed to be asserting that minority children have a right to mathematics. Such nonsense explains why some children don’t discipline themselves to learn mathematics.

One human right that I think is justifiable and repressed is opportunity and encouragement to develop integrity.

https://www.quora.com/How-important-is-it-to-display-strength-yourself-in-order-to-strengthen-others?

It’s essential. One of the triumphs of my life illustrates the point.

As an expatriate chemical engineer I was charged with maintaining the fidelity of our plant. The local bosses had insiders’ agreement to lie to the local government. I argued that I could not let that happen and that we could report our remediation projects that would bring us in to standards. After seeing my persistence, they removed an engineer from my group and told him to report to a superintendent. They omitted me from meetings about the subject.

During six weeks, they persuaded the engineer that they would report the truth. However, on the day they were to sign the papers, the engineer read the lie restored to the report. He claimed he needed to go to the toilet, but instead came and asked me to help him. I did, and we stopped the lie, finished our project, and came into compliance.

For me, the best part of that story is the engineer taking risk to avoid cooperating with a lie, I like to think, influenced by my earlier trust in him.

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/How-are-tradition-and-values-similar-or-different?

I don’t use “value” much in political context, so I referred to M-W online and chose “a fair return or equivalent in goods, services, or money for something exchanged.”

A person who accepts being a human being may discover his or her individual power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) and use it to either develop integrity or tolerate infidelity to the-literal-truth, most of which is unknown.

The person who pretends to know places himself or herself in jeopardy of ever discovering integrity much less developing it. For example the scholar who continues to extol the 17th-18th century fixation on liberty as the license to draw fellow-citizens’ blood, may never discover the potential integrity of responsible human independence. The liberty-to self-govern pales before the independence-to self-discipline.

The U.S. held hostage to the brand of liberty that was extolled for each the 1688 English revolution, the 1774 American revolution against England, and the 1789 French revolution. The American revolution was won by the military strategy and overwhelming presence supplied of Frenchmen in 1781.

In 1788, 9 of 12 represented states ratified the U.S. Constitution and its preamble. The preamble proposes 5 public disciplines in order to encourage responsible human independence to living citizens. Living citizens are continuously “ourselves” to future citizens. Furthermore, since there are no standards, only posterity’s posterity can move the leading edge of discovered integrity, re-writing the ethics books. Civic citizens are independently mutually-responsible, conform to physics and its progeny, and seek no moral liberties.

Tradition places no value on the integrity posterity’s posterity may approach.

I think my above ideas are worthy of copywriters protection. If I wanted to do more than share them, I’d have to start with how your question, Bixin Shui, inspired creative thought.

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-most-important-aspect-of-responsibility?

It seems aspect means “a particular status . . . in which something . . . may be regarded,” quoting Merriam-Webster online.

Responsibility refers to practicing human independence in appreciating the-literal-truth.

The newborn human-being seems totally uninformed and absolutely dependent---feral. After a year, he or she will be asking many questions, like “What’s that?” It’s equivalent to expressing “I don’t know.”

A he or she psychologically matures, a nest of acceptances may be taken. First, he or she may accept that 1) he or she is a human being and 2) it takes about a quarter century for the human to complete construction of the wisdom parts of the brain. With a few more years of experiences and observations, he or she may begin to develop integrity, provided he or she had accepted responsibility.

Early acceptances are not likely, because no culture I know of inculcates the self-interest of the discipline to routinely choose integrity rather than tolerate infidelity to the-literal-truth. Civil influences encourage adoption of human reason that is constructed to avoid admitting “I don’t know.” Fortunate is the human who accepts the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity rather than accept or pretend to accept infidelity to the-literal-truth.

For example, most people perceive that whatever-God-is controls actual reality, but some have not the humility to reserve sufficient appreciation for whatever-God-is. To the question: which doctrinal God represents whatever-God-is? some adults cannot say “I don’t know.”

I think the above acceptance principles adequately answer your question. Forced to reduce to one, I might choose accepting HIPEA to develop integrity.

What do you think of my opinions?

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/How-could-productive-discussion-between-opposing-political-sides-be-encouraged?

The society of Civic People of the United States, as defined by the preamble to the U.S. Constitution, may hold elected and appointed officials to be of their society instead of among the dissidents. However, at least 2/3 of fellow citizens must choose civic citizenship to make the elections accountable.

Choosing civic citizenship vs dissidence starts with each citizen owning his or her interpretation of the preamble. My interpretation is: Civic People of the United States connect with five disciplines---integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity---in order to encourage responsible human independence to living citizens. Recent discoveries for my interpretation are in the 6/6/2020 post at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com.

Evidently, “our Posterity” implies the nation’s viable ova are due equity and dignity. However, with 4 million births/year and $30 trillion debt, our generation, for adult satisfactions, is saddling each newborn with an increasing $7.5 million debt.

What’s your interpretation of the U.S. Preamble’s proposition? Yours is important to me.

https://www.quora.com/Does-every-human-being-have-the-potential-to-create-happiness-Why?

No. The bloated baby sitting on a desert floor with a fly drinking her tears has no chance, I think.

However, the human who studies Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and takes responsibility to supply them in self-interest and civic service will be happy, I think.

https://www.quora.com/Is-it-worth-it-to-compromise-integrity-to-get-what-you-want?

Oh, no, no, no. The horror!

You are on a path toward perfecting your person, and integrity in each choice is essential. Integrity is not to fear and can be exercised by relying on your human, individual power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA). Thoughts of infidelity make themselves evident and are to be destroyed on presentation! Your commitment to integrity can be shared with honest friends by example more than by exhortation.

In the first place, it takes a lot of work to understand and practice integrity. It’s a practice! When a heartfelt concern arises, you do the work to discover that it is not a mirage, filing the mirages as such. With a valid concern, you do the work to discover the-objective-truth using the ineluctable evidence. Then, you do the work to understand how to benefit from the discovery. If a fellow citizen asks why you behave that way, you explain it with attention to possible improvement they may suggest; your remain alert to new perception that demands change.

Every mistake I ever made cost me dearly, and I am in tears at this moment, because my person was telling my ego not to act. Some loses were devastating, and it is no comfort that at age 77 I can still develop integrity and do. I am happily alive with my family but I ruined my life a long time ago and nothing can change it.

https://www.quora.com/Why-do-we-fail-to-do-what-is-right-when-we-know-what-is-right-and-desire-what-is-right?

I’m working to change education systems so as to appreciate that the present generation cannot predict the world the next generation will face and therefore parents and other caretakers should transfer excellent basic tools for the children to use and the knowledge that goes with it.

More importantly, the system should coach and encourage children in key acceptances, such as: being a human being, which entails about 3 decades of study to accept the comprehension and intention to live a complete human life; accepting humility toward both whatever-God-is and each civic citizens’ personal God/none; accepting the human-individual power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to develop integrity rather than tolerate infidelity to the-literal-truth; accepting “I don’t know” when that is so.

I think with cultures that so coach and encourage children, more adults would possess the self-discipline to avoid infidelity. For the foreseeable future, there should be adult education in these principles and better.

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Do-you-think-minorities-deserve-more-equality-rather-than-equity?

I don’t know why, but your question sparked a creativity I could not reach before.

First, my opinion is No: there should be no attempt at equality, even before the law, where only equity can facilitate statutory justice.

How do you and I define “minority.” Merriam-Webster online has two pertinent uses: 1) “the smaller in number of two groups constituting a whole” and 2) “a part of a population differing from others in some characteristics and often subjected to differential treatment.”

U.S. citizens have the opportunity to consider the preamble to the U.S. Constitution and interpret it to guide civic, civil, and legal behavior or not. The preamble seems totalitarian in the subject: We the People of the United States. However, the subordinate predicates add a conditionality that each citizen may address or not. Regardless, the citizen’s behavior casts him or her as either a Civic Citizen of the United States or a dissident, perhaps by default. Recall that default does not exonerate the speeding driver.

Justice is possible when the civic citizen and the dissident receive equitable service from statutory-law enforcement. Either party can be in a numerical majority or in an ethnic majority and justice is blind to everything but civic behavior vs. dissident behavior in the case being adjudicated.

https://www.quora.com/Should-a-tolerant-society-put-up-with-the-intolerance-of-the-tolerant?

Is the intolerance internal or external? Either way, the intolerant person could not care less.

In civic conversation, I try to discover the-literal-truth. People who own the-objective-truth (tentative because invention could change perspectives) freely discuss it.

The moment I discover that the other party is tolerating my opinion or person, I change the subject to the weather, LSU sports, Nancy Pelosi, Adam Schiff, or other trivial pursuits. In summary, I am intolerant of tolerance and stonewall monologue by tolerant persons and societies.

I acquired this trust and commitment when I was an invited participant in a “Freethinkers’” monthly meeting. I discovered that self-styled freethinkers are the most closed-minded peoples I have met. Some are less tolerable than a religious fundamentalist. The evening I spoke on “Faith in [the-literal-truth]” my Louisiana-French Catholic wife and one of our non-doctrinal-theist daughters served punch and homemade cookies. The group insulted their religions with them in the room. Asked if she is humble, our daughter answered, “I think I am humble,” leaving judgement beyond her.

To your question:  A tolerant society’s tolerance/intolerance is of no interest to the individual who rejects social ego.

https://www.quora.com/Does-being-absolutely-free-means-an-absolute-injustice?

Human beings, while the most aware and able of known living species, share subjugation to physics and its progeny---including mathematics, chemistry, biology, psychology, and imagination. For example, the human who imagines he or she is a victim of history may either forge a history of subjugation or imagine success and make it happen.

Success is effected with a nest of acceptances: being a human being; taking charge of some 3 decades transition from totally uninformed infant to young adult with comprehension and intention to live a complete human life; human individuals have the power, the energy, and the authority (HIPEA) to develop either integrity or infidelity to justice; integrity is in the individual’s self-interest; through self-discipline the individual can practice responsible human independence.

In “the complete human life,” the individual matures to physics’ constraints with no external or internal imaginary limitations. He or she understands taxation as a personal necessity and feels no coercion or force. He or she appreciates the work of first-responders and cooperates without hesitation. He or she neither initiates nor tolerates harm to or from any person or association of civic citizens. For example, I have written for 2 decades to encourage Civic Citizens of the United States to amend the First Amendment so as to encourage civic integrity rather than civil religious institutions.

Freedom is practicing civic justice.

Law professors

https://lawliberty.org/book-review/misreading-the-prince/

To Michael Bond (comment at lawliberty org)

I think “a posteriori knowledge” remains alive in scholarly discussion only because it is so vague as to mean whatever the scholar wants to claim. So vague as to encourage blatant philosophical omissions like “There are two opposing conceptions of philosophy . . . the autonomy of reason, the other . . . revelation . . .  accepted in humility and obedience.”

What the human individual needs is integrity: The child, adolescent and adult person can maintain the infantile, feral posture “I don’t know,” until the-literal-truth has been discovered by comprehending ineluctable evidence, experience, or observation. Often, the evidence is incompletely perceived, but humankind invents new instruments that improve comprehension. Thereby, the-literal-truth may be approached if not attained.

While the-literal-truth requires reliable instruments of perception, it never yields to either reason or revelation (a religious appropriation of “imagination” or worse).

Perhaps Machiavelli by “the effectual truth” claimed to write about the-objective-truth if not the-literal-truth rather than reason---leaving revelation as unworthy, in his opinion. If so, I agree with him: if not, my creativity stands on its own, and I feel no reason to refer to Machiavelli at all.

The above comments disappeared as usual from the blog, even after:

YOUR COMMENT HAVE BEEN AUTOMATICALLY APPROVED AND POSTED.

 I wrote to the owners, but they did not answer.

I posted at https://www.facebook.com/lawandliberty1.

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.