Accommodating Anglo-American arrogance

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 appreciation:  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 proffer & practice 5 public disciplines —- integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, “in order to” encourage & facilitate responsible-human-independence “to ourselves and our Posterity”. 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

Accommodating Anglo-American arrogance

The 1787 U.S. Constitution’s framers proffered 5 public disciplines: integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity, reserving religious pursuits or none to personal-privacy. They did not provide disciplinary standards, depending upon the continuum “ourselves and our Posterity” including legal immigrants to discover statutory justice. The 1782 motto “E Pluribus Unum” applied to the-God.

The founders, in the 1776 declaration of war for independence from England claimed human-authority from Nature’s God, abandoning the language of English charters, such as the Mayflower Compact: “Having undertaken for the Glory of God, and Advancement of the Christian Faith . . .” And they appealed “to the Supreme Judge of the world” to affirm their intentions. In 1778, France granted the needed military providence. Without disparaging the English Trinity, the founders separated church and state.

Those two documents affirm the secular implications of Genesis 1, an ancient pre-Eve&Adam and pre-Sarah&Abraham political philosophy: ability demands humankind to independently provide order&prosperity to life on earth.

The politicians elected to the First Congress arrogantly imposed civil religion mimicking the constitutional partnership between Parliament and the Church of England, with its 26 seats. The sovereign entity We the People of the United States has accommodated this tyranny ever since. We, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” must&can amend the First Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate civic humble-integrity rather than accommodate Anglo-American religious-pride.

Quora

https://ethicsandmorals.quora.com/?__ni__=0&__nsrc__=4&__snid3__=26596804137&__tiids__=38464565

What are the arguments against the non aggression principle? by Julianna Anand

Population growth seems un-constrainable, but land-availability&economic-viability are limited.

https://www.quora.com/Is-a-non-cohesive-society-a-result-of-the-individual-or-the-social-sstem? by Not Shuana

Of course, I do not know.

My opinion is that humankind neither overcomes nor improves language of the past. The care-taker cannot imagine the future the young faces and therefore does not know enough to a) try to express basic thoughts in the language that will appeal to the young and 2) is not humble enough to think about misleading language care-takers take for granted.

For example, a typical modern descendent from one of the tribes of Abraham might think of “God” as a doctrine: Yahweh (not to be spoken), Allah, or The Trinity (Jesus is God). In conversation, they might all three represent “God”, assuming that the other 2 understand the doctrine it’s jabber. To reserve humility for whatever controls the consequences of a human-being’s individual choices, I use the term “the-God” and express the intention to include fellow-citizens who might assert that “the-God” is: the source of the-good, or physics and its progeny, or the ultimate achievement of our posterity, or chaos or other entity.

Scholars who preach Anglo-American tradition use terms like consent of the governed, liberty, freedom, natural law, and God, all reflecting seventeenth-century political philosophy to establish nobility’s power to control the people.

The human being cannot accept such tyranny, because each individual has the power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to judge tradition and reject it when it does not seem reliable under their intentions to perfect their person. HIPEA is viable to the person who accepts being a human-being, whereas freedom is granted by the winner of war and liberty is licensed by its magistrate.

I work to develop a glossary of words and phrases that appeal to most consider people’s experiences and observations and invite them to suggest improvements. I spent most of today updating the glossary, published October 30, 2014, at promotethepreamble.blogspot.com. There, search using “glossary” and you’ll find it. Also, I express appreciations to fellow-citizens who helped so far, posted on July 25, 2020.

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/Who-would-be-the-happiest-with-the-modern-democracy-out-of-Hobbes-Locke-Rousseau-and-Montesquieu-Please-leave-an-answer-thank-you? by IDK

I do not know.

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-is-more-important-t-you-authority-or-responsibility-Elaborate-and-explain? by Samantha Agustin

I think considerate human-beings, civic-citizens such as your question suggests, act on necessity&justice, the n&j syntax to indicate mutual requirement for personal satisfaction. Likewise, authority&responsibility are mutually required.

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-there-a-price-for-freedom? by Steven Chen

Freedom is a civil construct intended to distract civic-citizens from responsible-human-independence (RHI) so that elites can govern unaware citizens in widespread dependency. Similarly, liberty is license bestowed by government to foster loyalty.

The English fine-tuned these political strategies under the phrase “consent of the governed”. The 1787 U.S. Constitution proposes public discipline in order to establish RHI and empower “ourselves and our posterity” to approach its perfection. The First Congress repressed the U.S. intentions by partnering with religion and restoring, as much as possible, Anglo-American “tradition”.

Necessity&justice (the n&j syntax to express mutual dependency) demand RHI both as self-interest and as reliable-connections with fellow-citizens on earth.

Necessity&justice require taxation for infrastructural capital and services. Some fellow-citizens prefer dependency, for examples, indolence, abuse, crime, tyranny, and evil, which increases the burden to the independent-citizens.

However, civic-citizens value independence and therefore earn enough to fund the lifestyle they want plus pay taxes for the capital&service-infrastructure that fellow citizens need.

People who are bemused by freedom and liberty may pay a high price: their choice to practice RHI.

Make no mistake: this is not a new concept. I try to express it so as to appeal to the experiences and observations of fellow citizens.

My intention is for this message, in fellow-citizens own interpretations, to go viral and reach&persuade 75% of citizens in 75% of the states, so that we, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” will amend the First Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate civic humble-integrity, ending Congressional&Supreme-Court religious-pride.

Restore the 1782 motto “E Pluribus Unum”, confident that it applies to the-God, whatever that entity may be.

https://www.quora.com/If-fairness-contradicted-with-equality-which-one-would-you-choose? by Hecktor Baron (Hannibal Bashir)

Necessity demands justice.

https://ethicsandmorals.quora.com/?__ni__=0&__nsrc__=4&__snid3__=26637895025&__tiids__=38609367 by Julianna Anand

I communicate to learn. I write to my teachers, my fellow-citizens. I respond to astute questions, sometimes thinking the question is rhetorical.

However, I cannot assume what they assume, anticipate what they anticipate, explain what they need explaining, think what they are thinking, or feel what they are feeling (opposite Antonin Scalia’s speaking abilities).

I do not know the-ineluctable-truth, so can only share my thoughts. Ineluctable means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted” (merriam-webster.com). I think it is astonishing that fellow citizens don’t know phrases like “the-ineluctable-evidence” and hold scholars accountable for the neglect. I use hyphens to invite the reader not to disassemble my phrases.

I try to write what I think/speculate clearly and concisely, and take any appreciative suggestions I get, including rejection.

My hope is to express concerns that are shared by civic-citizens in words and phrases that appeal to their experiences and observations. “Civic” addresses faithful human-connections more than cooperation with municipal conventions.

For example, I appreciate Abraham Lincoln’s Lockean (English) dream “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth” but advocate the preamble’s 5 disciplines of, by, and for the people: integrity, justice, peace, strength, and prosperity. I sincerely think Lincoln errored to claim self-governance existed anywhere. I am sincere.

That some people consider my thought and disagree is OK, and that some stonewall the idea is not my responsibility. However, I find it condescending when someone accuses me of being condescending.

https://www.quora.com/Do-you-believe-that-the-Bill-of-Rights-expressed-the-concerns-of-James-Madison-along-with-other-framers-of-the-Constitution-for-protecting-certain-aspects-of-privacy? by Rafael Martin

I prefer “I don’t know” then research for the-ineluctable-evidence. Ineluctable means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted”. If undiscovered, I may express a thought and repeat “But I don’t know”. I do not accept “I believe”. I read, consider, and decide the meaning to me at the moment. We owe ourselves recovery from the damage James Madison and Tory-ratifiers inflicted on the 1787 We the People of the United States.

I’ve read several Madison-attributed thoughts and consider him a crafty politician more than authentic human-being. Scholars and politicians pretend to be flummoxed by plain writing, such as Thomas Paine on African slavery, 1775, or Niccolo Machiavelli on Ecclesiastical Principalities, 1513; in my 2021 view, when priests and politicians partner, they pick the peoples’ pockets with immunity; the people neither rebel nor depart and teach posterity to wait for their personal-God to relieve them of the losses and misery. Worse, most Americans, including James Madison, reject the proposition proffered in the 1787 U.S. Constitution: responsible-human-independence.

I was perplexed by “Memorial&Remonstrance”, June, 1985, until I read the speculation that it was a committee composition only attributed to Madison. How can anyone expect a Tennessee boy at age 13 to accept the notion that he must first be considered God’s property before his US citizenship can be considered? Good grief I was born in Knoxville, delivered by a woman months after activation of a single cell by a man: no heavenly force involved . . . except in constructed, metaphysical mystery.

That Madison could discount the separation of church and state --- expressed by the 1776 Declaration, with its authority on “Nature’s God” to separate-from without-disparaging England’s Trinity --- and author the First Amendment’s unconstitutional partnering of church and state, is egregious tyranny. Madison mimicked the Trinity’s partnership with Parliament as factional-American Protestantism partnering with Congress and the Supreme Court . . . at the people’s expense. Then, perhaps America’s most egregious hypocrite wrote “the morality of the priesthood & the devotion of the people have been manifestly increased by the total separation of the Church from the State”; https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/04-01-02-0378. The consequence in 2021 is divergent chaos in the USA.

The choice to pursue the metaphysics that religion offers, such as eternal-life for a mysterious soul, is private. For Congress to claim the authority to neither establish religion nor interfere with its purposes is blasphemy against the limited powers the people grant Congress.

It’s doubly egregious when neither Congress nor the Supreme Court has the integrity to define religion. It’s been a long time since I attempted to write a definition, but just now, here’s my thought: religion is the practice of imagining or accepting a heartfelt concern then constructing a theory to address it, without ever confirming that the concern is valid. The circularity is expressed not so obviously in the wonderful blues song “Amazing Grace”: “Was Grace that taught my heart to fear And Grace, my fears relieved”. By hard work, I independently-learned not to fear: instead, face the-ineluctable-truth.

Just as necessity&justice demand civic fidelity to the-ineluctable-truth, civil integrity requires Congress and the Supreme Court to have no say in an individual citizen’s choice to pursue metaphysics or not. Consequently, for the sake of personal-privacy, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” must&can amend the First Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate civic humble-integrity rather than civil religious-pride, not only among the people, but among the elected and appointed officials the people hold accountable to conduct lawful services.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-duties-of-citizens-to-constitute-authority? by Greg Thomas

I do not pretend to know the-ineluctable-truth. Ineluctable means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted” (merriam-webster.com).

Surprised? It occurs to me this morning that the obscurity of “ineluctable” is no accident. Scholars would lessen profit if they abandoned the choir’s vagaries: truth, the truth, objective truth, literal truth, your truth, God’s truth, ultimate truth, absolute truth, real truth, and the paradox, subjective truth, etc. I can only share my opinion.

Considering the citizens of the world, the first duty is to comprehend being a human-being and to accept your person. Whereas a foal stands by instinct in 1 hour, finds its mare’s tit in 3 hours, and a thoroughbred peaks in 3 years, the human-being walks by intellect in maybe 10 months. The proportionality is 600, and projecting, the human psychology might peak in 1800 years. Of course, my model is too simplistic for an individual. However I am glad I did the exercise, because 2 thousand years is reasonable estimate of the time required for a society to mature.

It should not be surprising to say that it takes a quarter century for a human infant to transition from total ignorance to comprehension&intention to live a complete human life. I use n&m syntax to join mutually required words to express my thought. “Complete” life means the chronological duration needed for a person to achieve responsible-human-independence (RHI) from external&internal constraints. Most humans die young. However, indications are that a human-being’s psychological independence may peak during the fourth quarter-century. Thus, 75-100 years, if at all, rather than 1800 years.

If the human-being takes charge of their psychological acquisitions during their first 25 years, they may observe that the human-being has the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to perfect their unique person. How they utilize their unique opportunity to live is their choice. They observe that many people choose to satisfy banal appetites, to be dependent, to practice crime, to be a despot, to be evil, or worse. Some choose to admit to themselves “I don’t know” when that is so. If they need to know, they proceed to research the-ineluctable-evidence, if it has been discovered. By refusing to pretend or believe, they develop humble-integrity, which empowers RHI. Physics including psychology involves statistical variations and deviations, so the people who practice RHI must constrain dependent fellow citizens, in order to encourage&facilitate reform. Like other metaphysical ideas, physics negates hope for a utopia.

Principles like those expressed above could not have been imagined in the evolutionary past. We think hominids diverged from their prior mutation 8 million years ago and some 12 mutations led to homo sapiens, the current human being. Homo sapiens emerged 300 thousand years ago (tya), developed language perhaps 150 tya, became independent of earlier mutations 10 tya, and developed grammar 5 tya. With grammar, human-beings had the power to negotiate peace, provided they adopted the intention. Cultural evolution during the last 5 thousand years seems stagnant compared to technological evolution the today offers us the opportunity to send our name to Mars on the next mission.

A civic-citizen may study 5 documents to establish personal-preferences regarding the above principles.

A political philosopher suggested RHI about 5 tya (3 thousand years BC). Leaping to 1513 AD, a Renaissance philosopher explained forms of Western tyranny. In one culture, declaration of independence was expressed in 1776, domestic-disciplines were proffered in 1787, and tyranny was codified in 1791. Civic-citizens must&can reform the tyranny. The 5 documents are: a scribe’s colloquialisms 3 tya in Genesis 1:26-28, Machiavelli’s “The Prince”, the USA’s 1776 declaration of war for independence from England, the 1787 draft Constitution for the US, and the 1791 U.S. Bill of Rights.

Here’s my opinion about these 5 documents. First, the 50 hundred year old political philosophy suggests that female&male-human being must&can independently provide peace to the earth and to its inhabitants, even though an Abraham-descendent-scribe, 30 hundred years ago, cited a God for the suggestion’s authority. Discovery since then empowers us to suggest that necessity&justice assign peace to homo sapiens and that the suggestion separates spiritual pursuits from responsibility for chaos in individual life-style: metaphysics separated from physics. Second, Machiavelli’s Chapter XI commends separation of church and state. Third, the 1776 Declaration expresses separation of church and state, citing “Nature’s God” without disparaging England’s Trinity. Fourth, the 1787 U.S. Constitution eliminates religion as a civic discipline, defaulting spiritual/religious pursuits to personal-privacy. Fifth, the 1791 First Amendment unconstitutionally re-established an English mimic: religious partnership with Congress, which the US Supreme Court arrogantly approves. I have no choice in leaving it to the reader to consider their views about these documents and take any action if they choose to. Most readers are too busy surviving the way they live to take charge of the politics that enslaves them.

It seems self-evident that as long as most individuals assume they are not responsible for peace on earth rather than chaos, there will be local conflict and global war. As long as tyrants persuade people to divide over their doctrinal-Gods, a squabble introduced in Genesis-1, individuals have excuses for not constraining dependency. As long as people are dissuaded from connecting the issues from 5 tya to the 2021 divergent chaos humankind is suffering, humankind will continue to regress order and prosperity.

The citizen has the self-interest and duty to accept each: being a human-being, HIPEA, humble-integrity, RHI, and the intention to constrain chaos in their way of living. This requires staying informed about politics in the citizen’s nation and aiding the continual development of an achievable better future “to ourselves and our Posterity”. I see no reason for a civic-citizen to abandon their nation: their “ourselves and our posterity”.

My view is that the first action the US citizen should take is to amend the First Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate responsible-human-independence rather than maintain Congress’s and the Supreme Court’s arrogance over “freedom of religion”. Pride is no surrogate for integrity.

If you find this proposal attractive, don’t wait for an authority to advance it. Know that only 75% of We the People of the United States in 75% of the states can effect the needed reform. Therefore, share the message with everyone you can, including your Senators and your U.S. Representative. When this message becomes virial in the US, the leader will step forward and make it happen.

https://ethicsandmorals.quora.com/?__ni__=0&__nsrc__=4&__snid3__=26596804137&__tiids__=38464565? by Julianna Anand

About

 

https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-importance-contribution-of-politics? by Leanne Grace L. Romano

It’s important for each citizen to exercise political power for life. Otherwise, the happiness they seek will not be possible, unless, elitism can dupe them. I prefer responsible-human-independence (RHI).

Politics means civic power, but the ancient nobles and living elites vie for civil power. “Civic” implies integrity in human connections more than civility to local, national, or global standards. There are two options to establish power: one is military force and the other is constitutional justice. Constitutional justice, or written law-enforcement, can be developed 2 ways: defense of legal opinion by upholding precedent or constitutional-amendment to correct injustice according to the-ineluctable-evidence. Ineluctable means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted.”

A civic-culture maintains Education Departments that encourage&facilitate human, individual power, individual energy, and individual authority (HIPEA) to constrain chaos in ways of living. However, some persons choose to apply HIPEA to develop dependency: indolence, abuse, crime, tyranny, evil, and worse life-styles. Consequently, civic-citizens must earn enough to pay for their independent lifestyle plus fund law-enforcement and development of statutory justice. Additionally, they must hold government accountable to responsible-human-independence (RHI).

If the dependent-fellow-citizens dominate, the civic-citizens can no longer provide the economic viability of each affected society: local, state, national, continental, and global.

These principles have been known to political philosophy for 5 thousand years --- before Adam was visualized and before Abraham was born. A scribe reported the principles in 3 thousand year-old colloquialisms. Since then, nobles have constructed political persuasions and military forces to persuade citizens to consent to governance for the common good. Most citizens prefer to “live” rather than participate in politics, and there are few civic-citizens among the good people of a country.

Consequently, civic citizens accommodate rule by people who do not care about responsible, personal happiness.

We, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” can end the accommodation by amending the First Amendment so as to hold Congress and the Supreme Court accountable to RHI rather than to accommodate their civil divinity under religious-pride. It is time to stop waiting for the-God to usurp humankind’s responsibility to provide order&prosperity on earth, as suggested in 3 documents: Genesis 1:26-28 and together, the USA founders’ 1776 declaration of war for independence from England and the framer’s 1787 republic predicated on 5 public disciplines to the people: integrity, justice, peace, strength, prosperity.

https://www.quora.com/What-sociological-concepts-help-explain-such-different-american-views? by Pooya Noori

Liberal democracy, which is divergent chaos, is trying to overthrow apathetic responsible-human-independence (RHI). I think the RHI that was proffered on September 17, 1787 in the U.S. Constitution will at last establish independence from Anglo-American tradition. We, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” will come forth after 234 years’ self-neglect, waiting for the-God to usurp our duty.

https://www.quora.com/Can-you-make-your-own-ideology-Explain-it-in-at-least-ten-sentences? by John Carl Goden

I assume “ideology” can mean “visionary theorizing”. I’ll start now and see if I reach 10 sentences.

Necessity&justice hold the human-being accountable to constrain chaos in their life.

1.    But not every person accepts that they are a human-being; some prefer animal, plant, mineral, or soul.

2.    Consequently, constraining chaos involves earning enough to pay for civic-personal-living plus statutory-justice-enforcement.

3.    Enforcement involves constraint of injury to others plus encouragement&facilitation to reform.

4.    The human-being can nourish the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) to develop the humble-integrity that is required for responsible-human-independence.

5.    However, they are born totally ignorant and dependent.

6.    During their first quarter-century, they must receive encouragement&facilitation to take charge of their acquisition of the comprehension&intention to live a complete human life.

7.    But they may be born into dependency: gaming welfare, infidelity, crime, tyranny, evil, and worse and consequently experience young death.

8.    Consequently, every culture must&can provide Education Departments that inculcate these principles at all levels for all ages, rather than to train “the workers we need”.

9.    In such a culture, every newborn has the opportunity to perfect their unique human-being before death, no matter how chronologically far into their life they accept the intention, low as they may be.

10.  In such a culture, every person may be regarded a god facing death.

11.  No such culture exists, but I know one that was proffered:  The USA in the founders’ 1776 declaration of war for independence from England and in its framers’ 1787 U.S. Constitution.

12.  We, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” must&can establish independence at last, primarily by amending the First Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate civic humble-integrity rather than civil religious-pride.

13.  The second action is to reform the Supreme Court to rule of law on ineluctable-evidence rather than opinion-precedence.

14.  Thereafter, the entity We the People of the United States can begin to nourish widespread chaos-constraint rather than the divergence we now suffer.

 

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-is-the-advantage-of-the-presence-of-the-source-of-authority-toward-our-action-of-law? by Nean'sy Esperanza

Humankind has known from Sumer philosophy 5 thousand years ago, that necessity&justice (the n&n syntax to express mutual dependency) hold the human-being independently responsible for prosperity on earth. But not everyone accepts that they are a human being. Some persons prefer dependency, such as indolence, abuse, crime, tyranny, evil, and such. Some people construct metaphysics to-attempt to-resist necessity&justice.

The civic-citizen, where “civic” refers to humble-integrity in human connections more than to municipal cooperation, accepts that they can&must constrain intentional injury by dissident fellow-citizens. Therefore, they earn enough to fund their lifestyle plus pay their taxes, including law-enforcement infrastructure.

The infrastructure includes not only first-response&adjudication&reform-services, but research to identify&amend unjust laws so as to approach statutory justice. Necessity&justice require reservation of each fellow-citizen’s opportunity to develop responsible-human-independence (RHI) during life, whether from infancy or from encouragement&facilitation following their behavior that caused injury. Unfortunately, no culture articulates these principles. The Congressionally repressed 1787 U.S. Constitution proffers RHI.

The civic objective is to encourage dependents to become independents. The human being can develop the individual power, the individual energy, and the individual authority (HIPEA) by which to develop humble-integrity. Therein, a person admits and expresses “I don’t know” when that is so. In other words, they are perseverant to discover the-ineluctable-truth. “Ineluctable” means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted” (merriam-webster.com). Only under necessity, for example, actual attack by an aggressor, would they act on what they think. They avoid believing, which is too often motivated by metaphysics&emotions.

The civic-citizen neither initiates nor accommodates injury to or from any person or association of people, including self and family. Thus, if their group announces plans to injure someone or a property, the civic-member objects. If there is no reform, they resign from the group with the promise to warn first-responders. They deliver the warning.

Thus, the civic-person who is dedicated to RHI, is the source of law-enforcement authority, and the dissident is aware that most fellow citizens pursue the required humble-integrity.

The presence of fellow-citizens is the authority that encourages dependents to either reform or risk restriction. The U.S. Congress and Supreme Court can reform to these principles.

https://www.quora.com/In-your-own-words-What-role-does-history-take-in-the-study-of-society-culture-and-identity? by Joe-Ann Alovera

Reading history opens your mind to your person and her potential-perfection. You read it with your assessment and judgement, no matter how celebrated the source. The worthy suggestions become yours.

Recently, I discovered two fallacies.

First, to comprehend what is written about the past, you must breathe the author’s culture, community, and character. Not so: in self-reliance, I can apply the author’s message in my comprehension and expression. For example, given the literature Genesis 1:26-28, NIV:

Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, in the likeness of ourselves; and let them rule over the fish in the sea, the birds in the air, the animals, and over all the earth, and over every crawling creature that crawls on the earth.”

So God created humankind in his own image;
in the image of God he created him:
male and female he created them.

God blessed them: God said to them, “Be fruitful, multiply, fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea, the birds in the air and every living creature that crawls on the earth.”

 

With physical and psychological discoveries during the last 5 thousand years, we understand the suggestion expressed above came from Sumerian political philosophy that was reported 2 thousand years later. Whatever was suggested in Sumer was interpreted and expressed in Israel, we know not how accurately. However, for my person, I perceive a commonality’s suggestion and care not about the scribe’s view of it. Following the scribe’s outline, I write the following:

We, female&male-human-being is the most independent species on earth and therefore, we must provide order and prosperity to the other species.

I reverse gender to appreciate source and enabler, respectively. There is no incentive to complicate life. And I have the human power, energy, and authority (HIPEA) to share my thought with fellow-citizens, without imposition. I do not feel obligated to reference a 3,000 year old report of a 5,000 year-old suggestion in my 2021 view. On the other hand, I think education departments neglect the journal of human discovery; both physical and psychological advancement.

The second fallacy is that copyright laws are legislated to protect original thought-expression. Actually, they subtly suppress speech, and in 2021 media use them for political power. For example, Abraham Lincoln dreamed “government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth”. Vaguely aware of the quote and ignorant of copyright law, a contemporary could be fearful to write:  The 1787 U.S. intention, which is civic-discipline of, by, and for the people, has been neglected for 12 generations, so far. In 2021, any quotation worthy of another human-being’s improvement can be found online, and plagiarism is easy to prove/disprove. An ancient writer’s unawareness of recent discoveries has no authority to the modern thinker. The same is true about “the founders”; the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” owe them awareness and correction of of their errors.

Those are my thoughts. For a motivating and inspiring view of history’s value to the individual, please read Ralph Waldo Emerson’s essay, “History”, 1937; https://emersoncentral.com/texts/essays-first-series/history/. Copy and paste it to MS Word so you can highlight and discuss with Emerson and save your work.

With Emerson’s leadership, U.S. citizens (E Pluribus Unum), can establish psychological independence from England and Europe after 234 years’ Anglo-American tradition.

https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-are-some-examples-of-situations-where-internal-and-external-interferences-affect-understanding-or-the-flow-of-communication? by Mark Jeferson Celso

One example: a particular woman does not accept that she is a fertile human-being and therefore obligated to take responsibility for her body and the viable ova she produces. A particular man does not accept that a fertile woman represents a potential crowd of about 400 humans and that an authentic-male-human-being would not threaten her and her viable ovum with pregnancy. That is, he would not be sexually intimate with her if they had not bonded for life, agreed to generate a family, and as spouses, care for their children for life unto posterity. That is, grandchildren and their descendants.

While it’s true they could have conception-preventive sex, the mutual-will to do so represses bond-building and thus threatens her children waiting to be born (borrowing from Leonard Cohen). A wayward man immediately abandons them.

The fact that races, civilizations, cultures, and nations don’t teach these obligations is tyranny over the lives of almost every conceived, gestated, and delivered baby. It means the baby must learn independently what many parents never accepted:  Being a human-being involves comprehending, intending, and practicing responsible-human-independence (RHI).

The baby who develops humble-integrity; that is, maintains “I don’t know” when that is so, yet learns when and how to act in necessity and ineluctable-justice, advances RHI. “Ineluctable” means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted”.

The physical attractions of male and female entice a couple who do not accept the obligations of being a human-being into intimacy that conflicts with the personhood of her child if born. (The U.S. adolescent Supreme Court might equivocate infant “personhood” as dignity and/or equality.)

Law professors

https://lawliberty.org/book-review/the-american-experiment-matters-too

“Americans . . . have a real love of freedom and equality, which is quite arguably unmatched by any people that existed prior to 1776.” These are English, Lockean impositions on the U.S. that Tory-scholars preserve with unfounded opinion.

Most Americans cherish responsible-human-independence (RHI) and some can’t quite overcome the aura of their personal-God. Anglo-American traditionalists can’t possibly understand the U.S. intentions, because they oppose them, depending on English precedent, which takes pride in their Trinity, without sufficient humility to the-God of the US motto “E Pluribus Unum”. Fellow citizens who have no Trinity yet are civic are the preferred citizens. Here, “civic” refers to maintenance of reliable connections with fellow-citizens more than cooperation with civil rules.

In RHI, civic-citizens responsibly pursue the happiness they want, expecting fellow-citizens to do the same: no one should tolerate the happiness someone else would impose on them. Responding to necessity&justice (the n&j syntax to express mutual requirement), the civic citizen earns enough to pay their way of living and help fellow citizens who cannot provide for themselves. Egregiously, some fellow citizens choose dependency --- indolence, abuse, gaming religion, crime, tyranny, evil, and worse --- and the civic-citizens pay the cost to constrain dependencies along with other infrastructural necessities.

“Accordingly, [the 1787 framers] compromised, praying that “time, patience and enlightenment” would eventually bring the practice of slavery to a peaceful end.” With an 8 slave-state to 5 non-slave-state ratio, ending slavery was not economically feasible. However, the framers scheduled termination of the Atlantic slave trade 20 years after ratification, and worded the 1787 U.S. Constitution so as to accommodate termination of domestic slavery. As Frederick Douglass remarked in 1852, it was the second and third generation who maintained domestic slave trade. In 1854, Kansas became a focus of white, Christian animosity toward white, Christian abolitionists from Missouri, by 1856 gaining the remembrance "Bleeding Kansas”. In December, 1856, R.E. Lee wrote to his wife animosity toward abolitionists for their evil in not waiting for the Lee-Christian-God to finish punishment of blacks for the sins of their ancestors. The CSA’s declaration of session admits less-erroneous Christianity and they attacked to USA anyway. It should be easy for scholars to opine that the U.S. Civil War was a white-on-white Christian war, as information if not facts by which fellow-citizens can consider remedy: no more domestic-Christian wars. I wonder if the Tewahedo Christian Church emerged from revisionists. I don't find the word on Google ngram from 1500 to a small blip in 1846, then significant frequency starting in 2000.

“The United States, which continued to practice and defend a form of chattel slavery that European nations refused to allow on their home soil.” The author shares abject ignorance. Beginning in 1452, papal bulls “authorized” first Portugal then Spain to colonize the Americas and use African and indigenous slaves for labor. In the seventeenth century, at least 4 more European nations competed in the colonization empowered by the Atlantic slave trade. England, with its shipbuilders in Liverpool became the dominant trader, and America their victim. By 1763, American leaders declared trade-embargoes with England, including slaves.

We, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” must&can amend the First Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate 1787 civic-humility required for RHI rather than support 1791 Congress&Supreme-Court religious-pride. We must end dependency on Anglo-American tradition to establish&develop 1787 U.S. public discipline.

https://lawliberty.org/book-review/living-well-with-nature-and-convention

In this essay, I looked for arguments asserting the dignity and equity due the woman and her viable ova. In a cluture motivated by necessity&justice, the authentic woman may attract the most promising man to care for her and her viable ova for life. Therefore, a culture with humble-integrity does not encourage&facilitate men to compromise authenticity with homosexual satisfaction.

In Symposium, Pausanias (erroneously) demeans women as not the most inteligent companions and argues for virtuous subjugation by a boy to an old man, who will care for the boy for the rest of his life.

The culture persuades the boy to subjugate himself for increase in virtue learned from the old man, rather than develop the usual self-reliance. It's a bitter bargain, because the old man uses the boy for a short time, leaving the boy with obsolete views of a man who could not imagine the challenges the boy will face during the rest of the boy's life.

By all means, if two same-sex adults fall in love for life, they should enter a civic contract with all the benefits afforded a heterosexual couple without children. However, involving children in homosexual partnership should be discouraged both civically and civilly.

Scholars and the U.S. Supreme Court err to ignore the dignity of a woman and her viable ova -- to discover the-ineluctable-truth, rather than accept a 5:4 opinion, often to favor men.

Wilfred M. McClay, “History as a Way of Knowing”, https://lawliberty.org/history-as-a-way-of-knowing/

I object to scholars quoting great thinkers without preserving the thinker’s persona, for example, the Ralph Waldo Emerson RWE wrote. Conservatives defeat themselves by not being civic to every fellow citizen, keeping responsible private-pursuits’ personal. By “civic” I mean faithful human connections more than municipal-cooperation. By private-pursuits I mean spirituality, religion, metaphysics, promiscuity, spectator-sports, gambling, and such. Human living intends responsible personal happiness rather than subjugation to someone else’s vision for you.

I work to conserve, encourage, and facilitate human opportunity and think religious conservatism errs when it purports to impose its hopes and comforts on others. I think the issue should be negotiated and resolved so that all human beings can choose to establish peace on earth, which I assert is humankind’s collective purpose.

History shows that since the idea that peace is humankind’s independent responsibility, expressed some 5 thousand years ago, cultures have divided over the-God, an expression for the entity that controls consequences of human action or inaction. The human-being-division has become exponential, causing 2021 divergent chaos. RWE spoke plainly about these issues. I mimic him when I say “217 years ago, Emerson agreed with Phil Beaver”.

Professor McClay and other scholars can&should be responsive to civic-citizens who are fans of both history and thinkers like Ralph Waldo Emerson (the c&s syntax intended to indicate mutual necessity). Civic-citizens no longer subjugated to university-grades affirm personal-thoughts when they read RWE (the hyphens to invite the reader not to disassemble the phrase). RWE is alive&well, in our benefits-from recent discovery together-with corresponding RWE-expressions. The scholar who does not accurately&precisely represent RWE stains&weakens human-responsibility. Regardless, liberal-arts academia maintains metaphysics, repressing and regressing human-advancement. The ancient Greeks are repulsed by 2021 males participating in female-sports.

A fellow-citizen who is trained in research is incredulous that scholars shield each in “social sciences” other like popes protecting prominent-priestly pederasty. Researchers brutally caution each other against fictional-data or experimental-design to promote a personal-paradigm. Researchers know that physics and its progeny eventually expose lies. For example, the king who accepts acclaim as the-God must never bleed (Kipling). The scholar who quotes Emerson yet opposes Emerson’s persona chooses vulnerability.

The scholarly choir is satisfied to debate the truth, never being accurate&precise about the topic: discovering the-ineluctable-evidence which leads to the-ineluctable-truth and its responsible use. “Ineluctable” means “not to be avoided, changed, or resisted” (I prefer merriam-webster.com). RWE leads modernity to discover the-ineluctable-truth, unaccommodating toward personal-truths and eternal-mirages.

Here are 3 pertinent quotes from RWE’s essay, “History”, 1837, each with my affirming personal-experiences&observations. (McClay quoted “The Natural History of Intellect”, 1893, posthumously published.)

 

First: “All history becomes subjective; in other words, there is properly no history; only biography.” To me, this means that the student gains more from studying the history-makers than by reading a contemporary’s account of the actual event; 10 contemporaries author 10 accounts. Moreover, the reader can learn more from documents than from history about them. I view Emerson’s thought parallel to mine as affirmation and need not cite Emerson to express my opinion.

Second: “When a thought of Plato becomes a thought to me . . . time is no more. [I pierce] to the truth through all the confusion of tradition and the caricature of institutions.” The thought-study RWE refers to is not easy. From Agathon’s speech in “Symposium” I comprehend that a civic-citizen neither initiates nor accommodates injury to or from any person or institution. My thought is so distant from Agathon’s speech it is distracting to credit him 2,500 years later.

Third: “Jesus astonishes and overpowers sensual people. They cannot unite him to history, or reconcile him with themselves. How easily these old worships of Moses, of Zoroaster, of Menu, of Socrates, domesticate themselves in the mind. I cannot find any antiquity in them. They are mine as much as theirs.” In other words, RWE need not credit their thoughts to express his.

RWE asserts that the metaphysical-Jesus is a construct by the Church, drawn from the lives of the ancients. Conservatives mistakenly suppress RWE’s “Divinity School Address”, 1838, in order to preserve the public’s psychological-dependency --- Chapter XI Machiavellianism. Emerson unchained my perception that the Church errs to pretend Jesus is the-God. I was so indoctrinated into Christianity it took me 2 decades revisiting RWE to accept Jesus’ literal message: Phil Beaver, you can perfect your person before dying, if you accept the intention. Conservatives who ban “Divinity School Address” do themselves and humankind a disservice by not addressing it.

This reader is constrained to ask why McClay does not feel vulnerable to objections to misrepresentation of RWE and moreover to fellow-citizens experiences&observations. People typically say that I’m entitled to my opinion; moreover, Emerson is entitled to his writing. Scholars are entitled to their interpretation and unshielded from fellow-citizens’ oppostion. And fellow-citizens are not subject-to the-academic-coercion: grades and diplomas.

I turn now to six McClay statements.

First: “A great many of today’s academic historians believe that the chief point of studying the past is to demonstrate that all our inherited institutions, beliefs, conventions, and normative values are arbitrary “social constructions” in the service of power, and therefore without any greater legitimacy or binding authority.” Why doesn’t the other side’s argument deserve more than McClay’s dismissal? And is he making claims about them they would not affirm or admit to? Is “our inherited” a totalitarian excuse? Or is it selective to the choir? Does McClay feel vulnerable?

Now in my fourth quarter-century (still influenced by the competitive-Protestant-metaphysics Mom and Dad divided to me), I’m still inspired by RWE’s “Self-reliance” and think it’s in McClay’s self-interest to challenge the constraints of conservativism enough to consider McClay-opposition among “today’s academic historians”.

For example, take seriously the political suggestion derived from the recent 5 thousand years’ discovery together with literature’s Genesis 1:26-28. I value my observation:  Whatever controls the unfolding of consequences holds humankind responsible for peace on earth. Everything that happened after that ancient suggestion convicts humankind of “’social constructs’ in the service of power” (McClay). It is not insignificant that the scribe who, 3 thousand years-ago related the 5 thousand year-old suggestion, attributed it to his-God. Since then, descendent-societies have each constructed their-God, in order to gain power. They’re arrogant toward both the-God (whatever the entity may be) and the human quest for peace. Civic necessity&justice drive the human quest.

Moreover, starting in Genesis 2, scribes attributed civilization’s bad fortune to females. Eve betrayed Adam, in “original sin”. Sarah suggested ancient, direct surrogacy, breaking the monogamy she and Abraham could have completed and creating a divided family. Embarrassingly, the rest of the canonized Bible expands the chaos Genesis 2 started against Genesis-1 advice, and in 2021, the chaos is divergent. It is in our self-interest to constrain chaos.

Second: “. . . the leap from a mountain of carefully compiled data to a compelling narrative or a persuasive theory will always be shrouded in mystery, propelled by the ineffable force of what Michael Polanyi called “tacit knowledge,” no matter the discipline in which the leap occurs.” The hapless Polanyi did not accept that physics does not respond to human constructs. He took a ten-year sponsored leave to write “Personal Knowledge”, in which he displayed his-misrepresentation of physics then abruptly concluded that his-religion is an equivalent path to the-ineluctable-truth. Polanyi presented this shocking premise on the last page of regrettable reader-abuse: metaphysics is as valid as physics. In reality, physics and its progeny eventually correct metaphysics. For example, there are no heavenly laws involved in NASA’s offer to carry your name to Mars on the next mission. In other words, physics does not conform to human reason and construction. Metaphysics does not trump physics.

While it’s true that a minister knows when his flock is emotional enough for salvation, when the-ineluctable-evidence is researched with integrity-to the scientific-method, there is no “leap” from the data. The research is repeated with different researchers and designs to affirm the-objective-truth. Then, research pauses for the invention of new instruments of perception which could alter prior conclusions. The human-research quest is to approach if not acquire the-ineluctable-truth and how to responsibly apply it. The-ineluctable-evidence does not depend on emotions.

In 2021, humankind is fully aware that the laws of physics and its progeny apply to psychology. The idea that “social sciences” can discover the-ineluctable-truth by statistically designing&conducting public interviews is a liberal-arts travesty. The human-being is too psychologically powerful for this ploy to survive.

Third: “We even can call what we are doing “social science” rather than history, if we like.” What folly and degradation of history: Research, whether physical or psychological, yields the-objective-truth using existing instruments for perception of the-ineluctable-evidence. As humankind invents new instruments, the-objective-truth is updated until it approaches the-ineluctable-truth.

This point, that research is iterative, until the-ineluctable-truth is understood, was missing for the Europeans 400 years ago who opined that reason is more reliable than physics.  Research employs the scientific method, which is very cautious against errors that can be introduced by statistics. In contrast, “social science” uses statistics to design public-opinion polls so as to favor the agenda being funded. For example, a poll to support gun control statistically silences hunters and persons who intend to protect themselves.

Fourth: Albert Einstein, whose political philosophy often represents me, unfortunately “liked” a social study: publically debating “Science and Religion”. He accommodated S&R language rather than using his own. Before he was a celebrity, he slighted genius --- his own --- by introducing his “cosmological factor” to force his mathematical paradigm to a static universe. About 10 years later, Edwin Hubble proved that the universe is dynamic and expanding. Einstein thanked Hubble for correcting “my greatest blunder”. But Einstein’s greater blunder is the nonsense “Science without religion is blind; religion without science is lame." The ethics-philosopher-Einstein expresses, in my language:  Research without integrity is ruinous; honesty without research is privation. If angels can read this from heaven, Einstein is saying “That’s right” and offering an improvement for my consideration.

Fifth, “By all rights, history ought to be among the most conservative of all the academic disciplines, given the degree of power and authority it accords to the past.” Emerson’s words counter for modern application: “Every revolution was first a thought in one man's mind, and when the same thought occurs to another man, it is the key to that era.” In other words, there is a continuum of human thought that the considerate, living person expresses in their vernacular for the temporal circumstances.

Conservatives must&can reform to the humble-integrity that is required to individually practice RHI, the 5 thousand year-old Sumerian suggestion. With most persons practicing RHI, humankind may reform with majority-fidelity to civic-necessity&justice, reserving religion/none to personal-privacy with sufficient humility to the-God.

Sixth: there’s a statement too crass to recall.

Conservatives may choose religion, a private-pursuit, while practicing civic-humility: responsible-human-independence. If they continue to try to impose their religion on civic-citizens, the divergent chaos will continue, perhaps unto utter ruin.

The ancients, such as the Sumerians, and the not so ancients, such as Emerson and Einstein, suggest that we, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” must&can reform so as to provide peace on earth. That-this-is-so seems obvious to every considerate, living human-being. I think conservatives are the most qualified to lead the civic reform, while preserving their privacy.

The first action We the People of the United States need to take is to amend the First Amendment so as to encourage&facilitate civic humble-integrity instead of civil religious pride, the 1791 Anglo-American-Bill-of-Rights tradition.

Facebook

Facebook

We, the 2021 “ourselves and our Posterity” suffer divisive angst over divergent domestic chaos. We could&should be focused on transformative action, such as encouraging and facilitating responsible-human-independence (RHI, which I'll use below).

I assert that a 5,000 year old non-Judeo-Christian, non Islamic, suggestion in Genesis 1:26-28 is denied by humankind until the 1776 USA declaration of war for independence together with the 1787 US amendable framing of domestic discipline. These three documents propose RHI.

The 1791 Bill of Rights restored Anglo-American tradition, which eventually replaced the 1782 USA motto "E Pluribus Unum" with 1956's "In God We Trust". The original motto applies to the competitive, doctrinal-Gods. After all the civil constructs, there remains the-God: whatever controls the consequences of human responsibility or none. The 3 documents separate church and state and facilitate RHI according to human research to discover the-ineluctable-truth. Ineluctable means "not to be avoided, changed, or resisted".

The 2021 "we the people of the united states" must&can amend the First Amendment so as to require Congress and the Supreme Court to establish civic humble-integrity rather than promote civil religious-pride. "Civic" means integrity in human connections more than cooperation with local standards. In a civic culture, religion is reserved for personal-privacy rather than public discipline.

With a reliable First Amendment, the US can begin to establish responsible-human-independence –RHI- rather than accommodate "bestowed" liberty and freedom.

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.