If only more people were interested in the question, "How does one find peace?" That path begins with finding inner peace. There is a saying in the scriptures (New Testament) which helped me understand it: "Thy will (God's will), not mine, be done." Our desire to defy reality places us in conflict with nature (God), and disturbs our peace. I recommend the book, "Loving What Is [Real]," by Byron Katie, a virtual masterpiece. It is the best I have seen on the subject, though I would advise that you exercise some caution of her very brief, but frequent treatments of Relativism and Knowledge; contrary to her assertions, you do know two subjects for sure 1) The exact natures of yourself, your desires, and feelings, 2) Your observations and experiences (which are not usually completely accurate).
Many people turn to religion to find peace, but instead typically find hate and division, or hopelessness and despair. Peace is the Holy Grail of Beauty and Life. Your beauty will rise to the surface and literally change your physical appearance as you find peace. There will exist no fear or doubt, no regret or anger, no problems or suffering only challenges and opportunities.
It is hard to find peace, especially with oneself, and here is why: Because you want things to be different than they are. In short, you must desire and expect that everyone and everything act according to their natures, regardless of your own personal wishes. The only way that your peace may be violated is when you expect differently.
The key to peace is this (and this is worth more than all the gold in the world): Decide to love and accept every real thing, but focus on the positive and inspirational aspects. See happiness in pain, but here is the hardest part: Accept that it is the nature of others (though not always) to violate their own peace, to disturb the peace of others, and even to sometimes try to disturb your own peace, if they ever get reason to believe that this is possible. Now loving pain is not to say that you desire more pain, but simply that you are deciding to respect and appreciate it while it is with you. As you heal by this process, the pain will and must leave you, but only when it is ready to do so, only when it is the right time.
While in jail, you must love those opportunities to find, embrace, and share peace: to serve, to inspire, and to live a happy life. . When others think poorly of you, there is only one peaceful reply, "I agree that your unrealistic expectations of me are negative, I accept that, and I am at peace with that." This reply is usually best said only to oneself, as other people tend to disturb their own peace even more when the truth of their negative dissonance is established. Disturbing the peace of others is obviously not the peaceful path. Never do it, even when others request it. Instead, find a peaceful and inspiring reply on the subject. If I have said anything which interests you, feel free to let me know.
--
Andy Landen
Houston, TX
When there is an income tax, the just man will pay more and the unjust less on the same amount of income.- Plato
Tuesday, December 19, 2006
Friday, December 15, 2006
The FairTax, Term limits, and Majority Rule
Many people introduce the idea of term limits in hopes of strengthening the voice of the people and thus enabling the FairTax to be passed into law. My response is that this won't work, it just changes the dynamic, that's all. Currently, I am convinced that mere numbers is insufficient for political reform because representatives exist ONLY to execute their own agendas and make the people think that they are "the lesser of the evils." If you contribute enough money, they will try to work you into the pork barrel spending politics of Washington.
Remember the effect of the massive anti-war demonstrations? To no avail whatsoever. Consider the effects of local protests against school district policies. With sufficient numbers, the board will pretend to listen by inviting the concerned parties to attend a *regular* school district board meeting. The board hears the group for a time without reaction, and then spells out their policies and justifications. They continue with the same plan, perhaps with small token adjustments to appease the protesters and the public into thinking that they had some effect.
I have seen government ignore very large numbers of people with very legitimate concerns, even using the judicial branch to undermine their initiatives (in Washington State). While number are important in some respects, the FairTax cannot succeed without a more strategic operations. Writing letters makes us feel good, and in fact appeases our anger on short term basis, but that appeasement only undermines the will to create a more effective campaign. Ultimately, the FairTax WILL PREVAIL when our government is reformed to *represent* the will of an equal and *complete* majority, otherwise any victories will be small and short-lived.
Which brings me to address the true (complete and equal) majority. The founders of this country imagined factional tyranny acting in the name of the people, as is found most extensively in George Washington's writings which includes warnings about foreign entanglements with alliances and mutual defensive pacts. They never imagined a complete and equal majority sovereign in government.
The concept of blind justice revealed the path of fairness and equality to me many years ago. The idea is that a person can only be partial if they can differentiate between several options, and that inequality requires the invasion of privacy which departs from "blindness." So given the existence of two wolves and one sheep voting on who to have for dinner, the sheep is only in danger if the wolves can discern or judge 1) that they are wolves and 2) that the victim is a sheep. With blindfolds (and nose pins, etc.), they are unable to target (vote) any specific group for dinner. Thus equality and fairness may be preserved only through the defense of privacy which blinds "justice" (i.e. the government). Concerning the FairTax, every measure taken to defend privacy in the FairTax strengthens its fairness, equality, and power; measures of privacy enacted throughout government strengthen its legal resistance to factional corruption and forces other laws to submit to the fairness of "blind justice."
Is blind justice, i.e. equality, relevant to the subject of the FairTax? Of course. The FairTax is attempting restore fairness, equality, simplicity, transparency, and responsibility into the revenue side of government, but the government must be aligned with those principles in order to accept any legislation founded in the same (without a SERIOUS fight). These principles must be incorporated into every other aspect of government, else "traditional politics" will both fight the enactment of the FairTax bitterly, and effectively and utterly corrupt it (as it has the income tax) once we win the needlessly costly fight.
The FairTax has begun as a grassroots organization, but noble goal of fiscal fairness must develop into a much more comprehensive and strategic operation in order to prevail in the current political establishment; brute force of numbers is insufficient, as very clever politicians are quite practiced in the art of "side-stepping" the brute will of the masses. Leadership will listen to the people when they are legally bound to the people's will, and that requires a constitutional ammendment. The only way to give the people (and thus the grassroots) sufficient power to advance fair initiatives like the FairTax is to fill government with leaders who would release their own power in favor of Democracy (and I have yet to ever see that happen). The FairTax binds government to the will of an equal people, removing the manipulative power of inequality which many politicians so cherish and thrive upon, so their strong opposition is natural and expected. What begins as a movement from the people, must "snowball" into an effective, multi-pronged, multi-tiered, strategic government reformation process, or else it must smolder forever as a good intention continually undermined and dismissed by the politics of the day.
-- Andy Landen
Houston, TX
When there is an income tax, the just man will pay more and the unjust less on the same amount of income.- Plato
Remember the effect of the massive anti-war demonstrations? To no avail whatsoever. Consider the effects of local protests against school district policies. With sufficient numbers, the board will pretend to listen by inviting the concerned parties to attend a *regular* school district board meeting. The board hears the group for a time without reaction, and then spells out their policies and justifications. They continue with the same plan, perhaps with small token adjustments to appease the protesters and the public into thinking that they had some effect.
I have seen government ignore very large numbers of people with very legitimate concerns, even using the judicial branch to undermine their initiatives (in Washington State). While number are important in some respects, the FairTax cannot succeed without a more strategic operations. Writing letters makes us feel good, and in fact appeases our anger on short term basis, but that appeasement only undermines the will to create a more effective campaign. Ultimately, the FairTax WILL PREVAIL when our government is reformed to *represent* the will of an equal and *complete* majority, otherwise any victories will be small and short-lived.
Which brings me to address the true (complete and equal) majority. The founders of this country imagined factional tyranny acting in the name of the people, as is found most extensively in George Washington's writings which includes warnings about foreign entanglements with alliances and mutual defensive pacts. They never imagined a complete and equal majority sovereign in government.
The concept of blind justice revealed the path of fairness and equality to me many years ago. The idea is that a person can only be partial if they can differentiate between several options, and that inequality requires the invasion of privacy which departs from "blindness." So given the existence of two wolves and one sheep voting on who to have for dinner, the sheep is only in danger if the wolves can discern or judge 1) that they are wolves and 2) that the victim is a sheep. With blindfolds (and nose pins, etc.), they are unable to target (vote) any specific group for dinner. Thus equality and fairness may be preserved only through the defense of privacy which blinds "justice" (i.e. the government). Concerning the FairTax, every measure taken to defend privacy in the FairTax strengthens its fairness, equality, and power; measures of privacy enacted throughout government strengthen its legal resistance to factional corruption and forces other laws to submit to the fairness of "blind justice."
Is blind justice, i.e. equality, relevant to the subject of the FairTax? Of course. The FairTax is attempting restore fairness, equality, simplicity, transparency, and responsibility into the revenue side of government, but the government must be aligned with those principles in order to accept any legislation founded in the same (without a SERIOUS fight). These principles must be incorporated into every other aspect of government, else "traditional politics" will both fight the enactment of the FairTax bitterly, and effectively and utterly corrupt it (as it has the income tax) once we win the needlessly costly fight.
The FairTax has begun as a grassroots organization, but noble goal of fiscal fairness must develop into a much more comprehensive and strategic operation in order to prevail in the current political establishment; brute force of numbers is insufficient, as very clever politicians are quite practiced in the art of "side-stepping" the brute will of the masses. Leadership will listen to the people when they are legally bound to the people's will, and that requires a constitutional ammendment. The only way to give the people (and thus the grassroots) sufficient power to advance fair initiatives like the FairTax is to fill government with leaders who would release their own power in favor of Democracy (and I have yet to ever see that happen). The FairTax binds government to the will of an equal people, removing the manipulative power of inequality which many politicians so cherish and thrive upon, so their strong opposition is natural and expected. What begins as a movement from the people, must "snowball" into an effective, multi-pronged, multi-tiered, strategic government reformation process, or else it must smolder forever as a good intention continually undermined and dismissed by the politics of the day.
-- Andy Landen
Houston, TX
When there is an income tax, the just man will pay more and the unjust less on the same amount of income.- Plato
Thursday, December 07, 2006
DNA Mapping Revolution
Understanding the language of life will empower those who "speak it" to program whatever kind of life he desires. It is the power of the Gods, and far more significant than a nuclear arsenal or advanced medicine, when completely understood.The DNA is a complete instruction set for each life. It chemically dictates the biological construction, functioning, and processing of all organs within it. Any language, to be understood, must be first mapped. Usually, the "bad" words (or diseases) are the first words learned, because they hold the greatest interest of the student/researcher.
The first benefit and the primary course of study in this effort is the identification of troublesome "codes," or diseases, but that just barely begins to scratch the surface. We will begin to recognize patterns between the code and the operations until we start to build DNA-compilers which translate human instructions into DNA-code, and attempt to reverse-engineer interesting segments to understand what they are saying specifically.
Ultimately, humans will be able to design viruses which attack certain diseases, or races, and they will move to designing better organs and even useful life forms to meet specific needs. As with all great powers, much potential for harm from side-effects exists with amateur experimentation unless great care is taken, much potential for good and evil will arise from developed/mature technologies and experience. Given the complexity and size of DNA, this process could take substantial time and resources, until the emergence of quantum computing.
Before we design viruses and other life forms, we will find it necessary to design "DNA workshops" consisting of "DNA construction machines," and stores of "DNA building materials," such as amino acids, vitamins, minerals, etc. Eventually, we will be building our own amino acids with specialized DNA/organisms. At last, a long and complex assembly line of Life will be designed and put into motion for each desired biological creation.
The science fiction names given to humans of "Carbon unit," and "Carbon machine" will be very easily accepted, and we will find ourselves with the difficulty of trying to define a new morality with the blurring of the lines between life and machine.
The first benefit and the primary course of study in this effort is the identification of troublesome "codes," or diseases, but that just barely begins to scratch the surface. We will begin to recognize patterns between the code and the operations until we start to build DNA-compilers which translate human instructions into DNA-code, and attempt to reverse-engineer interesting segments to understand what they are saying specifically.
Ultimately, humans will be able to design viruses which attack certain diseases, or races, and they will move to designing better organs and even useful life forms to meet specific needs. As with all great powers, much potential for harm from side-effects exists with amateur experimentation unless great care is taken, much potential for good and evil will arise from developed/mature technologies and experience. Given the complexity and size of DNA, this process could take substantial time and resources, until the emergence of quantum computing.
Before we design viruses and other life forms, we will find it necessary to design "DNA workshops" consisting of "DNA construction machines," and stores of "DNA building materials," such as amino acids, vitamins, minerals, etc. Eventually, we will be building our own amino acids with specialized DNA/organisms. At last, a long and complex assembly line of Life will be designed and put into motion for each desired biological creation.
The science fiction names given to humans of "Carbon unit," and "Carbon machine" will be very easily accepted, and we will find ourselves with the difficulty of trying to define a new morality with the blurring of the lines between life and machine.
Monday, November 13, 2006
The Third Party
My fellow Americans, I hear you. Grassroots and constituents hate their own parties and groups. Republicans jumping ship back and forth. Democrats keeping on their own ship mostly, but feeling betrayed. AFT trying to get the grassroots power (their own power base).
AFT is a party, it just hasn't been recognized as one, and hasn't accepted itself as one. AFT does not belong in any of the current parties today. It's true. Republicans are the strongest supporters, but with their majority did nothing for it. Many Democrats like it but with the party *dead* against it, they are frozen and mute on the subject. The constituents of both parties are quite similar in their desire for the FairTax, but the parties are more interested in themselves. Yet the Democrat constituency stands out with amazing patience and loyalty.
Most people already want the FairTax, they just don't know it yet. When we get the support of the masses (the question is only how soon), my experience shows that the politicians will manipulate, deceive, and divide them in every possible way to advance their own agendas and the power of their parties, respectively. AND IF somehow we manage to ram the popular rampart through the castle gates, storm the congress, and put the FairTax bill before our leaders, I promise you that they will pervert it in every way possible so that the bill which is passed is only vaguely similar to the original, and over time the people will see the FairTax defiled by corruption comparable to the current Income Tax. To me, this is a very ugly picture on the backs of tremendous will and sacrifice by AFT leaders and grassroots.
Try a different picture now. Fine, charismatic, honest, amiable, open leaders are taken from within the FairTax ranks as candidates for a new FairTax party. Wealthy individuals such as Ross Perot and Bill Gates are persuaded to back us. Our party is cleansed from all politics, including desires for reduced government (that will happen in time when the people are empowered to rule in fairness and sovereignty), and our platform becomes only fairness, honesty, and integrity. These leaders will inspire a nation which already want the FairTax deep in their hearts. These leaders will protect the FairTax from corruption, and fairness from politics.
DO NOT entertain the idea of creating a third political party in terms of the traditional partison lines, or it CANNOT energize the populous. We need a party for the people, protecting fairness in every aspect of government while ready to advance the will of the people IN ANY FAIR AND RESPONSIBLE WAY WHATSOEVER.
Let the people increase government spending by 10% every year (or reduce it). Let them UNSECURE the borders if they wish (however unlikely that might be). Let them deteriorate our military readiness (that hasn't been the American way yet, but hey, people may change with good representation, no? :) Let the people abandon social security (its was built upon an unstable foundation and is due to collapse of its own accord quite soon anyway) and replace it with something which is fair to all. Last, but most important, let the people "abandon" the Constitution (according to its own provisions for ammendment of course)! It is THAT document which established the system which empowers two parties, both of which have done injustice to the people since the beginning. Let the people reform the constitution to create a system of nonpartisan popular sovereignty in equality, instead of the highly partisan system which fights, controls, subdues, and manipulates the people at every turn.
I accept that AFT wants a strong popular base, and though I see much wasted effort and disappointment at the end of that road, please recognize that any party and any person is at risk to the corrupting influence of power unless they stand on the sure platform of democracy, equality, and freedom, where each candidate is not an agent of popular power, but a powerful agent of the people, a true representative.
Andy Landen
Houston, TX
AFT is a party, it just hasn't been recognized as one, and hasn't accepted itself as one. AFT does not belong in any of the current parties today. It's true. Republicans are the strongest supporters, but with their majority did nothing for it. Many Democrats like it but with the party *dead* against it, they are frozen and mute on the subject. The constituents of both parties are quite similar in their desire for the FairTax, but the parties are more interested in themselves. Yet the Democrat constituency stands out with amazing patience and loyalty.
Most people already want the FairTax, they just don't know it yet. When we get the support of the masses (the question is only how soon), my experience shows that the politicians will manipulate, deceive, and divide them in every possible way to advance their own agendas and the power of their parties, respectively. AND IF somehow we manage to ram the popular rampart through the castle gates, storm the congress, and put the FairTax bill before our leaders, I promise you that they will pervert it in every way possible so that the bill which is passed is only vaguely similar to the original, and over time the people will see the FairTax defiled by corruption comparable to the current Income Tax. To me, this is a very ugly picture on the backs of tremendous will and sacrifice by AFT leaders and grassroots.
Try a different picture now. Fine, charismatic, honest, amiable, open leaders are taken from within the FairTax ranks as candidates for a new FairTax party. Wealthy individuals such as Ross Perot and Bill Gates are persuaded to back us. Our party is cleansed from all politics, including desires for reduced government (that will happen in time when the people are empowered to rule in fairness and sovereignty), and our platform becomes only fairness, honesty, and integrity. These leaders will inspire a nation which already want the FairTax deep in their hearts. These leaders will protect the FairTax from corruption, and fairness from politics.
DO NOT entertain the idea of creating a third political party in terms of the traditional partison lines, or it CANNOT energize the populous. We need a party for the people, protecting fairness in every aspect of government while ready to advance the will of the people IN ANY FAIR AND RESPONSIBLE WAY WHATSOEVER.
Let the people increase government spending by 10% every year (or reduce it). Let them UNSECURE the borders if they wish (however unlikely that might be). Let them deteriorate our military readiness (that hasn't been the American way yet, but hey, people may change with good representation, no? :) Let the people abandon social security (its was built upon an unstable foundation and is due to collapse of its own accord quite soon anyway) and replace it with something which is fair to all. Last, but most important, let the people "abandon" the Constitution (according to its own provisions for ammendment of course)! It is THAT document which established the system which empowers two parties, both of which have done injustice to the people since the beginning. Let the people reform the constitution to create a system of nonpartisan popular sovereignty in equality, instead of the highly partisan system which fights, controls, subdues, and manipulates the people at every turn.
I accept that AFT wants a strong popular base, and though I see much wasted effort and disappointment at the end of that road, please recognize that any party and any person is at risk to the corrupting influence of power unless they stand on the sure platform of democracy, equality, and freedom, where each candidate is not an agent of popular power, but a powerful agent of the people, a true representative.
Andy Landen
Houston, TX
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
The Mind
It is clear to me that most people are scared of the little understood Mind, but that they are all troubled by its operations.
The Mind seems to be the spiritual part of the person which governs our perception of, interaction with, and effect on the universe. The spirit seems to be the psychological control center of the brain, especially the conscious part. It seems almost synonymous with God and definitely somewhat removed from our consciousness. It seems as if there are three parts to the life of the person: the body, the spirit, and the mind. The mind seems to observe and react to the situation of the body and the spirit so as to advance one's interests while protect oneself from harm, both bodily and spiritually.
By faith, the mind hears the suggestions of the spirit and works to establish peace and security for the individual. At times, this work appears to be real and miraculous, while at other times, it appears to be unreal and deceptive. The former appears to operate on the principle of industry and respect and peace, while the latter seems to be driven by anger, fear, doubt, idleness, and disrespect for nature.
The Mind seems to be the spiritual part of the person which governs our perception of, interaction with, and effect on the universe. The spirit seems to be the psychological control center of the brain, especially the conscious part. It seems almost synonymous with God and definitely somewhat removed from our consciousness. It seems as if there are three parts to the life of the person: the body, the spirit, and the mind. The mind seems to observe and react to the situation of the body and the spirit so as to advance one's interests while protect oneself from harm, both bodily and spiritually.
By faith, the mind hears the suggestions of the spirit and works to establish peace and security for the individual. At times, this work appears to be real and miraculous, while at other times, it appears to be unreal and deceptive. The former appears to operate on the principle of industry and respect and peace, while the latter seems to be driven by anger, fear, doubt, idleness, and disrespect for nature.
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Republican Failures and Government Shortcomings of 2006
Republicans appear to be unable to deliver on key promises and American expectations when it comes to:
- Fiscal Responsibility with a Balanced Budget Ammendment, Tax Reform/Simplification/Fairness (FairTax) and Elimination of Debt
- Social Responsibility with Welfare Reform/Privatization (especially Social Security)
- Civil Respect and Freedoms with Protections on civil liberties, privacy, justice, and legal and government transparency
- Stronger Democracy with measures which increase voter turnout and increased government dependence on the same
- Foreign Strength with Respectful Alliances and Clear, unilateral advancement of American interests; disable threats and respect foreign peoples
- American Independence with solely American command of American troops
- Military Superiority in space and especially against ICBM (long range missile) threats (work is just beginning in those areas
Tuesday, October 17, 2006
Increasing the Population
A recent article commemorated the US population 300 million mark, and I salute her for it; though I believe that she should open her borders to much more legal immigration having only the requirements of English proficiency and lawful intent (free English courses offered and police background checks required). She should also reject criminals (after reparations) to their home countries (transfered to their home government's jurisdiction).
Some argue that an increase in population is bad, but I say that nothing could be farther from the truth, unless of course you are trying to make slaves of the existing population to your will. It is true that resources are finite, but we can hardly tap into them all, for nature is far greater than us and we keep getting smarter everyday. The important point is that every person earns at least as much as they spend (no subsidies or grants). True, every person adds their own set of needs and wants, but at the same time they must also offer services to meet the needs and wants of others, which in value exceeds their own consumption. Therefore the net result is that there is more of an increase in resources and services than there is a demand on the same concerning each individual, thus leaving a net increase for every addition to the population.
A study revealed that there is enough land in Texas alone for every American family to live on a 2 acre plot of real estate. Obviously, land is not an issue, for we are very good at building up even if the population rose to such heights that ownership of a quarter acre was not possible for every single American family (a population increase of 800%, assuming we are only limited to living in Texas, never mind California and Alaska, and the other 47 states for that matter).
An increased population brings increased competition, increased specialization and talent, increased culture, and more diverse ideas and communication. It brings a stronger country when the population is raised for success. The increase in demand for food with increased populations certainly raises the costs of food (which is good for the agricultural sector), thus revealing the insanity of our subsidized destruction of crops. Larger populations increase the potential for social and economic circulation (much like the life blood of the body). In conclusion, there exists no negative argument against an increased population which isn't immediately countered with a larger positive argument for it.
If there exists any problems associated with larger populations they are erroneously confused with the root problems of poor family, social, or governmental systems. Problems must be expected from children who are raised to fight goodness, and love evil. Societies which rejected children or foreigners border on the evils of isolationism and racism, and create selfish, foolish policies which quickly undermine the foundation of their strengths and successes. Governments undermine their economies and the freedoms of their citizens when they establish masters and slaves by creating inequality, as in the current partial, progressive tax system which allows no privacy or impartiality and by redistributing wealth by grants/subsidies, and by targeted, free services. All of these problems are independent of population and completely based on politics and inequality. So America, open your borders to good people interested in integrating into our english-speaking societies and remove your ïllegal' laws which establish inequality and injustice.
Some argue that an increase in population is bad, but I say that nothing could be farther from the truth, unless of course you are trying to make slaves of the existing population to your will. It is true that resources are finite, but we can hardly tap into them all, for nature is far greater than us and we keep getting smarter everyday. The important point is that every person earns at least as much as they spend (no subsidies or grants). True, every person adds their own set of needs and wants, but at the same time they must also offer services to meet the needs and wants of others, which in value exceeds their own consumption. Therefore the net result is that there is more of an increase in resources and services than there is a demand on the same concerning each individual, thus leaving a net increase for every addition to the population.
A study revealed that there is enough land in Texas alone for every American family to live on a 2 acre plot of real estate. Obviously, land is not an issue, for we are very good at building up even if the population rose to such heights that ownership of a quarter acre was not possible for every single American family (a population increase of 800%, assuming we are only limited to living in Texas, never mind California and Alaska, and the other 47 states for that matter).
An increased population brings increased competition, increased specialization and talent, increased culture, and more diverse ideas and communication. It brings a stronger country when the population is raised for success. The increase in demand for food with increased populations certainly raises the costs of food (which is good for the agricultural sector), thus revealing the insanity of our subsidized destruction of crops. Larger populations increase the potential for social and economic circulation (much like the life blood of the body). In conclusion, there exists no negative argument against an increased population which isn't immediately countered with a larger positive argument for it.
If there exists any problems associated with larger populations they are erroneously confused with the root problems of poor family, social, or governmental systems. Problems must be expected from children who are raised to fight goodness, and love evil. Societies which rejected children or foreigners border on the evils of isolationism and racism, and create selfish, foolish policies which quickly undermine the foundation of their strengths and successes. Governments undermine their economies and the freedoms of their citizens when they establish masters and slaves by creating inequality, as in the current partial, progressive tax system which allows no privacy or impartiality and by redistributing wealth by grants/subsidies, and by targeted, free services. All of these problems are independent of population and completely based on politics and inequality. So America, open your borders to good people interested in integrating into our english-speaking societies and remove your ïllegal' laws which establish inequality and injustice.
The Threat of North Korea
North Korea poses a grave threat to all and differs little from Iraq, except that she has no resources of value. Her dictator is killing her own people for the military power to fight America. The world strongly resisted the US invasion of Iraq against a ruthless dictator bent on the destruction of Israel and America. Similar resistance is found with this equally ruthless dictator. North Korea stole our nuclear secrets, secretly implemented a nuclear program based on them, took our money as funding for the very weapons they intend to use against us, openly broadcast their desire for war with us by a nuclear dud. We've put up with them long enough and now it is time to move our military assets to bear on the situation, as they leave no other option.
Secure all weapons of mass destruction. Leave a small force in Iraq to train the Iraqi forces to maintain security, and threaten the nuclear option for the next 8 years (on condition that Iraqi forces and operations remain inside her own borders) on any country, especially Iran, who attempts to violate her borders or fund any group which violates her borders or control any city within her borders. Posture all military units on the borders of North Korea, declare a DMZ on the country's borders, and tell them to stand down for a military invasion using strategies which expose us to minimum risk. Prepare the use of non-conventional weapons where needed/appropriate. Secure and destroy all weapons, and their systems, plans, technologies, and facilities, conventional and unconventional. North Korea will be united with South Korea under South Korean government. The nuclear option will be put on the table for any country which attempts to invade South Korea for the next 8 years (similar to the Iraqi deal). American forces will then leave. Post-war humanitarian aid will be limited to food and water donations from and by third party Red Cross and other neutral, non-military organizations (at their own risk). Ask Iran to consider her own fate in light of Iraq and North Korea.
US forces must leave Iraq quickly (9 months from now, June of 2007) with a native, trained security force in place, lest there be devastating results from nuclear attacks by North Korea and Iran and their militant, terrorist allies.
Secure all weapons of mass destruction. Leave a small force in Iraq to train the Iraqi forces to maintain security, and threaten the nuclear option for the next 8 years (on condition that Iraqi forces and operations remain inside her own borders) on any country, especially Iran, who attempts to violate her borders or fund any group which violates her borders or control any city within her borders. Posture all military units on the borders of North Korea, declare a DMZ on the country's borders, and tell them to stand down for a military invasion using strategies which expose us to minimum risk. Prepare the use of non-conventional weapons where needed/appropriate. Secure and destroy all weapons, and their systems, plans, technologies, and facilities, conventional and unconventional. North Korea will be united with South Korea under South Korean government. The nuclear option will be put on the table for any country which attempts to invade South Korea for the next 8 years (similar to the Iraqi deal). American forces will then leave. Post-war humanitarian aid will be limited to food and water donations from and by third party Red Cross and other neutral, non-military organizations (at their own risk). Ask Iran to consider her own fate in light of Iraq and North Korea.
US forces must leave Iraq quickly (9 months from now, June of 2007) with a native, trained security force in place, lest there be devastating results from nuclear attacks by North Korea and Iran and their militant, terrorist allies.
Tuesday, October 10, 2006
Telling the Truth
It has been said that "truth is the greatest virtue," and also that one should "learn the truth and the truth shall set you free," and some people even teach that one should always tell the truth. But is it true that to lie or to withold the truth is always bad?
I have long held that deceipt is a form of force in that it causes people to act against their rational will or self-interest contrary to their just desires. Is it ever proper to use force, or deceipt, and if so when and why?
Knowledge of the truth can be quite stressful, especially when you want things to be different than they are. Telling the "truth" forces others to confront ideas with which they may find conflict.
Typically, we do not possess the truth, but instead we know only our version of the truth, or our perspective tainted by our desires and philosophies. When we believe that a person is mean, we tend to only see those things which justify that view. When we are dishonest, we tend to superimpose that character upon all others, believing that other people are generally dishonest.
In general, we can only have two effects on others: positive (empowering) or negative (harmful). The only rational course of action is to influence our friends positively and our enemies negatively. Contrary to the well-known saying: Knowledge is not always power. Knowledge may destroy desire, morale, and even oneself, if one is unprepared to receive it, understand it, and accept it.
While it is no person's duty to empower their enemies, you are always much better off winning friends from enemies when possible (assuming the risk of betrayal is managed appropriately). Conversely, it is your duty to empower your friends, that your alliances may stand stronger in the face of adversity.
Therefore care must be taken to ensure that you always empower your friends to the degree of power with which they may be safely trusted, for no person may be assumed to hold an infinitely strong bond of friendship, except perhaps God Himself, Who is already infinitely powerful (perhaps for that very reason). Care must also be taken that your enemies are fought in such a way as to miminize one's own loss of power by the consumption of resources in the war, and to lower the overall threat to oneself consisting of the summation of all of the individual threats from each of one's enemies. Again, the authentic transformation of enemies to friends is of vital importance in that it simultaneously saves the expenditure of resources in confrontation and adds strength to your alliance.
In conclusion, the only truth which should be said is that which empowers and inspires your friends according to the respective degrees of trust, and which harms or discourages your enemies according to the threats they pose to your alliance. Insufficient inspiration and empowerment limits the potential to increase trust with one's friends, and strengthen one's alliance. Excessive harm costs excessive sacrifice in the conflict and reduces the opportunities for winning friends of your enemies. The optimal balance requires great wisdom and rational consideration.
-by Andy Landen
I have long held that deceipt is a form of force in that it causes people to act against their rational will or self-interest contrary to their just desires. Is it ever proper to use force, or deceipt, and if so when and why?
Knowledge of the truth can be quite stressful, especially when you want things to be different than they are. Telling the "truth" forces others to confront ideas with which they may find conflict.
Typically, we do not possess the truth, but instead we know only our version of the truth, or our perspective tainted by our desires and philosophies. When we believe that a person is mean, we tend to only see those things which justify that view. When we are dishonest, we tend to superimpose that character upon all others, believing that other people are generally dishonest.
In general, we can only have two effects on others: positive (empowering) or negative (harmful). The only rational course of action is to influence our friends positively and our enemies negatively. Contrary to the well-known saying: Knowledge is not always power. Knowledge may destroy desire, morale, and even oneself, if one is unprepared to receive it, understand it, and accept it.
While it is no person's duty to empower their enemies, you are always much better off winning friends from enemies when possible (assuming the risk of betrayal is managed appropriately). Conversely, it is your duty to empower your friends, that your alliances may stand stronger in the face of adversity.
Therefore care must be taken to ensure that you always empower your friends to the degree of power with which they may be safely trusted, for no person may be assumed to hold an infinitely strong bond of friendship, except perhaps God Himself, Who is already infinitely powerful (perhaps for that very reason). Care must also be taken that your enemies are fought in such a way as to miminize one's own loss of power by the consumption of resources in the war, and to lower the overall threat to oneself consisting of the summation of all of the individual threats from each of one's enemies. Again, the authentic transformation of enemies to friends is of vital importance in that it simultaneously saves the expenditure of resources in confrontation and adds strength to your alliance.
In conclusion, the only truth which should be said is that which empowers and inspires your friends according to the respective degrees of trust, and which harms or discourages your enemies according to the threats they pose to your alliance. Insufficient inspiration and empowerment limits the potential to increase trust with one's friends, and strengthen one's alliance. Excessive harm costs excessive sacrifice in the conflict and reduces the opportunities for winning friends of your enemies. The optimal balance requires great wisdom and rational consideration.
-by Andy Landen
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
The Physician
The world needs physicians, not doctors, and counselors, not psychiatrists. Physicians heal the root problem, while doctors merely bandage the symptoms. Counselors resolve the mind, while psychiatrists simply numb its pain. Now pain killers are valuable in many ways, but they themselves are not the solutions to our problems. To many people trying to escape reality, only to realize that the fight only complicates and creates further problems.
The foundation of healing is identifying root causes and resolving them and ultimately, each individual solely holds that responsibility for oneself. Just as the body is the best physician for its physical wounds, the mind is the best physician for its mental/spiritual wounds. But unlike the body, the mind must choose whether to live or to die, to hope or to fear, to love or to hate, to be at peace or at anger. Thus the physician of choice is self, and salvation comes through this embrace of life: hope, love, and peace.
The foundation of healing is identifying root causes and resolving them and ultimately, each individual solely holds that responsibility for oneself. Just as the body is the best physician for its physical wounds, the mind is the best physician for its mental/spiritual wounds. But unlike the body, the mind must choose whether to live or to die, to hope or to fear, to love or to hate, to be at peace or at anger. Thus the physician of choice is self, and salvation comes through this embrace of life: hope, love, and peace.
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Thermodynamic crimes
Heating with electricity is as much a thermodynamic crime as turning a motor with combustion.
Homes and food should be heated by natural gas. Motors should be turned by electricity.
When gas burns (combustion) it's most natural and plentiful product is heat, therefore it is best suited for heating. Electricity is a much higher and more precious form of energy required by motors. Unfortunately, portable needs for energy have not developed the most natural conversion of chemical energy into electricity, electrochemistry using fuel cells.
The consequence of committing a thermodynamic crime is wasted energy, which comes at a price both physically and psychologically. Wasted resources harm the "bottom line" and disrespect the laws of nature.
Homes and food should be heated by natural gas. Motors should be turned by electricity.
When gas burns (combustion) it's most natural and plentiful product is heat, therefore it is best suited for heating. Electricity is a much higher and more precious form of energy required by motors. Unfortunately, portable needs for energy have not developed the most natural conversion of chemical energy into electricity, electrochemistry using fuel cells.
The consequence of committing a thermodynamic crime is wasted energy, which comes at a price both physically and psychologically. Wasted resources harm the "bottom line" and disrespect the laws of nature.
Friday, September 08, 2006
Utopian commute
The ideal commuter solution to congested roadways would be free (the savings in road construction would more than pay for it) shuttle services, where respectful, safe drivers in nice vans shuttle residents from their front doorsteps to main transfer points (off the road for minimal/no disruption of traffic) along main road arteries where larger buses take them into the city (always remaining on main roadways, especially freeways (for a speedy and quick commute). These buses drop commuters off at main transfer points (minimizing the number of stops on the route for a quick commute) where similar vans shuttle commuters to the front entrances at the workplaces. All city transport services are concentrated on these services so that buses leave and arrive at main transfer points very frequently (at least every 30s to 1 minute), and vans arrive at commuters homes within minutes of the "ready call," where commuters signal their desire and preparation for pick-up. In this way, the main transfer points do not require large parking lots because the only method of transfer is by drop-off via the city-funded vans, or via drop-off by a spouse. People are paid to advertise the presence of the commuter shuttle service with door-to-door flyers to areas of viable commuter populations.
Tuesday, September 05, 2006
Al Qaida, Hezbollah, and Iran
Everyone knows that Al Qaida's mission is the forceful spread of Islam, and I think that this reason underscores the threat which Americans have successfully assaulted with much sacrifice both in Afghanistan and in Iraq. I think that their words are not hollow, but their brains are, so it has been easy to thwart their mission. Such religious devotion blinds them from common sense and forces them to attack in strategically foolish ways, especially when we manipulate them with our words. Right now, Al Qaida doesn't have much power at all, thanks to the damage that we have inflicted on them for four years now, despite world protests against it. Of all of the excuses used to justify our invasion of Iraq for political purposes, I believe that the fight against Al Qaida is the primary reason and perhaps the only reason which we really care about.
This same war against terrorism has justified America's support of the recent Israeli offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon. They are not lunatics, they are murderers, thieves, and disillusioned, power-hungry zealots. But their power is quickly diminishing and their words are becoming quite hollow. But notice Iran in the coming years and her support of Hezbollah and other terrorist groups. Her words are not hollow, and we may likely suffer much in the near future if the world does not unite in the American war on Terror, namely France, Russia, and China.
Some people say (source protected): "Iran is fomenting trouble and the sooner it is brought under control the better....but we need to be careful and use non-violent methods first. Only if they fails do we need to use force. We can't be like them and use indiscriminate force..and bring tragic loss of human life."
In response to the concerns for the destruction of war, I recognize the tremendous sacrifice and harm inherent in armed conflict, but the refusal to meet one's enemies with force when self-preservation is of the essence risks much worse. Only two questions needs to be asked of Iran: 1) Does she desire peace with America and her allies (including Israel)? and 2) If she does not desire peace, then what threats to our security does she pose now and may she develop in the future? For your, the 1st question would naturally be modified to: 1) Does she desire peace with India and her allies? A third question is probably required for the sake of consistency: 3) Do all of one's allies desire peace and security for one's homeland? Those who do not must be re-classified as enemies.
Now, while it is much easier and wiser to make friends out of former enemies, this must never come at the expense of the peace and security of one's country, and the risk of betrayal must be always accurately considered. Furthermore, the condition of conversion to the religion of Islam, or any other religion for that matter, is an unacceptable violation of human freedom and a re-affirmation of nonpeaceful (forceful) intentions. Any country which desires to control another country as a condition for peace is not an ally at all (America included); I know that we have done our "fair share" of controlling other countries without the justifications of either peace or security.
FYI: It seems clear to me that the American people are preparing to wage war on Iran as we waged war with Iraq.
Personally, if I were President of America, I would immediately classify Iran as an enemy. As an enemy, I would extend the olive branch of peace and also, after a short period of consideration of our peace offering, exercise wisely chosen military opportunities to safeguard our peace and security. Until she accepted our offer of peace completely, I would simply cut off all trade and aid to Iran and all her allies (including those who trade with her), and exercise a balanced strategic and economic military campaign to minimize the threat.
This same war against terrorism has justified America's support of the recent Israeli offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon. They are not lunatics, they are murderers, thieves, and disillusioned, power-hungry zealots. But their power is quickly diminishing and their words are becoming quite hollow. But notice Iran in the coming years and her support of Hezbollah and other terrorist groups. Her words are not hollow, and we may likely suffer much in the near future if the world does not unite in the American war on Terror, namely France, Russia, and China.
Some people say (source protected): "Iran is fomenting trouble and the sooner it is brought under control the better....but we need to be careful and use non-violent methods first. Only if they fails do we need to use force. We can't be like them and use indiscriminate force..and bring tragic loss of human life."
In response to the concerns for the destruction of war, I recognize the tremendous sacrifice and harm inherent in armed conflict, but the refusal to meet one's enemies with force when self-preservation is of the essence risks much worse. Only two questions needs to be asked of Iran: 1) Does she desire peace with America and her allies (including Israel)? and 2) If she does not desire peace, then what threats to our security does she pose now and may she develop in the future? For your, the 1st question would naturally be modified to: 1) Does she desire peace with India and her allies? A third question is probably required for the sake of consistency: 3) Do all of one's allies desire peace and security for one's homeland? Those who do not must be re-classified as enemies.
Now, while it is much easier and wiser to make friends out of former enemies, this must never come at the expense of the peace and security of one's country, and the risk of betrayal must be always accurately considered. Furthermore, the condition of conversion to the religion of Islam, or any other religion for that matter, is an unacceptable violation of human freedom and a re-affirmation of nonpeaceful (forceful) intentions. Any country which desires to control another country as a condition for peace is not an ally at all (America included); I know that we have done our "fair share" of controlling other countries without the justifications of either peace or security.
FYI: It seems clear to me that the American people are preparing to wage war on Iran as we waged war with Iraq.
Personally, if I were President of America, I would immediately classify Iran as an enemy. As an enemy, I would extend the olive branch of peace and also, after a short period of consideration of our peace offering, exercise wisely chosen military opportunities to safeguard our peace and security. Until she accepted our offer of peace completely, I would simply cut off all trade and aid to Iran and all her allies (including those who trade with her), and exercise a balanced strategic and economic military campaign to minimize the threat.
Representation in government
Representatives represent the people as individuals, Senators represent the people as a state. It seems to me like the job of a representative is to represent, and the best qualifications are those of doing the best discovering, and advancing the will of the people, in order of their priorities.
The representative must know the views of all of one's constituents and must honor the freedoms and equalities upon which this country was founded. The representative is bound to solicit the views his constituency, and act only with the support of a full majority.
To that end, technology proves a very crucial tool in its ability to move and organize information. One should establish an electronic system for authenticating identity for the purposes of verifying constituents, for receiving and organizing viewpoints, and for modifying those views either on an individual level, or on an organizational level by majority vote of those who support the respective view.
The representative must know the views of all of one's constituents and must honor the freedoms and equalities upon which this country was founded. The representative is bound to solicit the views his constituency, and act only with the support of a full majority.
To that end, technology proves a very crucial tool in its ability to move and organize information. One should establish an electronic system for authenticating identity for the purposes of verifying constituents, for receiving and organizing viewpoints, and for modifying those views either on an individual level, or on an organizational level by majority vote of those who support the respective view.
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
The keys to success
There are only two keys (universal laws) to success with which all the doors of opportunity may be unlocked: 1) Honor yourself, and 2) Honor the Universe.
Honoring yourself means accepting that you are important and that your long-term welfare deserves both investment and protection, earned by your own efforts. Earn your wealth, both spiritual and physical, by maintaining harmony with both the laws which govern the physical world and those of the spiritual world.
Honoring the Universe applies to both other people, and everything living and non-living, but never at your own expense or at their expense. Harmony is maintained by accepting reality and by engaging only in mutually beneficial interactions/relationships. Respect other people and inspire in them a desire to embrace the 1st universal key, and then defend their right to to it as you would defend you own right to honor yourself. Respect nature by preserving natural resources for wise, optimum, efficient advancement of the two universal laws.
Honoring yourself means accepting that you are important and that your long-term welfare deserves both investment and protection, earned by your own efforts. Earn your wealth, both spiritual and physical, by maintaining harmony with both the laws which govern the physical world and those of the spiritual world.
Honoring the Universe applies to both other people, and everything living and non-living, but never at your own expense or at their expense. Harmony is maintained by accepting reality and by engaging only in mutually beneficial interactions/relationships. Respect other people and inspire in them a desire to embrace the 1st universal key, and then defend their right to to it as you would defend you own right to honor yourself. Respect nature by preserving natural resources for wise, optimum, efficient advancement of the two universal laws.
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
The Power of Cleaning
Whenever I clean, I notice everything that is hidden or wrong. Lost items, and defects in the materials become immediately and glaringly obvious. The best method of inspecting anything before buying it is to clean it first. The best method of finding your keys or your ring is to start cleaning and organizing your house (or apartment).
Wednesday, August 23, 2006
Promises
Promises are only good when they are made freely. When either force or deception (ideological force), are used it must be expected that one is dealing with an enemy defined by the violation of the establishment of optimum, mutually beneficial relationships. In other words, one party stands to lose benefit available from alternative courses of action while the other stands to benefit too much. Lacking the best interests of the former party (the victim/slave), the promise holds no force and actually faces a resistive force. Establishing undue/unearned gain for the latter party (the thief/master), there exists great forces advancing the maintenance and strengthening of the inequity by force. This further releases the thief from obligation to the original promise.
No person may be expected to honor any commitment with any party which poses a threat to one's health or one's prosperity. Promises require trust and establish dependency, both of which are undermined by those who would advance their agendas by force. Negotiation with one's enemies (as has been the common practice with terrorists before 9/11) implies the desire to establish promises and commitments with one's enemies. This policy is insane because it denies inherent distrust and independence required for relationships with one's enemies. Anything which strengthens an enemy, even if it hurts another enemy more, must be considered an added threat to oneself. Of course, negotiations are preferred if one's enemies may be convinced to release their evil desires against oneself, and prove their loyalty.
No person may be expected to honor any commitment with any party which poses a threat to one's health or one's prosperity. Promises require trust and establish dependency, both of which are undermined by those who would advance their agendas by force. Negotiation with one's enemies (as has been the common practice with terrorists before 9/11) implies the desire to establish promises and commitments with one's enemies. This policy is insane because it denies inherent distrust and independence required for relationships with one's enemies. Anything which strengthens an enemy, even if it hurts another enemy more, must be considered an added threat to oneself. Of course, negotiations are preferred if one's enemies may be convinced to release their evil desires against oneself, and prove their loyalty.
Friday, August 11, 2006
The future of communications
I have a vision of the unification of communications technologies, from wireless cell phones to wireless highspeed broadband internet.
A special "cell phone" acts as a portal to the internet much like a wireless router with stand-alone capabilities. Through it one may access the internet, personalized information (in a format similar to Google's personalized homepage with modules), email, video and voice communications and recordings, and financial information with bio-ID such as a fingerprint and a voice authentication and electronic ID such as wireless key cards. This ID could be used to protect financial information and transactions. The email could screen for trusted sources, routing all other communications to a quarantine folder. User interaction with the router would supplement voice communication for the traditional qwerty keyboard or painfully slow and awkward upside-down 10-key.
The router would interface with the computer through an ethernet port and it would continuously check for updates and send new information from the user for communication with the highest quality and lowest disruption due to lost or low wireless signals.
A special "cell phone" acts as a portal to the internet much like a wireless router with stand-alone capabilities. Through it one may access the internet, personalized information (in a format similar to Google's personalized homepage with modules), email, video and voice communications and recordings, and financial information with bio-ID such as a fingerprint and a voice authentication and electronic ID such as wireless key cards. This ID could be used to protect financial information and transactions. The email could screen for trusted sources, routing all other communications to a quarantine folder. User interaction with the router would supplement voice communication for the traditional qwerty keyboard or painfully slow and awkward upside-down 10-key.
The router would interface with the computer through an ethernet port and it would continuously check for updates and send new information from the user for communication with the highest quality and lowest disruption due to lost or low wireless signals.
Thursday, August 10, 2006
Peace and War
Those who desire peace (the cessation of hostilities), fear war. Those who desire war, fear life. Those who desire life, fear death of self. Those who desire death, fear themselves and their agency (freedom); in essence, they are fear.
Those who are peace have no fears. They value allegiance and hostility, life and death, agency and obedience - each in harmony with reality which consists of the natures of all things. Those who are peace, know happiness and continually enjoy inner peace as their companion. Such inner peace is shunned by those who fear, which fear harms and weakens their inner selves with dissonance against nature herself.
Those who are peace have no fears. They value allegiance and hostility, life and death, agency and obedience - each in harmony with reality which consists of the natures of all things. Those who are peace, know happiness and continually enjoy inner peace as their companion. Such inner peace is shunned by those who fear, which fear harms and weakens their inner selves with dissonance against nature herself.
Tuesday, August 01, 2006
The ends do not justify the means.
Most atrocities and abuses have been justified by the common saying, "The ends justify the means." Ironically, the application of this philosophy actually undermines the ends and typically is used to support the use of force/deception (I see no difference between the two, except minor details in the traditional definitions).
The ends define the means. The end of a happy society consists of policies which allow individuals to discover and pursue their own interests. The end of justice consists of policies which respect individual sovereignty and freedom. The end of efficiency entails the elimination of excess entropy (waste) by establishing energetic environments which honor the strengths and weaknesses of each. In other words, accept reality peacefully and align your nature with its nature.
Subsidies are means to creating dependencies as their ends. Policies of control yield an audience unaccustomed to freedom, independence, and sovereign respect, thus fighting the very nature of the human soul.
The end of parental respect requires that parents act in respectful ways. The end of developing children into mature adults requires the bestowal of responsibilities and support, and a strict refrain from "spoiling" them (i.e. giving them what they want when they want it simply because they want it), though it is completely acceptable (to the end of maturity) for the subject to be allowed to enjoy policies which develop maturity.
The end of a strong family requires the increase love and respect between all members, which is quickly undermined by physical and verbal abuse. What we call "respect" due to physical or verbal punishment is actually fear and unrelated to my idea of respect. This fear is nothing like the admiration, value, and even love intrinsic with my definition of respect.
The end of a strong economy is advanced by productivity and efficiency and freedom. These require equality/impartiality, and simplicity of the governing laws of the land, to name a few. A complex tax code (as enforced by the wasteful and intrusive IRS) giving preferential treatment (i.e. subsidies) to some groups over other groups will make an inefficient, biased system in which people will not work as productively or with as much motivation. A simple, flat, transpare sales tax like the FairTax motivates productivity, efficiency, and freedom in its fairness (equality) and in its simple efficiency.
The ends define the means. The end of a happy society consists of policies which allow individuals to discover and pursue their own interests. The end of justice consists of policies which respect individual sovereignty and freedom. The end of efficiency entails the elimination of excess entropy (waste) by establishing energetic environments which honor the strengths and weaknesses of each. In other words, accept reality peacefully and align your nature with its nature.
Subsidies are means to creating dependencies as their ends. Policies of control yield an audience unaccustomed to freedom, independence, and sovereign respect, thus fighting the very nature of the human soul.
The end of parental respect requires that parents act in respectful ways. The end of developing children into mature adults requires the bestowal of responsibilities and support, and a strict refrain from "spoiling" them (i.e. giving them what they want when they want it simply because they want it), though it is completely acceptable (to the end of maturity) for the subject to be allowed to enjoy policies which develop maturity.
The end of a strong family requires the increase love and respect between all members, which is quickly undermined by physical and verbal abuse. What we call "respect" due to physical or verbal punishment is actually fear and unrelated to my idea of respect. This fear is nothing like the admiration, value, and even love intrinsic with my definition of respect.
The end of a strong economy is advanced by productivity and efficiency and freedom. These require equality/impartiality, and simplicity of the governing laws of the land, to name a few. A complex tax code (as enforced by the wasteful and intrusive IRS) giving preferential treatment (i.e. subsidies) to some groups over other groups will make an inefficient, biased system in which people will not work as productively or with as much motivation. A simple, flat, transpare sales tax like the FairTax motivates productivity, efficiency, and freedom in its fairness (equality) and in its simple efficiency.
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
The Parable of the CEO
There once was a CEO, named John, who founded and owned a large, successful real estate corporation, and owned a red H2 Hummer (an ATV, all-terrain vehicle), several Navy blue suits, and many silky, shiny, white shirts and ties. Now John had a very good friend, named Isaac, who typically drove a white porsche and wore a blue suit; the car was a promotional bonus gift from John, who just recently transferred Isaac to a nice position in the accounting department in his successful company.
Several employees in the accounting department immediately decided that they did not like Isaac, because of his suit and car, which was a gift from John as part of the transfer bonus, so after a short time they all threw him hard up against the wall. He fought them all back, and of course several of the employees either left the company or were fired.
Isaac rose to fill the vacancies left by these ex-employees, which made them hate him all the more. These ex-employees were, of course, envious of and angry at John, and they hired hitmen to attack both John and Isaac. One hitman, named Al, entered the company and passed by security without being detected. He approached John from behind and shot him three times, once in each leg and once in the head, though John's hard hat substantially minimized the damage, before John's security engaged and repelled the threat. Al left a message for John: "Fire Isaac, resign your position, and give us your company, lest you continue to be smitten. Also, you must subject yourselves to us, including your wealth, your customs, your family, and your freedom."
John recovered quickly enough to make war with Al; though the wounds in his legs took years to heal. Obviously John was furious and looking to execute swift justice upon his enemies. One ex-employee, named Ira, boasted of her financial support for Al and for another ex-employee, named, Pal, who was supporting a hitman, named Ham, to attack with Isaac frequently. Both Al and Ham, and many of the ex-employees publicly announced their intent to destroy or captivate both John and Isaac.
Assuming that there is no one else to whom John may turn for assistance, what should he do at this point? Judge for yourself first, apply it to the most familiar experience coinciding with this parable, and then evaluate the conclusion of this parable.
In this case, John pursued Al with a rifle and seriously wounded him, fired and killed an employee, named Alf, when he protected Al, and captured Ira, when she tried to defend the dying Al, and finished Al.
Several employees in the accounting department immediately decided that they did not like Isaac, because of his suit and car, which was a gift from John as part of the transfer bonus, so after a short time they all threw him hard up against the wall. He fought them all back, and of course several of the employees either left the company or were fired.
Isaac rose to fill the vacancies left by these ex-employees, which made them hate him all the more. These ex-employees were, of course, envious of and angry at John, and they hired hitmen to attack both John and Isaac. One hitman, named Al, entered the company and passed by security without being detected. He approached John from behind and shot him three times, once in each leg and once in the head, though John's hard hat substantially minimized the damage, before John's security engaged and repelled the threat. Al left a message for John: "Fire Isaac, resign your position, and give us your company, lest you continue to be smitten. Also, you must subject yourselves to us, including your wealth, your customs, your family, and your freedom."
John recovered quickly enough to make war with Al; though the wounds in his legs took years to heal. Obviously John was furious and looking to execute swift justice upon his enemies. One ex-employee, named Ira, boasted of her financial support for Al and for another ex-employee, named, Pal, who was supporting a hitman, named Ham, to attack with Isaac frequently. Both Al and Ham, and many of the ex-employees publicly announced their intent to destroy or captivate both John and Isaac.
Assuming that there is no one else to whom John may turn for assistance, what should he do at this point? Judge for yourself first, apply it to the most familiar experience coinciding with this parable, and then evaluate the conclusion of this parable.
In this case, John pursued Al with a rifle and seriously wounded him, fired and killed an employee, named Alf, when he protected Al, and captured Ira, when she tried to defend the dying Al, and finished Al.
Monday, July 24, 2006
The power of the US federal government
I'm sure that you are aware that the US federal government's rise to power during this last century is rooted any much more than taxation. The other half of the fiscal equation is benefits, subsidies, grants, entitlements, etc. It is only the taxation which hurts most directly, and is therefore most noticed. In addition to revenue collection (taxation) and spending (benefits), the government has successfully claimed the powers of nationalization, regulation, and education.
Nationalization is the "legal" theft of real estate by the government; theft because despite the compensation (money) offered, the transfer of wealth (property, in this case) is coerced.
Regulation involves the issuance of certifications, permits, and standards for environmental waste.
Education consists of the governments control over all public academian establishments, being a virtual monopoly in the elementary and high school levels.
A few other major elements of federal power (beyond taxation, which wasn't mentioned here yet) include the IRS, extensive tax code, and invasion of privacy, and the differential, unfair, and manipulative treatment of citizens by classes and groups. Taxation includes all import and export taxes, tariffs, investment taxes, death taxes, gift taxes, leasing fees, permit fees, income taxes, corporate taxes, property confiscations, quid pro quo "donations," and the power to levy bonds (debt).
Every power listed thus far may be justified by hundreds of "good intentions," but in the end only one general observation holds true for all of them: These powers have all been grossly abused because they all violate the fundamental principle of blind equality, which is freedom. Blind equality says that it is immoral for government to hold different standards to different people; without consideration, or even collection, of any unique, personal attribute, government must create an impartial law and enforce it impartially. Impartiality is the anti-thesis of factional politics and the basis of fairness. The FairTax, a revenue-based approach to establishing and implementing impartiality, and thus freedom for the people, in government, holds great potential, despite its intrusions upon the privacy of the American family in its implementation of the prebate provision, an flat credit adjusting for the expected taxes paid at the poverty line.
Nationalization is the "legal" theft of real estate by the government; theft because despite the compensation (money) offered, the transfer of wealth (property, in this case) is coerced.
Regulation involves the issuance of certifications, permits, and standards for environmental waste.
Education consists of the governments control over all public academian establishments, being a virtual monopoly in the elementary and high school levels.
A few other major elements of federal power (beyond taxation, which wasn't mentioned here yet) include the IRS, extensive tax code, and invasion of privacy, and the differential, unfair, and manipulative treatment of citizens by classes and groups. Taxation includes all import and export taxes, tariffs, investment taxes, death taxes, gift taxes, leasing fees, permit fees, income taxes, corporate taxes, property confiscations, quid pro quo "donations," and the power to levy bonds (debt).
Every power listed thus far may be justified by hundreds of "good intentions," but in the end only one general observation holds true for all of them: These powers have all been grossly abused because they all violate the fundamental principle of blind equality, which is freedom. Blind equality says that it is immoral for government to hold different standards to different people; without consideration, or even collection, of any unique, personal attribute, government must create an impartial law and enforce it impartially. Impartiality is the anti-thesis of factional politics and the basis of fairness. The FairTax, a revenue-based approach to establishing and implementing impartiality, and thus freedom for the people, in government, holds great potential, despite its intrusions upon the privacy of the American family in its implementation of the prebate provision, an flat credit adjusting for the expected taxes paid at the poverty line.
Friday, July 21, 2006
Flag burning
The incineration of a flag (or any other symbol) is a clear advocation the destruction of the organization designated by it. Therefore, all who burn flags are mortal enemies to the respective countries and must be taken as a declaration of war. No declaration of war may be wisely dismissed, and no friendly relations may be maintained with those who make such declarations, except they repent by re-establishing friendly relations built upon time-tested trust. Any organization which supports an organization which makes such declarations must be assumed to be joining them in such declarations. Any group or organization which does not openly oppose flag burning activities must be considered either supportive of them, or controlled by them.
Thursday, July 20, 2006
The Reformist and the Revolutionary
Reform and revolution is generally wise so long as those new ideas are tested extensively for all potential problems with a deep consideration of the past and of one's own partialities and agendas.
Most institutions and traditions are shaped by a long history of mistakes, and therefore rest on strong and oftentimes subtle foundations. Yet we all know that every existing institution and tradition was created by imperfect humans, and therefore are imperfect themselves. Stability requires consideration of every strong foundation and of the best methods for constructing and building upon them. Typically, change is motivated by avoiding one problem, and usually unintentionally creating several others, yet any consideration of all of the foundational truths will naturally reveal all institutional foundations, which will enable the avoidance all potential problems.
So what is the most foundational truth? That all things have natures defined by their compositions and organizations and that the nature of life is to increase its own survivability through individual decisions, i.e. to increase freedom and power. The best defense of freedom is blind equality, i.e. the lack of "traditional politics," and the defense against those who violate this blind equality, i.e. thieves, vandals, etc. So the best revolution is the one which most closely embraces nature, and especially human nature.
Most institutions and traditions are shaped by a long history of mistakes, and therefore rest on strong and oftentimes subtle foundations. Yet we all know that every existing institution and tradition was created by imperfect humans, and therefore are imperfect themselves. Stability requires consideration of every strong foundation and of the best methods for constructing and building upon them. Typically, change is motivated by avoiding one problem, and usually unintentionally creating several others, yet any consideration of all of the foundational truths will naturally reveal all institutional foundations, which will enable the avoidance all potential problems.
So what is the most foundational truth? That all things have natures defined by their compositions and organizations and that the nature of life is to increase its own survivability through individual decisions, i.e. to increase freedom and power. The best defense of freedom is blind equality, i.e. the lack of "traditional politics," and the defense against those who violate this blind equality, i.e. thieves, vandals, etc. So the best revolution is the one which most closely embraces nature, and especially human nature.
Tuesday, July 18, 2006
No pure democracy has ever been on this earth
When is the last time that government has ever waited to hear from the majority of an entire population? Woman were ignored for the longest time, and slaves too. So most of the earth's history has already been disqualified from pure democracy. These days the majority of the vote is taken to be the majority of the population, but two issues arise from that: 1) Majority vote is not majority population, 2) A small, well-organized, and motivated faction can exercise great political influence by voice and by vote, and 3) Apathy does not constitute endorsement of any view, even of the majority of the voters. In reality, modern democracy cannot be described as the rule of the people, but instead as the rule of the voters, or the rule of the factions.
When has any government been content and patient to wait for the majority of the people before closing its elections and extrapolating the will of the people? And why do intellectual elites deem their issues to be of such great importance as to berate the people for ignorance and apathy when their pet issues are neglected and thus rejected for lack of resonance with the people? And finally, how do representatives pretend to represent when most of the work represents their own interests and agendas, lacking support from the majority of their entire constituency? Who do representatives represent and how do they withold from the people the power to override their vote, which vote is considered to represent the will of the people? Such weaknesses are inherent in the nature of the current practices of government and politics, and they challenge the very foundation of power for a great many politicians and special interest groups, hence the justification for substantial opposition from those who pretend to be democracy's strongest advocates, but in reality are the strongest advocates of the modern, corrupted forms of democracy.
In a real democracy, the representatives represent the people, only acting with and according to their explicit and expressed will. Likewise, the government only governs by the established will of the majority of either the people or their representatives. The government should never have the power to discriminate, except in the execution of justice or enforcement of impartial, indiscriminate laws, or in the contracting of private agencies by bid for government work according the relevant requirements of each respectively.
When has any government been content and patient to wait for the majority of the people before closing its elections and extrapolating the will of the people? And why do intellectual elites deem their issues to be of such great importance as to berate the people for ignorance and apathy when their pet issues are neglected and thus rejected for lack of resonance with the people? And finally, how do representatives pretend to represent when most of the work represents their own interests and agendas, lacking support from the majority of their entire constituency? Who do representatives represent and how do they withold from the people the power to override their vote, which vote is considered to represent the will of the people? Such weaknesses are inherent in the nature of the current practices of government and politics, and they challenge the very foundation of power for a great many politicians and special interest groups, hence the justification for substantial opposition from those who pretend to be democracy's strongest advocates, but in reality are the strongest advocates of the modern, corrupted forms of democracy.
In a real democracy, the representatives represent the people, only acting with and according to their explicit and expressed will. Likewise, the government only governs by the established will of the majority of either the people or their representatives. The government should never have the power to discriminate, except in the execution of justice or enforcement of impartial, indiscriminate laws, or in the contracting of private agencies by bid for government work according the relevant requirements of each respectively.
The Powers of Government and Freedom of the People
How can a government which claims to derive its power from the people can so often deviate from the interests of the people, while at the same time regularly catering to the interests of the special, small factions?
Such is the nature of government, to set men on unequal grounds so that some are masters over others. How is this made possible? When the voices of any are allowed greater weight than the voices of others, and when men are allowed to legislate discriminating laws, then the faction is empowered to enslave the other factions; until they physically resist by revolution or by organized "crime."
The nature of an equal government must then weight every person's voice equally, and be barred from discrimination of any kind.
Such is the nature of government, to set men on unequal grounds so that some are masters over others. How is this made possible? When the voices of any are allowed greater weight than the voices of others, and when men are allowed to legislate discriminating laws, then the faction is empowered to enslave the other factions; until they physically resist by revolution or by organized "crime."
The nature of an equal government must then weight every person's voice equally, and be barred from discrimination of any kind.
Sunday, June 25, 2006
USA war on terror
First I want to emphasize that if I had had a blog in 1994, you would have seen an entry in the fall of that year concerning the future terrorist use of aircraft as weapons against buildings, and the need for active military prosecution of terrorists. The War on Terror is long overdue, but I can't say that we are fighting it in the most effective manner at this time. I acknowledge great room for improvement on that front, but I must admit that it is far better than our approach during the Clinton years.
So there was a threat from terrorists which no one wanted to face seriously. Now the USA faces her terrorist enemies with her full military might and power, and her enemies disperse and cower from her wrath. On the other hand, a great many people around the world are angry at the USA for many reasons, all of which are at least partly justified.
The Taliban in Afghanistan was given notice to deliver Al Qaida operatives within its borders to US custody or risk war. They resisted and the US invaded with all her might and wrath still steaming from the then recent attacks on the WTC towers, the Pentagon, and the loss of four civilian aircraft and their civilian crew and passengers (usually referred to as the 9/11 attacks).
Many Al Qaida operatives fled into neighboring countries, including Pakistan, Iraq, and Iran, so the wrath of the USA from the 9/11 attacks turned to these countries for extradition of her enemies. Pakistan greatly strengthened relations with full cooperation. Iraq and Iran greatly hurt relations with no cooperation. So American anger turned to the easiest target Iraq, being already in defiance of the UN sanctions and regulations imposed upon it and continuing to financial reward terrorists and publicly proclaim the annhilation of Israel, the harsh punishment of America for her alliance with Israel, and the subjugation of the world to Islamic rule.
So American anger initiates a War in Iraq which frees US military presence from Saudi Arabia (the holiest Islamic territory), topples a dangerous dictator and sponsor of terror, removes the daily risk to our pilots and aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones, and finds an effective battleground against foreign terrorists (easier to fight the enemy when it comes out of hiding and identifies itself).
Here is where things went wrong. American troops adopted a big brother role, instead of a big mentor role. They did massive engineering and humanitarian work (both of which were politically motivated) for the Iraqis out the expense of the government of the USA. They conducted massive searches (politically motivated) for Saddam Hussein. We've wasted a lot of money and time on political issues while maintaining an Iraqi dependence on the American occupation of Iraq. We can't afford to fight this war against terror like that. We need powerful friends, so we need to make friends by mentoring them to achieve independence and to become powerful by their own efforts.
Here is what I think should have happened after the suppression of the insurgents. The USA should have seized complete control of the oil and its protection in addition to control of all of the major cities. They should have then trained and then contracted local government and engineering guilds for the restoration of civil order (police), utilities, and military defense. Most of the US troops should trained the police and the military first alongside of their operations with pay increases for increasing levels of involvement, until the US forces are transferring authority and funding to the Iraqi forces over a three month proving and supporting phase. US troops withdraw from each region after this period and focus on other regions (the oil resources being the last) until they are no longer needed and are withdrawn from the country completely, at which time complete control of the oil has been transferred to the country of Iraq. As for their constitution, I already have a document in mind, which is my own work-in-progress, based on the concept of True Democracy (search Yahoo Groups for it).
So there was a threat from terrorists which no one wanted to face seriously. Now the USA faces her terrorist enemies with her full military might and power, and her enemies disperse and cower from her wrath. On the other hand, a great many people around the world are angry at the USA for many reasons, all of which are at least partly justified.
The Taliban in Afghanistan was given notice to deliver Al Qaida operatives within its borders to US custody or risk war. They resisted and the US invaded with all her might and wrath still steaming from the then recent attacks on the WTC towers, the Pentagon, and the loss of four civilian aircraft and their civilian crew and passengers (usually referred to as the 9/11 attacks).
Many Al Qaida operatives fled into neighboring countries, including Pakistan, Iraq, and Iran, so the wrath of the USA from the 9/11 attacks turned to these countries for extradition of her enemies. Pakistan greatly strengthened relations with full cooperation. Iraq and Iran greatly hurt relations with no cooperation. So American anger turned to the easiest target Iraq, being already in defiance of the UN sanctions and regulations imposed upon it and continuing to financial reward terrorists and publicly proclaim the annhilation of Israel, the harsh punishment of America for her alliance with Israel, and the subjugation of the world to Islamic rule.
So American anger initiates a War in Iraq which frees US military presence from Saudi Arabia (the holiest Islamic territory), topples a dangerous dictator and sponsor of terror, removes the daily risk to our pilots and aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones, and finds an effective battleground against foreign terrorists (easier to fight the enemy when it comes out of hiding and identifies itself).
Here is where things went wrong. American troops adopted a big brother role, instead of a big mentor role. They did massive engineering and humanitarian work (both of which were politically motivated) for the Iraqis out the expense of the government of the USA. They conducted massive searches (politically motivated) for Saddam Hussein. We've wasted a lot of money and time on political issues while maintaining an Iraqi dependence on the American occupation of Iraq. We can't afford to fight this war against terror like that. We need powerful friends, so we need to make friends by mentoring them to achieve independence and to become powerful by their own efforts.
Here is what I think should have happened after the suppression of the insurgents. The USA should have seized complete control of the oil and its protection in addition to control of all of the major cities. They should have then trained and then contracted local government and engineering guilds for the restoration of civil order (police), utilities, and military defense. Most of the US troops should trained the police and the military first alongside of their operations with pay increases for increasing levels of involvement, until the US forces are transferring authority and funding to the Iraqi forces over a three month proving and supporting phase. US troops withdraw from each region after this period and focus on other regions (the oil resources being the last) until they are no longer needed and are withdrawn from the country completely, at which time complete control of the oil has been transferred to the country of Iraq. As for their constitution, I already have a document in mind, which is my own work-in-progress, based on the concept of True Democracy (search Yahoo Groups for it).
Tuesday, June 20, 2006
Freedom
Freedom is equality. Let no person (or group) become the master of any other person (or group), lest the tyranny of inequality destroy freedom.
Equality is blind. Even as impartiality is blind, so discernment is partiality. Any person, group, or government (a group forcibly ruling over themselves and over another group; unfortunately, but typically with different rules) knowing personal details concerning a person or group is inherently partial concerning them.
The establishment of fairness is the consistent application of equality and the promise of freedom. Privacy is the root of equality and fairness.
Identification is the root of justice. Justice requires that all people restore the harm done to others, and anonymity is the easiest method of escaping this responsibility and this authority. Identification requires the unique identification of every person and the establishment of their legal status, mostly limited to:
Equality is blind. Even as impartiality is blind, so discernment is partiality. Any person, group, or government (a group forcibly ruling over themselves and over another group; unfortunately, but typically with different rules) knowing personal details concerning a person or group is inherently partial concerning them.
The establishment of fairness is the consistent application of equality and the promise of freedom. Privacy is the root of equality and fairness.
Identification is the root of justice. Justice requires that all people restore the harm done to others, and anonymity is the easiest method of escaping this responsibility and this authority. Identification requires the unique identification of every person and the establishment of their legal status, mostly limited to:
- Their contracts,
- Their property,
- Their citizenship status, and
- Their "name."
The name is a symbol representing and identifying a person (also applies to objects) uniquely. Numbers are oftentimes used as names. This is best illustrated by the "Social Security" (oxymoron) number, the Selective Service number, and by bank account numbers. The fingerprint is a biological name, in that it uniquely identifies each person. Fortunately, biometric-ID is within technological reach, but remains relatively difficult to steal. Used in combination, it is virtually impossible to mimic. Authentication could be securely established with two random fingerprints and voice authentication using a random phrase. Tokens are also effective names, and the subdermal, electronic token (microchip) would significantly protect against identity theft and escalate the potential effectiveness of justice. The collection of "names" is a very powerful authority, requiring special care that such information is carefully safeguarded and most importantly that they "name-keeper" be committed to equality and justice.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)