Anda di halaman 1dari 182






To Author and Book

“The LORD God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it. And the LORD God commanded the man, ‘You are free to eat from any tree in the garden; but you must not eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, for when you eat of it you will surely die.” Genesis 2: 15-17

Before I go into the nature of this book I feel it is right to put the author in context of the book, in hopes that when you read what I will be talking about in this book, you may have a clearer understanding of what I am trying to express. Let me start by saying that, I am a college student who just recently completed his time in a 2 year college for Liberal Arts in Humanities. While there I have spent my time, not merely collecting information passively like a sponge in college from the teachers, but also teaching myself while learning things related to each respective class that I had taken. I am an autodidact someone who has committed himself to the accumulation of knowledge and understanding, without the traditional educational institutions of our time. My interests while in college have not only changed but also have expanded, at the beginning my understanding was illusory and at best superficial but as time went on I have gotten much knowledge and have become interested in the fields of Psychology, Philosophy, Politics, Economics, and Theology.

I was always someone who wondered about life and its meaning, always seeking meaning and the purpose for life and the purpose of my life. An existentialism that still in some ways sticks with me to this day as it does for most people. It was this longing for purpose and meaning that lead me down the path of philosophy and its many diverse outlooks for life and understanding of the world and ourselves. As you can imagine this outlook and longing for depth and meaning has also pointed me down the path of theology and looking to my Christian Faith as a means to also understanding, this path of theology however was not always like this, for I was born Roman Catholic, found myself doubting for a time in my pre-teen and teenage years, re-discovered God, became a heretic and returned back to Christianity with an appreciation for Eastern Orthodox Christianity. It was also during my days when I re-discovered God, became a heretic, and returned back to Christianity that I also developed an interest for psychology, in particular depth or analytical psychology and an appreciation for understanding how the mind works. At the time of me writing this I would describe myself as, a Christian in Limbo, someone who does not really adhere to anyone particular church doctrine, yet I also call myself an Inner Christian because my interests lie in being transformed by God not just merely adhering to moral codes.

However, this was my approach to the inner world of man. The outer world was also connected to these fields of knowledge, and based on the “inner world knowledge” accrued I had built a political and

economic outlook as well as an opinion on society that would compliment my political and economic outlook. Originally, I was a socialist, but that was back in the days of government funded public school when I simply let the information wash over me and passively absorbed it like a sponge. I was taught to have a disinterest in limited government; I was shown that government is the only savior for all our woes. I was taught that businesses were evil and corrupt. However, when at a certain point my political awareness was heightened I lost faith in government being the savior for all our woes and became more so devoted to the idea of private property and individualism. At the time of me writing this I would describe myself as, a Libertarian with an anarchistic bent, I am firm believer in individualism and realizing the individual potential within us with little interference from Government or its idea of “help” that it thinks it, can “bestow” on us.

I wish to keep the autobiography of my Life Experiences short. So let me just say that I wish to go over a few life experiences of my own that have meaning for me and that I strongly believe have brought me not only to this moment in my life but have transformed me into the person who I am today. Now, I am not going to exalt myself here, everyone has had some type of experience related to or similar to what I am about to write. I have experienced intense loss at a time when I was young and naïve, the things I had once taken for granted for being true revealed themselves to not be true, and of course as someone who is still young by this societies standards, I am still growing up as we all are, and this all coincides with that whole “Coming of Age” Experience.

Although in my life I have lost many things, and sometimes for the better, I have also suffered from the Loss of things that fundamentally altered my worldview with regards to how I acted in life and challenged how I sought to view my life differently, forcing me to ask what is it that I really want out of life and what is really important as well. Those profound moments of loss however woke me up to being more serious about life and not to be so childish for long. It was the loss of two relatives of mine in the same year that proved difficult to me and to those in my family, it was this loss that made me ask at the age of 15 so many questions that at that time in my life I could scarcely find the answers to, let alone the comfort as well. It was this that set me on a journey to which I am still on, and to which I wish to share some of the fruits of this amazing journey with the reader.

As this journey began, I had been in contact for the first time with a real helping dose of chaos in my life. My old worldview was in shambles and my life I felt was being swept away by the roaring currents of such chaos. I was lost and confused and hurt as well. It was at this time that I also came to be a doubter in God and was developing an interesting in Philosophy, especially ancient philosophers but some more modern ones as well. The fact of the matter was I had a series of what I liked to call “panic attacks” in truth. Much of what I had taken for granted as being true was proven wrong, much of the old order in my life had been thrown to the wind after experiencing that loss, it was at this time I began to wonder who am I and where am I going, what type of friends do I have and are they really my friends? These questions and there subsequent answers, in the short term proved challenging to the old order of my life. I cannot express how many times I felt forced to compromise and accept many spoonfuls of truths that before hand, I would not accept as being true, but inevitably, you walk around a thought to be impenetrable wall long enough and it collapses, so was this with my old life. The point, I wish to

express with the reader is that, in order to be truly dedicated you will need to experience these “panic attacks” I had, as you to come to the Revelation of Freedom.

The Overall Coming of Age Experience, which although I think is a lifelong experience, but traditionally associated with the teenage years of one’s life has revealed to me a sort of pessimism for humanity coupled with an awareness of society being hollow, lacking meaningful depth overall. This however, has not disempowered me, but rather shown me how to adapt with the many disappointments that have been revealed to me since the day I woke up and how through the Revelation of Liberty we can perhaps realize perhaps a more realistic or optimistic potential for mankind, for if there is anything that life has shown me it is that we can change and for the better but the question, is one of dedication.

I am largely filled with pessimism for Humanity; I would consider human society as overall ignorant, selfish, and apathetic. This ignorance leads to deception and meaningless suffering. This selfishness only leads to ignorance and apathy of issues that rise above our smaller lives and that affect people around them. This apathy allows for much evil to take place and suffering again, but apathy for the most part is wedded to man’s ignorance and is related to man’s selfishness. So it seems like an overall unholy trinity of evil and death that is responsible for our fears and laziness to really live life to the fullest potential that we each can. Of course, on a more humorous note, according to George Will’s view on pessimism, “The nice part about being a pessimist is that you are constantly being either proven right or pleasantly surprised.” With that I tend to agree with such a statement.

The Hollowness of Society is only a macrocosm and amplification of the pessimism that I have of humanity. We look outside of ourselves for everything to make us feel safe and secure, happy and docile. This human society is one in which I am greatly troubled by, with its sense of tolerance toward our weaknesses and a perverted acceptance that gives us only a non-desire to make us want to change ourselves. We give our time and energy to meaningless pursuits in the name of seeking praise and simply making money. We do everything today for the sake of some outer appeal or goal, but I have seen few things done by people for the sake of an inner goal, to live life and transform themselves. There is a definite sense of self-defeat as well, that we can’t change anything, but I find this to only be related to man’s ignorance and his own ability to be deceived, deceive others, and deceive himself.

In an attempt to share with you where some of my original ideas have come from and where I come up with certain other ideas I often like to point to my Research & Influences that have helped me come to the point of awareness of where I am today and how this research and these influences will be prevalent in this book in hopes of making sure you are aware of the position I am coming from, for it is only fair and right that you know in some part what makes me want to write such a book about the Revelation of Liberty.

The influences in my journey revolve largely around religious scholars and mystics, psychologists and philosophers. This is for the inner worlds of man, which man will need to admit are just as real as the outer world. In the outer world of course, my influences revolved political activists and philosophers, as well as economists who I believe would complement the political philosophers. Now I will be writing

about my current influences as well as those whom I had started with my journey and still have near to me today. Those whom I have had rejected I will not bring up, for example I will not go into detail and explain what Karl Marx said to me in his writings and how he lead me to the awareness I have today, because I have rejected Marxism for awhile now.

In regards to my Religion and Psychology influences I have been influenced heavily of course by the teachings of Christ and the early Church Fathers, especially Origen Adamantius, now some people consider him a heretic but he also lead me to the awareness of the Church Fathers. Jesus Christ is of course my source for wisdom and salvation; I do my best to contemplate upon the word of the Lord and to seek him out in all I do. However, it was Christ that showed me a different path than the popular path taken in viewing religion, it was Christ who showed me the point and purpose is to be transformed not merely statically worshipping or seeking “feel good” love and adhering to some moral code. It was also the early Church Father Origen (and the Alexandrian Fathers as well) whom I have been influenced by as well, he did in fact point me to the rest of the orthodox church fathers as well. Let me say that just because Origen influenced me this does not mean I have taken up the ideology however of Origenism. It was Origen who in his writings showed me that there are three levels to Biblical interpretation and understanding. In the first half of this book however I will go into what those levels of interpretation are. For a time now I must also confess that because of my association to the Inner Christian Tradition, I have also been and continue to be interested in the writings of some (but not all) apocryphal texts of early Christianity, some have called these texts as, Gnostic writings but nonetheless they have lead me to where I am and have helped further in me a growing in understanding of the inner world. In particular I have been influenced by The Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Phillip, and The Gnostic Writings on The Soul. Now in my travels I have also been interested in the esoteric and stayed there for a time, it would be wrong of me to not include my interests in the esoteric philosophies of Kabbalah, Alchemy, Hermeticism, Christian Mystic Tradition, and Sufism as well as the more modern philosophy of The Fourth Way by G.I. Gurdjieff. Let me conclude on my religious and spiritual influences with a quick comment on the Eastern spiritual philosophies. It is my belief that the West has lost its more spiritual roots, my research and dedication has been one of trying to find these roots, it is because of this that I have not really paid a whole lot of attention to the East and its beliefs, of course however, I have read the main Buddhists writings as well as the Tao Te Ching and Sun Tzu’s Art of War. But again, my main interests and work has been focused on the west, in response to seeing many westerns look east for the spiritual waters that are not much more than dry canals in our hyper rational western outlook.

In my psychological influences I have been influenced by Carl Jung and his more current followers with respect to his work and the field of Depth Psychology and Analytical Psychology. Carl Jung and his work has appealed to me so much that I have, at the time of writing this, heavily considered going into psychology and become a Depth Psychologist coupled with Counseling Psychology. In regards to understanding the psychological aspect of myths and allegories I have also been influenced by the works of Joseph Campbell. His works allowed me to really look into the idea of religion and the interpretation of religious texts. The hope is to be able to use psychology in such a way that we can find practical applications in response to the spiritual messages and ideas which we may come across in our lives that may lead to a sense of real wholeness around us.

The influences in my philosophical pursuits have been many. I have been influenced by and continue to be influenced by Plato, Aristotle, and Socrates. Their ancient view on the world is one in which I may hope to learn from over and over again. Plato and his various allegories painted a picture for me that I have already come to accept. Aristotle and his writings on ethics are ones which I have also come to accept, with moderation as being the head ethical virtue. Socrates, the teacher that taught me how to really begin to think, is another person that has helped me come to be a bit more critical and observant. For a time now however, I have been seeking to be able to reconcile my outlook on life and man with the existentialism of Kierkegaard and the Nihilism of Nietzsche. It was only recently that I have been able to work to build an awareness that can co-exist with both as these two philosophers have essentially forced me to grow up and out of the naivety that I see in society around me. Throughout the course of the 1 st half of this book I will speak about the awareness that has recently come to my attention that has allowed me to blend the Christian outlook with the Existentialist or the more extreme Nihilistic outlook on life.

I have been progressing from the religious and spiritual influences over to the more secular influences in my life. To this effect this is the end of the list of people who have influenced me and have leaded me to new areas of awareness. The last group of influences in my life is the Politico-Economic influences. I must confess I love my American Heritage, especially my early American heritage of Individualism and the idea of Liberty. To that effect my influences from that time period have been Thomas Jefferson and his views on Government and the ideal of liberty as well as Benjamin Franklin and his practical application of living for liberty and a morally upright lifestyle as well.

My more modern sources of political and economic influences have been by Lew Rockwell, Murray Rothbard, Ron Paul, as well as Peter Schiff. Lew Rockwell and Murray Rothbard have shown me the way of living life without a state and maintaining private property, to this end I must confess that these two men have lead to my more anarchistic political philosophy. However, in the vast vat of mixtures of influences in my life I also lean more so to a libertarian bend because, I personally am left with a sense that man has not reached the level of intelligence where he can do without a government, however I feel that if a master must exist it must be one that is constrained in hopes that his potential can be realized and so he is not oppressed by the state. To this effect, I say Ron Paul has influenced my political thinking as well, with his more libertarian yet conservative approach, I would say it is a healthy blend of living a free life with a moral one as well. Peter Schiff has strongly influenced me, with Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell on my economic opinions on the government and its intervention in the marketplace and the effects that come from it.

In this journey of mine, I have spent a lot of time doing research. My Research is rooted mainly in two areas, the same way my influences are as well. The first has to do with the inner world of Religion and Philosophy, now granted philosophy also examines the outside world but it also must examine the individual in relation to the outside world. The second group of research is dedicated largely to politics and economics, as well as Current events. It is through current events that I had begun to do more research into political and economic research to better formulate a more educated opinion on the issues that people rarely hear of and always hear of. Although I do not want to get into the specifics of my research, I do want to speak of the engines driving my research. My research goes wherever

information leads me, so what may at first appear as unclear I eventually see the connection as time goes on, but this is why I do not want to go too much into my research, at the moment.

The first group like I said is focused mainly around the inner world of man, in regards to Religion and Philosophy. My top three engines that are driving me in my research are the following:

1. The Search for Truth, both in the nature of truth itself as well as finding the truth in every place it can manifest. I wished to know at a young age what makes something true and how can I identify it without necessarily being too doubtful of it should it manifest in my life in a way that goes beyond the casual manifestation. At this moment I would need to say that in my research, truth has proven itself to be a paradox, that everything has truth in it, but only in degrees and finally the notion that even truth is subjective is true as well but only to a degree. A paradox is a statement or proposition that seems self-contradictory or absurd but in reality expresses a possible truth. Truth carries with it an objective sense of certainty, yet truth can only be discovered in a subjective way. Also at this time of research, I have also come to believe, that truth when naked is unattractive and this is why most people do not want to accept the truth, therefore truth is often masked behind myths, allegories, and parables in hopes that through being dedicated to figuring out and experiencing the truth through the masks and images we are able to grow in better appreciation for it.

2. The Search for God is my next driving factor. This search for God is not in any sense a dogmatic or strictly one religion or another type of search, although I will confess my search is now largely based in Christian studies, because this is where it has leaded me. It is a search for The One True God from which all things have come forth. God has been with us since the beginning, and my research is based on discovering this experience with the connection with this divinity. In my research I have discovered that no one is “godless” for everyone has a god, something that they devote their time and energy to. Of course, the search for me than in this regard is a search to find something that is worth devoting my time and energy to in hopes of becoming one with it.

3. The Search for Ways to Empower Man is my final driving factor in my philosophical and spiritual pursuits. It is done out of love for mankind, especially the weak and down-trodden that I wish to empower them, to raise them up above those with worldly power and those obsessed with the world. My research has revealed to me, that man is truly empowered when he is free, especially free from oppression. However, this journey is one in which I had to also overcome my own oppressions and therefore, this research is worked on first by me before I share it with anyone. We live in a time in which we are seeking to be empowered, seeking to be able to do something transformative in our lives and the world around us. I see the desire to want to save the world as an internal desire to save ourselves. I do believe that spiritual traditions everywhere are dedicated to the idea of salvation and illumination. It is to this end that I seek to transform myself and then aid in transforming the world.

The second group is focused on man and the world around him in relation to Politics, Economics and Current Events. This research is done in a way however, where it can coincide with my inner world research. So because of that, the engines are different and yet they are the same. Likewise, my desire for liberty and freedom is like the fuel that powers the engines for my outer world research. This fuel is the mirror image, for my source of empowering man and giving him freedom and responsibility. The engines for my political, economic, and current events research is the following:

1. The Search for Truth, again the search for truth not only within me, but outside of me as well. The truth to why there is conflict and chaos, evil and strife, corruption and ignorance in our world. The desire to find out who is responsible for these problems both directly and indirectly. Research has shown me that all are to blame, but some more so than others. When I look at the world and compare it to my research, I see people want to throw all their time and energy at the effects of the problems they are facing, rather than trying to uproot the causes of the problems we are facing. If we get to the root we can end the suffering that much sooner and we devote our time and energy on other equally oppressing manners.

2. The Search for Understanding, this is similar to the search for truth but slightly different. I seek to understand in hopes of understanding how things work and why they work the way they do, likewise I seek to understand society and life in a way that can lead to real change. This section is short in description but full of depth for those who seek to gain understanding in general.

3. The Search for a Noble Change is the final drive in my outer world research. The noble change is of course dedicated to the empowering of man, but in a way the outer world can be like the inner world. This noble change is one that is also fueled by my drive for understanding and truth, for without these two drives there can be no real and meaningful change. Like the section describing my driving force to seek understanding, this too is short in description but full of depth for those who understand.

Now that I have put the reader in context of the author, I wish to now use that context to explain Why Have I Written This Book. The first is largely to do with the fact, that I have reached a point in my life, where the research and the knowledge accumulated has lead me to want to have a collection of thoughts that I have contemplated upon in relation to world events as well as personal events that have taken place in my life. I wish to share in this discovery with people who are engaged in the same conversations and debates as I am. After all are not all authors writing based upon their experiences and the knowledge that they have accumulated? Every book has a bias, the difference is one where one is intentional in their bias or if one is genuine in expressing what they wish to express.

The second reason why I have written this book is an attempt to aid in giving equality or balance in the inner world of the individual as well as to aid in the realization of potential that lies latent within each individual. It is my strongest belief that people are divided against themselves and this inner division creates inner conflict which we see made manifest in the outside world, both in the impersonal global issues as well as the personal life issues which we all must experience. This book is written with this awareness that in order to truly begin to end outer conflict in all its forms, one needs to first focus on themselves and at least begin to work at fixing the inner divisions by becoming whole with ourselves, by having a dialogue of equality or balance within the individuals own mind or soul. It is also my strongest belief, that people have it within themselves to do many great things, whether things are evil or good. There is enough God Given potential within each individual, to realize it within their own lives if they simply worked at becoming whole and knew themselves, not for the sake of praise from people around them, but for themselves. This work needed to realize the potential latent within the individual is something that needs genuine work and dedication, but it does not necessarily require the stereotypical asceticism to get there, this is however not to say that asceticism cannot get you there.

Likewise, in response to this inner world I have written this book for a third reason, that reason being that I have written this book is an attempt to spread the message of liberty in human society as well as to help aid in realization of the potential within mankind as a whole. The issue of Liberty and Equality is a big one today, and both are valid concerns. If we are not free, but have all things provided we are dead in spirit, but what if we have nothing yet are free, we could equally die in body. From the Christian perspective of course, we do not want to die in spirit, only in body. From a worldly perspective we do not want to die in body at all. Nonetheless, is it right that there are poor people who do not wish to live poor but rather seek comfortable lives yet they lack much despite others who overflow in prosperity? This is a question that people who believe in the virtue of equality often ask, while the people of the virtue of liberty often ask, what good comes to someone who knows that everything will be provided to them and possess no ability of their own to want to get out of their circumstances? Both are equally good questions and likewise both are questions that must be realized and appreciated. This book will aim at trying to reconcile this issue. Likewise, this book is not only dedicated to the individual realizing their potential, but the whole of the human community as well. One thing you will realize however is that human society is only as good as the individuals living in it, therefore this book is largely focused upon YOU the individual, rather than asking how we can come from a top-down imposition I ask how we can come from the bottom-up, because I believe that the grassroots is where reality is most present, not in high worldly places.

This book dares to be unorthodox and thought-provoking. It needs to be, for I am tired of seeing books and hearing things that make promises but never deliver, never make a real change, never upset the status-quo and in the end only strive to make people “feel good” about themselves. It is my hope that this book will take you out of the box that society has built up around you, so that you may come out of the world instead of continuing to live in it and for it. Our society promotes tolerance and acceptance to a sickening degree, instead of feeling shameful for the wrongs we do, we publicize them. Instead of trying to get angry enough to make change, we diffuse it with an apathy that leads to us only complaining but not actually acting. All things in Moderation, that should be the call to all of humanity,

this includes tolerance, for it begs the question as to how much can you tolerate before the problem(s) gets out of hand? Often, when trying to fix something we individually understand that something must be done sooner rather than later, but if we are tolerant of small things that have the potential to be big things, we would never overcome our problems. After all does a stage one cancer patient standby waiting for chemotherapy saying that they will wait until they have stage two cancers? No! Problems are like cancer, the sooner you detected it, acknowledge it and embrace it the better you’re able to fix it! So if you see this book as intolerant of certain views, especially more mainstream views on certain issues, it is because my research, experiences, and influences have shown me that these are for the most part wrong, again I will acknowledge that everything has truth in it, the question is not one of quality but one of quantity, one of degrees.


The Revelation of Liberty


The Inner World

“People travel to wonder at the height of mountains, at the huge waves of the sea, at the long courses of rivers, at the vast compass of the ocean, at the circular motion of the stars; and they pass by themselves without wondering.” - St. Augustine

The point to this first part of The Revelation of Liberty is not merely to offer opinions and expressions in regards to my opinions about Religion, Psychology and Philosophy but rather to through talking about these well-known and less-known issues of our day one will be able to come to a greater appreciation of how to be free as an individual, within themselves. In regards to Religion and Spirituality I have been motivated to also write about these topics, largely because my own experiences have shown me that the words are once again getting in the way, with regards to the understanding that clergymen have as opposed to the assumptions that the laity have. There seems to be a serious lack of conveying the original sense of the words with putting it into the context of todays world, it is my hope that me writing about religion and spirituality in this section will give a better understanding to the reader. Nonetheless, Part One has 6 sections and each part is designed not only to inform the reader and hopefully enlighten the reader, but also to think about the ideas raised in this Part of the book. The sections are as follows and here I want to give a brief taste of what I will be speaking about in each section:

1. The Case Against Part One of Zeitgeist – This essay is written in response to Part One of internet documentary Zeitgeist which seeks to reveal information that destroys the old assumptions that we have held as true for a long time. This essay is written largely out of a response to offer a larger awareness that not even Zeitgeist has offered. Coined an internet documentary, this film I do credit for revealing to us the agenda of people in high places, however this essay is aimed solely at Part One which I feel is sorely lacking in information aimed at trying to give the whole picture rather than just a picture that this producer wanted you to see. The effects of people who view this film often lead people to assume that the information given because it somehow came from the internet and not TV makes it truth, and because it people think it is counter-establishment than its whole message is true. So I have written about the issue on the information provided in the film and the effects that this film has made on those who typically view it.

2. My Opinion of The Nature of Our Contemporary Atheists – V – Theist Debates – The next essay

I have written is focused primarily upon the observations I have made in my own debates with atheism and the overall context of these debates. This essay tries to be fair and balanced on both sides for there is blame to go around on both sides of the argument. I do have section where I write about the militant atheist mentality, but likewise I do write about the Christian mentality. The focus of most of my essays is geared for Christians or to Theists in general, but in my arguments there is a Christian undertone, largely because I do not know much of the Jewish or Islamic response let alone teachings to be an advocate for them.

3. Constructive Criticism to Christianity – This next essay is aimed at a constructive criticism for my fellow Christians. I believe that there is indeed a sense of disconnect between the ancient Church and today’s many amalgam of faiths that are united under the name of Christ. This essay is critical, but through the criticism given I also seek to offer solutions. For how good would it be if I only offered a half done job by giving scolding criticism and no advice to aid rising above the problems I have posed to my fellow Christians? I ask if you read this question you read it with open-mindedness and being willing to entertain the ideas written in this essay.

4. On The End Times – If there is one thing that always got to me, it was this “End Times” Prophecy which did not originate in the early days of the Church under the Apostles, but rather was made up in Britain and America back in the 19 th Century. I have witnessed more evil done in the name of this idea of the “End Times” than I have seen much good come out of it. This essay than is geared to a higher understanding toward how we should view “The End of the World” that will enable us to act rather than to sit and wait, in an apathy that we cannot afford to live with as a society any longer.

5. Christianity and Plato’s Allegory of the Cave – The next essay is written in response to the

philosophical worldview of man and society in Plato’s Allegory of the Cave in its relation to

Christianity. This essay is meant to offer again a higher understanding of how to view what Christianity is supposed to be about as opposed to what it is not about. The purpose of this essay is designed to show how we as Christians are called to come out of the cave and live in the light of reality.

6. The 10 Virtues of Individualism – This final section is something I have written that I think is pretty important to share with all people who are interested in the idea of realizing their human individuality through these 10 virtues. This is kind of a play on Benjamin Franklins own list of virtues for Americans, but this one covers the spectrum of the individualism. Individuals who of course want to realize their potential within them.

Section One:

The Case Against Part One of Zeitgeist

a. Introduction

For those who have seen this internet film I am writing on it, expressing my disagreement with the film, at least to a certain point. This film in part one basically speaks of the Christian religion specifically that it is mainly derived from other religions, astronomical facts, astrological myths and traditions, which in turn were derived from or shared elements with others. In furtherance of the Jesus myth hypothesis, this part argues that the historical Jesus is a literary and astrological hybrid, nurtured politically in the interest of control. This film is an eye opener or one of those “panic attacks” in truth as I have mentioned. However, this film does not do any justice for Christianity, let alone religion except to take the popular route of being angry at religion for our ills, it speaks of how Christ is a myth from pagan origins these things I want to expand on. There are two parts to this essay that I am writing about. The first part for me is about tackling four issues in Part One of the film that I feel need to be addressed by someone who also has done some research on the issues of Jesus Christ and Christianity. The second part of this essay is my counter-response to the usual response of people who have viewed Zeitgeist as I aim to once again offer a more empowering response that can be made after viewing this film.

b. Tackling Four Parts of The Zeitgeist Problem

I want to begin first tackling four issues I have with Zeitgeist, in hopes of than being able to move on to an alternative that may serve to better inform those who have (yet) viewed this internet documentary. The first part of this is that of tackling the issue over the historicity of Jesus Christ, and then beginning to go further into the issue as my research has revealed things to me. The next issue I want to tackle is the one concerning Jesus Christ and his relation to Pagan Sun Gods, again going over the issue and then offering up some research of my own. I want to then take a look at Astro-Theology and explain what it is and how it has links to Christianity, only to than of course offer up my research. Finally I just need to make an overall statement about the film and conclude my thoughts on the criticism I have on the film.

The first issue is one concerning the things in which Jesus Christ shares in common with many of the Pagan Sun Gods. The film mentions Horus, an Egyptian Sun God, who is introduced as having a number of attributes similar to that of many of the religious deities which came after him, including but not limited to Attis, Krishna, Dionysus, Mithra and Jesus Christ; these attributes include a virgin birth on December 25, twelve disciples, burial for three days, resurrection, and performing of miracles. This issue is obviously one of many statements that I feel are designed to pull away the significance of the Christian mythos, however my research shows that there should be no reason to feel threatened by such an argument. The producer also asserts that, of the thirty or so historians living in and around the time of Jesus Christ, none mention him or any of the miracles he performed. Three mention, in few

lines, "Christos" which is a title meaning "anointed one", but it is unclear and may not necessarily mean the Biblical Jesus. A fourth historian was proven to be false over a hundred years ago. This lack of evidence for a supposedly important figure, underlines the artificiality of the Jesus story.

According to the Church Father, Epiphanius he was aware of this fact that before the pagans were allowed to come into the Community centered on the Messiah and his teachings, the original followers were not called Christians but something else. Saint Epiphanius writes, “And there is much to say about this. However, since I have come to the reason why those who came to faith in Christ were called Jessaeans before they were called Christians, I have said that Jesse was the Father of David. And they had been named Jessaeans, either because of this Jesse; or from the name or our Lord Jesus since, as his disciples, they were derived from Jesus; or because of the etymology of the Lord's name. For in Hebrew Jesus means "healer" or "physician," and "savior." (10) In any case, they had acquired this additional name before they were called Christians. But at Antioch, as I have mentioned before and as is the essence of the truth, the disciples and the whole church of God began to be called Christians.”(The Panarion 29.4.9-10)

St. Epiphanius goes on a little bit more in his writing to say also that, “If you enjoy study and have read about them in Philo's historical writings, in his book entitled ''Jessaeans,'' you may discover that, in his account of their way of life and hymns, and his description of their monasteries in the vicinity of the Marean marsh, Philo described none other than Christians.”(The Panarion 29.5.1) Now the interesting part is that Epiphanius goes further on in his book to describe the Essenes, but the fact is that the Essenes’ have existed for at least 200 years before Christ supposed birth, this would mean that Christianity came from an esoteric and exclusive group of people, before it just appeared out of nowhere in 30 AD. For those who do not know who Philo was, he was a Hellenistic Jewish philosopher born in Alexandria. Also just to give some illumination on this book from which I have quoted, The Panarion is Greek meaning “The Medicine Chest” against certain Heresies that were emerging at the time of Saint Epiphanius’ ministry.

According to the Church Father, Augustine he was aware of the fact that Christianity is older than what we have been told. In his book The Retractions (A Book of Augustine’s Reconsiderations), Augustine writes, “That which is called the Christian religion existed among the ancients, and never did not exist, from the beginning of the human race, until Christ came in the flesh, at which time the true religion that already existed began to be known as Christianity.” (p.54, The Fathers of the Church, Vol. 60, St. Augustine The Retractions, by Brogan c. 1968 Catholic University of America Press) The book from which this quote was taken carries the formal approval of the Catholic Cardinal Patrick A. O'Boyle D.D. Arch Bishop of Washington, which means that the Catholic Church certifies that, "the document is free of doctrinal or moral error". This says unequivocally that St Augustine, whom which is considered to be a revered Doctor of the Catholic Church, knew that the True Religion had always existed long before Jesus. Saint Augustine wrote The Retractions toward the end of his life, in an attempt to do retrospective re- reading and review of all of his written works, one at a time. He re-read his words so as to see what progress he had made in the truth, and to correct whatever he thought required changing so as to be of better clarity and use for his many readers - present and future. It is often described as the history of the mind of St. Augustine.

The film maker goes by the belief of the idea in Astro-Theology, and how Christianity is no different than other pagan religions that also used myths to describe the rotation of the seasons. Astro- Theology is used in the context of 18th to 19th century scholarship aiming at the discovery of the original religion, particularly primitive monotheism. In this case the Astro-theological point of view on Christianity is used in the film for example with The Birth of Christ on December 25th, the film shows that as the winter solstice is the shortest day of the year with the shortest hours of sunlight (in the northern hemisphere), three days after the solstice the hours of sunlight can be seen to be increasing. This marks the birth of a "god of light" or Sun God. Another Christian-astrological similarity, according to the film, is that the three stars in Orion's belt (called the "Three Kings" or wise men) align on December 25 with Sirius, the brightest star in the sky, and point to the Sun's rise on the horizon. This time is equated to the nativity of Jesus, where, according to the popular Christian myth, three "kings" follow the star in the east to locate the place of Jesus' birth. Furthermore, around December 25, the Sun rises in the vicinity of Virgo, the constellation known as Virgin, which refers to the origin of Jesus' virgin birth. Comparison of sunset in the vicinity of Crux with Jesus' death on the cross is based on a similar principle. In addition, parallels such as walking on water (reflection at dawn/dusk), helping the blind see (without light there's nothing, black; with light, one can see again) and turning water into wine (ripening of grapes) are shown as metaphoric miracles, explained as the influence of the Sun.

Now let us keep in mind what was written above about the existence of Christian teaching before there was Christianity. It should be clear by now that Christians should not have to be devastated by this fact that the book called the Bible is largely a non-historical book, or for those who cannot accept this, this book is not meant to be interpreted historically and literally, but rather conveys a sense of allegory and myth that is meant to convey a larger and more meaningful message that the world does not want us to know. At this point I present to you the wisdom of Alexandrian Church Father Origen and what he had to say about biblical interpretation, “And this we ought to know, that the chief purpose being to show the spiritual connection both in past occurrences and in things to be done, wherever the Word found historical events capable of adaptation to these mystic truths, He made use of them, but concealed the deeper sense from the many; but where in setting forth the sequence of things spiritual there was no actual event related for the sake of the more mystic meaning, Scripture interweaves the imaginative with the historical, sometimes introducing what is utterly impossible, sometimes what is possible but never occurred. Sometimes it is only a few words, not literally true, which have been inserted; sometimes the insertions are of greater length. And we must this way understand even the giving of the Law, for therein we may frequently discover the immediate use, adapted to the times when the Law was given; sometimes, however, no good reason appears. And elsewhere we have even impossible commands, for readers of greater ability and those who have more of the spirit of inquiry; so that, applying themselves to the labor of investigating the things written, they may have a fitting conviction of the necessity of looking therein for a meaning worthy of God.”(The Philocalia of Origen


According to the picture painted then by Origen, interpretation comes from a literal, moral, and mystical/spiritual sense. In the literal we see “the body” we have a mixture of literal history that seems plausible enough to happen but we also have fictionist history (myth), which according to Origen was

made by the Holy Spirit to convey moral and mystical truths, those which sound absurd or impossible to accomplish were meant to be allegorical not literal, in hopes of conveying these moral and spiritual truths, therefore it is meant to be contemplated over. The next level of interpretation is that of the soul, which only meant to convey the moral message, or The Law. Origen states further on the Law that,

“And besides all this, the Word sown in the soul, evidenced by the moral notions common to mankind, and in Scripture language ‘written in the heart,’ enjoining what we have to do, forbidding what we must not do, is called ‘law.’ This is proved by the following words of the Apostle: ‘For when the Gentiles which have no law do by nature the things of the law, these, having no law, are a law unto themselves; in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their consciences bearing witness therewith.’ For the law written in men's hearts and in Gentiles who by nature do the things of the law, is no other than the law of common morality by nature written in our governing part, and day by day becoming clearer with the perfecting of reason.”(The Philocalia of Origen 4.2).

Finally the final level of interpretation is the spiritual or mystical interpretation, which is conveyed by allegory and parables. Allegory is used to show the imagined life of Christ and his Church and parables to show the things of a higher world that this world has an opposite of. It goes back to the idea of truth being paradoxical.

Yet how does this relate to the issue of Astro-Theology? Well it is my hypothesis that this book conveys many layers of meaning and messages, and the Astro-Theology version can be one of them. However, to say it is the only interpretation and that all others cannot be true or are not meant to be looked at as such is to me, utter nonsense. Religion has a point and purpose to man and the world around him and back in those days paper was not nearly as readily expendable as it is today, it is my belief that many things can be conveyed in a story from back in antiquity, for I believe it was meant to be. This is written to show that there are many layers of interpretation that can be derived from a few lines of scripture.

I just need to say that this film has done nothing to give any form of Spiritual Alternative. It simply declares religion to be nonsense and manipulative, like we have not heard this claim before. This film is to me, nothing new under the sun. This is my biggest criticism I can offer to the film, it figures that “if I can prove Jesus was not real, than people will not believe anymore.” I sense a lot more anger and spite than trying to convey a sense of understanding. Now, I will not conclude this however saying that the producer was wrong and “evil” for making this film or at least this part of the film. Quite the contrary I believe very strongly in what he said in the conclusion of this segment of the film, when he said that,

empowers those who know

the truth, but use the myth to manipulate and control societies.… The religious myth is the most powerful device ever created, and serves as the psychological soil upon which other myths can flourish.”

“Christianity, along with all other theistic belief systems [


To this I will not disagree, but I took the hint from the producers’ closing statements on this issue, and I decided that I would seek to know the truth and embrace it and work with it, in hopes of being empowered by it, and not to control but rather to liberate others. I hope the knowledge brought to you here in my “tackling of the claims” proves to be worth your time, as much as it was mine and that you will not run away from this but embrace it, in hopes that you will be empowered and not manipulated by those who already know.

c. My Counter-Response to The Zeitgeist Problem

Now that I have addressed the film and the information I wished to present to the reader in hopes of giving a more balanced opinion I wish to now focus on a counter response to the Zeitgeist problem I have been working on to formulate and share with you. Now this implies that Part One of Zeitgeist is indeed a problem, but what about this film makes it a problem? Well it shows that there is an agenda behind this part of the film, and it may not be as noble as the producer wants you to think, or as noble as the producer thinks it is. There have been more assumptions than truth expressed in this film. These assumptions have indeed chased more people away from further investigation rather than it has done to call for further investigation into the origins and nature of ancient Christianity. I have three counter-responses that one could act upon rather than go the more popular route that most people have taken as the more usual response to the film, if you think you have been illuminated merely from this film, than think again. This film is only filled with half-truths, designed to cause anger and then ignorance toward religion rather than understanding and appreciation for it. Even the condescending tone of the producer’s voice suggests this.

The first counter-response I wish to share with you is the one that both I and the producer have shown to be true, that the mythology and story of Christianity were indeed known facts in ancient times. It is this mythology that we see in Christianity as the Embodiment of Previous Religions, that should not come as a surprise but in today’s society there is no respect for the value of myths and the slew of other literary expressions. Even in the bible itself there are allusions to the connection between Judaism and the “Pagan” World. Moses was educated in the ways of the Egyptians and there relation to the structure of the metaphysical/spiritual world. Enoch is believed to have been Thoth or Hermes Trismegistus, for they had much in common with the qualities that described them as well as the time period given in which they would have “existed,” Hermes Trismegistus is a mythological figure who is responsible for the founding of the religion of Hermeticism. Let us also not forget the exposure the Jews have gotten during the reign of Alexander the Great, and the mixing of Hellenized culture with Judaic culture that took place. It is after all, well-known to those who do the research today, that even the Apostle Paul might have been a Hellenized Jew, and that influence aided in the the creation of his letters that we see in the Bible. Of course we cannot say for sure whether or not Judaism has any originality in their belief structure but we can certainly say that these various exposing elements must have influenced Judaism right up to the early Christians.

The problem of today is that we as westerners with our hyper rational and literalistic outlook, have unfortunately been losing that more intuitive connection with mythology and allegories. Today we read stories like The Holy Grail, King Arthur and the Twelve Nights of his Roundtable, Turning Lead into Gold, and even the Bible in a way we can see it through time and in physical existence, so we can feel comfortable that it actually “happened.” Our hyper rationalism has made us greatly diminish our sense of symbolism and our literalism has kept us confined and boxed into very few avenues of thinking and awareness with regards to the symbolic and spiritual well of religion. Myths are not concerned with historicity so much as the message being expressed: Myths never happen, but they always happen. This is a paradox you will need to get your mind around, for this is a truth worth contemplating on and getting many things out of.

Sadly this dryness in western religion, is not supposed to be this way, later on in this book I will explain why I think this and the way it was meant to be. It is because our society largely associates myths with lies that this film may have elicited the popular response that it has, we see it all the time here. We often say in our society “Lets debunk these myths” and once they are debunked they are proven not to be true, put in positive, proven to be false, thus we associate myth with lies or falsehood. So now we are forced with this evidence that says Jesus Christ was himself a myth, and thus everything about him never happened thus making the religion of Christianity a lie as well. However, the ancients who employed myth and allegory often would call our more modern understanding of myths as just misunderstandings and would say “Lets debunk this deception” not “Lets debunk this myth”. Myths were meant to convey messages that could not be rationally apprehended, thus the ancients would have said that in the realm of myth and allegory, the usefulness of our reasoning ability is very limited, whereas this ability to use mans more creative side in hopes of grasping something more than the literal story that was written, is appealed to greatly. This is the purpose to religion and the stories that we worship as being true, not to use our reasoning faculty to grasp the myth but the creative, or spiritual side.

This is why, however I feel more frustration than appreciation for Part One of Zeitgeist because the producer did not really go in-depth with the power of myths and the purpose to them, he did what society does today and that is simply blow off the power, message, and meaning of myth as a mere lie or deception. Do myths have the power to do this? Absolutely for those who do not understand the myths are often lost, looking for the lost city of Atlantis in the physical world, as an allusion to the point I want to express. The counter-point that I am going to argue here is that we should assume that anything that seems too absurd or too good to be true, should be thought of and searched, for a symbolic, spiritual, moral and mythical understanding rather than a physical location or occurrence. Do not underestimate the side of man that is opposite to the rational, analytical, and logical for all parts of the mind of man have a purpose to them.

The second counter-response that I wish to share with you is something I have already written about while I was tackling the issues with Zeitgeist and its use of Astro-Theology as way to debunk the Christian mythos. My main point is that all religious texts carry a Wide Array of Meanings. In exploring what they were I presented the Alexandrian Church Father, Origen Adamantius who stated that the focus of religious texts is to convey two meanings: A Moral and A Spiritual meaning, the text often use

either physical events that did occur or events that did not occur, whether they occurred or not is not the concern for the meaning is not found in historicity and physicality but rather in morality and spiritual understanding. Nonetheless, for those who wonder whether such an event did happen, is based largely on its absurdity and possibility of happening in the physical universe. Therefore the expressed point and purpose is NOT to be literal in even the most direct command made by anyone in The Bible, for it must be put in context of what is occurring, all things are meant to be genuinely contemplated over in order to begin to grasp the underlying messages being expressed.

So let me conclude with my third point to this counter-response to Part One of Zeitgeist. This Film Should Encourage NOT Discourage Investigation in the matters of religion, mythology, and your relation to it. We are called to live and become the myth, not statically worship it. I find the words of Joseph Campbell to be the main point of the Bible as well, “We must let go of the life we have planned, so as to accept the one that is waiting for us” for it alludes to Christ’s own message, “For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it.”(Matthew 16:25) Do your own investigation in this matter; actually learn do not merely passively absorb what is thrown at you. Do not be angry and do not let your anger turn into not caring, because you not caring will only further in making you ignorant. Now again another compromise with the Part One of Zeitgeist, I am not saying we should not be angry, but the producer seems to have directed his anger at the Christian religion and in effect religion overall whereas I am simply saying that the anger should be directed toward those who have known the truth but rather than shared it kept it to themselves and took advantage of others. If your research reveals what I have spoken about than contemplate it and share it, go and play with the ideas do not be boxed in, for this is all about getting out the box.



After viewing this and viewing the reactions of others, I have seen a lot of assumptions instead of research. This has only leaded me to conclude that for the most part people are mere tape recorders, instead of real people who genuinely want to do more research. Like as if it was simply good or cool enough for them to feel that rush of righteous indignation. Individual research has been halted in thinking that all the information on the subject has been provided by this film. I am completely against such thinking, largely because of the research I have made as well in these matters, which contradicts what this film so biased has offered. Again, this comes back to my research into seeking the truth and how nothing is fully true, only true in degrees. So the issue is one of, how much truth as opposed to bias does this film have? To this I say that I have seen a lot more bias rather than truth on the subject. I leave you than with a fuller picture now with the Zeitgeist producer’s research and mine to make a decision as to whether or not Part One of Zeitgeist is largely right or largely false.

Section Two:

My Personal Conviction Regarding The Atheist V. Theist Debates of Our Time



Let me start by saying that when I talk about these things, I am not going to be going into an analysis as to why the typical theist arguments are right and why the other side is wrong. That is not the purpose of the essay. I am going to coming from a different angle altogether on this issue. I want to begin looking at this problem by examining the psychology behind these arguments we are facing, by examining the problem of religion and then examining the reason for conflict with the secular point of view. After this examination I need to offer criticism for my own side, by examining its lack of novel arguments, because ultimately as a witness to these debates I see the same old debates not holding water and it just becomes a vicious cycle. Finally, it would be wrong of me not to take the time also to point out some observations I have made while observing the debates that I have taken part in, this section should not however be made into a swooping generalization of atheists in general, because ultimately a close friend of mine is an atheist yet he does not act in the manner I have seen others act in. Remember I am an individualist, I do not like seeing people in groups and making broad generalizations on the issue, but at the same time I do feel compelled to speak of things I have witnessed more often than not.

II. The Psychological Problem

The first issue I wish to tackle is the psychology behind religion and secularism. I want to examine this in a way that is based on Jungian Psychology and his system of Typology. As a disclaimer, I just want you to be aware that this is just an over simplified explanation and analysis but one that can help explain and better understand the conflict. Typically Jungian typology is used on individuals to find out there more dominant and less recessive sides to their being, this does not mean that one side completely lacks the opposite side, but that it cannot express itself as well as from another side of typological spectrum. If you imagined a circle cut into four quarters the top line is represented by thinking and the bottom half by feeling; likewise the right side is intuitive and the left side is sensate each of the four has a particular way of perceiving and evaluate the world around them, the location on the circle has no specific meaning for this analysis, but you are welcome to explore Jungian Typology if you wish to get a better understanding.

Just to explain these four qualities, let us begin with the thinking function. To start let me say that those who are pre-dominant thinkers does not mean they can’t “feel” it just means that in expressing and understanding things around them they are more adept using the thinking function. Thinking is best understood as someone who is logical, cold (Lack of emotion or empathy coming across as cold or uncaring) and intellectual, a person concerned with just the facts and science, preferring a

clear moral guideline of “Do’s” and “Do not’s”. Likewise the opposite of thinking is feeling, and again this does not mean someone who “feels” cannot “think” it simply means that while expressing and understanding the world around them, they like to use this aspect better because it aids them better. Feeling does not mean emotions or sentiment so much as it means a “feeling into” or empathy of the situation, often related to an emphasis on metaphorical and artistic, contextual, and in touch with emotional side of things.

We also have the relation of Intuitive and Sensate as well. The intuitive aspect is something that can “see around corners” and can “read between the lines” and is directed by the inner senses which we perceive the inner world by. The sensate function actually can see the corner and just see’s what is written, it is dedicated to the five senses which we can perceive the world by. The Intuitive aspect perceives possibilities not the obvious or visible and judges on probabilities. The sensate of course, is only concerned with what can be sensed directly and cannot really see behind the façade, often stuck in the literal level of here and now.

Of course let us also look at the dual attitudes we are faced with in the psyche called extroversion and introversion. The extrovert is shy with regards to the inner world and the introvert is shy with social interactions, the extrovert directs the four typologies to the world outside of themselves (objectivity and impersonal) and often gets lost in these outer things. The introvert directs their energy and four typologies within themselves (personal and subjective) and often recoils to the outer world because; it takes a longer time at adapting to the world around them. Again this does not mean that introverts cannot have certain extroverted skills and vice versa but this is how they go about understanding and expressing themselves and the world around them.

Now that we have a general understanding on Jungian Typology, I can begin to actually work on describing the quality of the realm of religion and the realm of the secular. To begin let me start with the realm that I have come to identify myself with. I am someone who identifies with the spiritual and religious aspect of mankind. I must say that the nature of religion has been perverted, according to Jungian Typology, it is first and foremost introspective, from there its nature is based largely on the intuitive aspect, one can say that in one way it is based on this aspect. According to Jungian typology there are two supporting aspects that aid in the primary aspect, in the realm of religion these two supporting aspects are the thinking and feeling aspects of man. Often we think of the thinking aspect in this regards as dogma and doctrine that is laid down often in this we see the issues of morality taking place, and the feeling aspect as the more spiritual experience that we see in the writings of mystics. Again, the thinking and feeling are coupled to the intuitive. So the fourth part of sensate is the more weaker side because it is based on what is perceived with the 5 senses which of course are used to perceive the outer world, this explains why religion is at times more in conflict with science, because they are talking differently and perceiving differently.

So now we must see that the secular is the complete opposite of religion, in this regard. The Secular Point of View is overall more extroverted to begin with, and its primary functioning aspect is based largely upon the sensation side with the philosophy of empiricism with its secondary support also gathered around the thinking aspect. The problem is that science is not really a place for feelings and

intuition. It is dedicated by the analysis of data received by the 5 senses which are meant to perceive the world outside of themselves and from there intellectualizing and theorizing over that information given. However where do feelings have a place to go, in any of this? One can best describe this as the ethical aspect to Secularism overall.

So now that we see the nature of both secularism and religion overall, in a more or less generalized way the observations of our current society can better be understood. In today’s world the Religious parts of our society seek to project out what is meant to be Internal those who do this are doing it based on that old thinking that we can apprehend God with the Reasoning Mind often related to the idea of Scholasticism, however it is well-known that the realm of reason is complementary to the realm of the sensate which is empirical and logical. This suggests and creates a sense of being uncomfortable in religions primary purpose or natural state which is meant to be introverted and intuitive, and basing our thoughts and feelings on these principles. This is why religion is conflict with the secular these days, at least in regards to its arguments that try to “prove God’s existence” and for example why certain Christians feel that creationism is a thing from God and evolution from the devil, like as if God and all these spiritual entities were something that can be physically grasped and like as if the End Times was going to be a physical and historical time in the future. Because, this is all in the realm of the extrovert and the sensate there is misunderstanding in abundance between these two quarrelling parts, it’s like two people coming from two different worlds, one says “do you see that?” and the other says “see what?” and they both argue over how one is acting in regards to the thing that was or was not seen. They both are entirely different, but the only difference in our world is as if one is sticking a gun to the head of the other and that is why the secular are very defensive against the religious, because it’s like a person bringing his gang on your property and you want him to get off. We as theists need to begin to take the biblical fundamentalism and the literal and historical interpretations and end them, earlier in the book I spoke about this and later in this book I will be explaining more as to what I am talking about in how we can go about ending these historical and literal interpretations.

However this is not to say that science is an innocent victim in this as well. Science is based strictly on gathering information about the world around us and using the reasoning mind derive a process in which we can understand the physical universe and its relation to us. However science is getting ambitious as well for it is making philosophies based solely on its own typologies or based solely on information gathered from the sensate part and the extroverted nature that secularism has taken up. Now this is not to say this is all wrong, but it is not all right either. In an attempt to be objective we have lost sense of ourselves and are finding difficulty in this world with finding meaning and empowerment, the religious people are looking for new spiritual waters and the secular people are looking for the latest self-help book or trying to fill the void to get them through their lives and find some happiness and meaning. Nonetheless, this is why the religious are also so defensive against science, because science being what it is; is divested of any real inner sense of meaning or purpose, being nihilistic and arrogant in its philosophies it has uttered. Like that gang which you don’t want there on your property, science has behaved the same way. There is a point and purpose to every part of man, science should just stick to the facts and formulas given and allow others to come to their own judgments on life. For example, science speaks of evolution, ironically I as a Christian am absolutely fine with that theory, not because I

merely am trying to reconcile the “conflict”, but because in my research it is revealed that as strange as it may sound it is Biblical, in fact it only proves my point further that biblical literalism is wrong.

III. The Lack of Novel Arguing

Now that we have gotten through the psychological explanation and view I have given on the nature of the two debating parts I need to offer some constructive criticism for my fellow theists in hopes of trying to better ourselves through this adversity. This is particularly aimed at Christians because this is where the brunt of the arguments is aimed at. On top of this I feel that it would be wrong of me to argue from another religions point of view which I have not taken up nor ever believed in. So although all theists are welcome to take away something from this, my real focus is on Christians being able to take away something constructive.

So the criticism for people on the theistic side of the argument is one of looking at three issues that I have noticed in both my research and my experiences with debates that I have taken part in. I do not know if this is the case everywhere but if it is the case, than these three points can go a long way in better understanding the argument and actually getting something out of it. Of course, I would say that overall it would help that you learn how to debate and argue in the first place, learning both the skill of logic, grammar, and rhetoric, in particular being able to identify, know, and understand metaphors and allegories. The rest of the criticism I need to make from here on out is about issues of the nature of our arguments in light of what I have written already, issues of ignorance exhibited already in the theistic side of the argument, and issues of what I hypothesize is the reason why people are losing the faith.

It should be clear that the same old arguments are not holding up and that new arguments need to be founded. I have witnessed this through my own experiences while debating with atheists. Whenever I saw the traditional arguments (all based on the sensate and extroverted point of view might I add) trying to prove the existence of God, I often see no one winning or saying anything but taking the usual stance. Most of the time I see no ground made in either direction, like the proverbial stalemate that you may see in a World War I battle, where many shots are fired and people rush out dying in no- man’s land yet no one wins and more are just coming back, hurt of course in this case it’s just a lot of hurt feelings based on lack of understanding, arguments made in a vacuum. However, in my arguments when I throw out a novel observation or making a novel argument, although they do not concede all the time, some do and either way most appreciate the fact that I did not use the same talking points to argue God’s existence.

It is my belief that we (mainly as Christians, but all theists in general) are losing believers for our own lack of understanding. There is serious lack of exploration for understanding and seeking God, we are not looking we are just taking the latest doctrine and dogma and throwing it at people who do not believe. We need to seek God personally, we need to seek him genuinely, do not think all the answers will be given overnight, because they will not those who truly and genuinely dedicated to God are those who truly love him. We need to get back to the roots of what religion is based on and we need to find a holistic way of trying to bring the two together, instead of having a constant quarrel. Has not Christ told

us that we should Love Thy Enemy? Aren’t we treating science, secularism and atheism like one? So let us go the path of love, peace, and understanding in order to make peace in these debates. Most people today assume that because the way things are, everything is as it should be that religion has always been an institution that is part and parcel with the extroverted and sensate mentality and that science is too, and from this we see conflict emerge. It is because those who know and refused to share the truth have tried to make religion an extroverted and sensate thing, in order to justify worldly ambitions of their own. Yet I have show that religion used in the view of the extroversion and sensate mentality is not the reality of the situation we face, this is not supposed to be about Zionism, End Times, or anything based around the ideas of some historical and physical occurrences. Dare I be a heretic, and think boldly to say that God’s Chosen people transcend a biologically related group of people, dare I say that the end of the world is not some time in the near future, but now at this moment, dare I say that evolution should complement Christianity not insult it? I dare to say these things, because these things threaten the world and the status quo, because this is what research has revealed: That people rely on these perverted issues to control or oppress others.

Let me say one more thing in relation to this issue, I also believe that we are planting roots in a garden that is not ours, this goes back to the psychological component of what I have been writing about. That we are from the realm of the intuitive introspective and we are planting our seed in the realm of the sensing extrovert, have we grown so insecure of the nature of what religion is that we feel compelled to act in a way that religion is not? Well look at how much appreciation we are given by those who staked their claim first on the lands of extroversion and sensation and also learn that when we are uprooted everything feels like it was for nothing, there are those who have been uprooted in this realm of the extroverted sensate and have lost the faith, because religiosity is not even supposed to be in this foreign land. Theist, in particular Christianity in the west has put on glasses that we are not meant to wear when our eyes are fine, and we are acting according to what we unnaturally aren’t meant to see through the perspective of the glasses instead of our own natural eyes. This is speaking of what is natural of the purpose of religion and what is unnatural.

We should see this as a sign that Christianity has been turned into nothing more than an outer moralistic shell of a religion that is severely lacking its spiritual substance. The proof is in the pudding, look at our society today, we usually say that when someone adheres to a strict moral code they became “religious”. It is a well admitted fact, that secular ethics aims at finding the best moral code to live by, so if religion is just about morality than this is simply another way of losing more of the faithful, for whichever moral code offers the best morality that is where most people go, however, what makes the best is subjective, utterly dependent upon the person in question. So if religion and spirituality exists, what is its purpose if it is not solely for morality? The point and purpose is transformation, all people are called to be transformed by God, and this is something that in terms of the secular cannot be done for its focus is primarily a worldly one, not a spiritual one, largely because it does not believe in the spiritual. Therefore, the only way to restore faith and the desire to seek out God is for us to re-discover the spiritual, yet how can you do that when in today’s world we have turned religion from something mystical and symbolic, over to something dry and logical? Those who call themselves Christians, and theists in general need to go back and re-discover their roots, in particular their more spiritual roots with

the suggestion I have made above. This is not an attack on reason, I am not saying we should forfeit reason, but reason can only carry the faithful so far in the search that when we can admit where reason ends and faith or intuition begins that is where we can see the helpfulness to reason. Obviously, we need reason lest we become superstitious and are taken advantage of yet again.

IV. Observation of the Secular Militant Atheist Through My Debate Experiences

Before I conclude it would also be right that I offer some observations that I have made in my research and my own experiences with debating with people who are on the other side of the argument. It largely has to do with the behavior I have seen exhibited, the overall personality shown with people who are not merely of the atheist bend, but of the militant atheist bend. Now I want to mention again that this is not an attack on atheism overall, in no way shape or form am I saying that “all atheists act this way” but the numbers of militant atheists are present in both people I spoken with and my experience as well. I want to take a moment also to point out that a close friend of mine, is an atheist and it was in my days when I only began trying to find myself that he helped me, for if he wasn’t there I would have probably been lost in the wind, his rational approach helped keep me grounded. So I can’t saying anything too bad about him, because it ultimately is proof that some bad apples shouldn’t have to spoil the bunch, but how far is the atheist side of the argument willing to admit this, I am unsure.

The first quality I have noticed is this sense of Condescension and Elitism. It is often embodied by a sense of “Logical than thou art” often equating those who believe in God with those who believe in the Easter Bunny. The first part though that I have seen is this condescending arrogance, it largely has to do with the fact that they celebrate the use of reason and think they have achieved a sense of enlightenment that suddenly makes them better than those who “still” have faith in the existence of something that cannot be perceived in the physical realm. This often leads to a sense of elitism, that they are better than the theists. I have not seen more pride than what they exhibit, and this ultimately will be there downfall whether personally or publicly. The second part just has to do with equating the faithful in God with someone who believes in the Easter Bunny, like as if the two were on the same level. This is how they view us, in a way they are right, but not in the way they think, but rather in the way I have written this is how they are right. Either way this still creates pride that kills them on the inside, becoming unresponsive or hateful to anything spiritual.

I find militant atheism to be a Hypocritical Religion of its own accord; I believe very strongly that it has a God. Let me start explaining how it is hypocritical. It is hypocritical because, this particular branch of atheism claims to trump the use of logic and reason while mocking those who have not put as much emphasis they have on it, yet if you took the opportunity to debate with one who is militant in their views, they engage in the use of the very fallacies that they so quickly spot out in theists. They are particularly fond of the Ad Hominem attacks, often mocking rather than debating. It is a funny hypocrisy and I wouldn’t take them that seriously whenever they do speak and argue, sadly they are worth mentioning because I believe that they are a problem more than just an isolated incident here or there.

Now how does the modern atheist movement of today, in particular the militant atheist arm of this movement, have a God? Well it is simple; everyone has a god, something they dedicate their lives to or worship, something they put their time and energy into. Where is the God of the atheist, or at least the ones I have interacted with? Their god is this life, the physical world around them, their bodies, materialism, science, reason, logic and worst of all themselves in their arrogance although these qualities (save the arrogance of self-worship) are all important in understanding the world around them, it is still limited and sadly these things do not last when we die, they worship a god who is going to die and is not eternal. By worshipping the personalities founded in these ideologies and actions, they become them, this is evitable for all people we become what we worship and put our time into.

From my experience as well I have seen this eerie similarity take place that actually furthers the case of my claim that Militant Atheists are hypocritical. It is interesting to note most of all that in my experiences most of the Militant Atheists were Ardent Bible Thumpers. They were born and raised in the household of parents who were fundamentalists, evangelicals, or just biblical literalists. The degree of parental influence varied from person to person but one thing is certain the personality of the ex-bible thumping Christian remind the same mentality as it had from the days of being a Bible Thumper. It is what I like to call the “Copy and Paste” Mentality, they have become the very thing they couldn’t stand, arrogant and condescending forcing their beliefs on others, the only difference now is that instead using the condescending and dehumanizing persona of the fundamentalist for God by saying “if you don’t accept Christ, your nothing” they use the same fundamentalist mentality that “if you don’t accept Reason, your nothing” and they are just as ardent in pushing their agenda as the fundamentalists are, at least the fundamentalists and atheists I have witnessed. Nonetheless I find the irony both humorous and pathetic, they embodied the personality they say they cannot stand, and when you point it out they deny this vehemently.



Based off the research accumulated and the experiences I have had I would say two things, the first is that it would seem that some if not most self-proclaimed atheists are not angry with God per say but rather in conflict with the definition of God that has been given to western society. The second has to do with the first and that is that I believe that some atheists are not spiritually immature but rather they are seeking a more or less better understanding of God, however reason is conflict with the doctrines laid down by more superficial understandings of God, in the context of what St. Paul has spoken they are looking for Meat instead of Milk but they are not being given any and this is what makes them frustrated and distasteful of Religion and God overall, thus giving up on the search. It is a sad thing indeed, because personally I see atheism and agnosticism more so as the easy way out, a kind of spiritual and possibly intellectual laziness, of giving up and not being bothered with trying to find God, which by now you know is one of my engines of my “Inner World” research.

However, it would be wrong of me to make such claims if I did not confess that I was once an agnostic myself, but I find agnosticism one bit closer to being honest with oneself than an atheism because with agnosticism you admit you do not know, whereas with atheism you admit you do not want

to be bothered. However as I have said there is no such thing as atheism for all have a god and all are unsure in varying degrees. The atheist however, is very revealing in what they want, they want a God who gives certainty, they want to be certain yet they embrace ideologies of nihilism where all is thrown to chance, funny and peculiar arrangement of beliefs these are. Agnosticism reminds me at least of Socrates saying that, “The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing” that is where the beginning of wisdom lies, and it is where the beginning of the path takes place for those who doubt, so doubt and then begin to seek out God, if you are genuinely dedicated you will find him. I guess by now it should be apparent that the blame can be equally given; that everyone is to blame and that no one side is completely justified in their point of view. The message I hope you get out of this is balance; balance in how one perceives and evaluates the world, knowing where one is more fitting for making judgments over the other.

Section Three:

Criticism of My Own Against the Christianity of My Time



In contemporary Christianity there are many problems which we are plagued by in our relationship both within the tradition and from those outside the tradition. Within the tradition, there are some who believe that Biblical Literalism and Christian Fundamentalism are meant to serve God. There is also a major lack in the awareness of our Christian counterparts in the East as well, for in the west much of what has been spiritual now seems lost to just physical and emotional expressions, but not spiritual ones, which is what we are meant to aim for. There is indeed a sincere need for a solution that will help us to re-discover the spiritual aspect yet again in the West, this aspect is the cornerstone which Western Theological thinking has largely minimized and yet it is that stone which gives people faith and desire to experience this in their lives. This essay is written largely to offer some re- considerations that we as Western Christians should think about and not merely reject because, it may seem incompatible with the society around us, for “the world” after all is society.

II. The Problems

The first thing that needs to be examined is the problems, the topics and issues written here are meant to be controversial and thought-provoking, for these things are often the things that wake us up. The first issue that I have called a problem is exactly the issue of Biblical Literalism and Christian Fundamentalism; it is a problem because it serves worldly purposes and agendas not those of God. The second issue is just a comparison of Western theology with our Eastern Brothers and Sisters, bringing up the observations that I see as problematic in the Western Approach. The final issue essentially sums up the first two issues but adds more to it and that is the lack of the spiritual in the Western tradition.

Now I have written already on the stance religion is supposed to take with regards as to how it is meant to facilitate our awareness of the world around us. Dare I say than that, Biblical Literalism and Christian Fundamentalism Serve the World and NOT God? It is based on the old idea of getting people wrapped up in issues of world politics and affairs through religious superstition and fear. Biblical literalism is a problem largely because it is limited to a narrow-minded logical interpretation of scripture, which essentially empties out a jar of spiritual water in the desert called the world. Christian Fundamentalism also is very dogmatic and narrow-minded, a re-creation of the puritanical ideology, this ideology is not life affirming in anyway but life denying, there is no room for Spirit but only rational dogma decreed by the fallen man. Both are responsible for many a cruel joke on western Christianity, how sad it is that we see groups today that are filled with so much hate yet preach hypocritically, and the love that their idea of God has given to humanity, which I humorously love to call “Spiritual Stockholm Syndrome”. That is of course the key, their idea of God, not God himself, thus they have become idolaters of the truth, not adherents of it. Yet it is known that idolatry is a worldly thing and

thus there is a connection between the idolatry of these literalist fundamentalists and the world that whether they know it or not they are serving rather than God who they claim to serve.

It is indeed sad that a growing number of Christians today who assume that the narrow literal interpretation is somehow the right one. I have reason to suspect that The Literal Interpretation of Biblical Statements has allowed people who think they can force God to trigger the second coming through the manipulation of politics and economics, this is not Godly but worldly and thus from the devil. We know of the Neo-Conservative political movement with a large part of its members coming from the denomination of Evangelical Christianity which is largely also taken up Literalism and Fundamentalism, in regards to their own ideology they call themselves Dispensationalists which is the idea that, emphasizes the literal interpretation of Bible prophecy, recognizes a clear distinction between Israel and the church, and organizes the Bible into the different dispensations it presents. However, if we examine the foreign policy of the Neo-Conservative, which is by the way as Ron Paul stated, “Nothing New and Nothing Conservative” we see that everything is Pro-Israeli Lobby, and anti- Palestinian and not Pro-Peace but Pro-War especially with the countries whose main religious faith is Islam. Neo-Conservatism and the Christian Fundamentalist movement has a very clear and unique connection to the world politics, where we know that in today’s Globalized Society is the devils playground, however rest assured that the Neo-Cons are certainly not “The Pure Ones” who fight for God in this game.

However, many people have taken the popular view that religious people like to read the scriptures in a literalistic fashion and then observe the political power upon which they pull in government only than do we see the wars upon which they have blindly accepted as part of the faith. We wonder than as we always have through the ages why religious conflict is so frequent, however I will argue that the Problem is not Religion in and of itself but the improper interpretation of it that makes the difference. Violence, hate and ignorance are abounding in any religion wherever Fundamentalism may rear its ugly head. Case in point, Christian Fundamentalists say Islamic Fundamentalists are terrorist; while Islamic Fundamentalists say that the West (pre-dominantly Christian) is a spawn of Satan, pointing to Western Aggression in their lands as there example, this is the paradox that the only people saying this are Fundamentalists, as well as atheists, but this article is aimed at Fundamentalists. Wars that have religious connotations, hatred toward others who are not like us also known as intolerance and finally a pronounced ignorance about the roots, meaning and purpose of the true faith is the symptoms of religious fundamentalism, which is nothing short of a perversion of the zealotry written in the Bible. You see than that every problem is rooted in something good, if these zealots only looked within and not without to see the signs of God at work in the world, their fire would not engulf others but aid in God’s plan to illuminate others.

So it is true than that, power corrupts and whatever is exposed to Power, save God and all that is Holy, becomes corrupted, we thought if we took away power from the church in temporal affairs the world would be a better place, yet now we also must witness the corruption and evil done in secular affairs as well to realize that the problem is not this (science and separation of church and state) or that (religion and metaphors), but one thing only and that is the abuse of worldly power, which those who hold power and refuse to give it up are largely Machiavellian in their outlook where “The Ends Justify

The Means!” Where they will use whatever they can in order to get on top and stay on top, whether it is religion or not. They do not care about the true meaning what it is they use so long as they use it for their own selfish purposes. Again the nature of science and religion are not evil or unenlightened in and of themselves, but rather it is how we use these two aspects in perceiving and acting in the world that we live in that can be used for good or evil and illumination or ignorance. Perversions, forgetfulness, narrow-mindedness, and deception will only cause evil and ignorance to become abundant both within (how it views itself) and outside of itself (how others will view it). Likewise returning back to our origins, remembrance, open-mindedness, and a never ending search for the truth will only do us good and offer the illumination of understanding to become abundant within the two realms (science and religion) and how others view the two realms. However, it is mans dedication to truth, instead of his truth that makes me curious as to how far he is willing to go to do good and seek understanding. As I have spoken about earlier in the introduction, how many “crises in truth” can man endure?

The next issue is one that may seem very broad; it is the issue of the two dominant forms of Western and Eastern Christian Theology. The first thing I want to do is just briefly state some of the more common issues and observation that I made concerning the western approach to religion. The observations I have stated here are things that most people see when they look at the Western Christian Tradition that ironically all comes from the Latin Rite which Protestantism has tried so vehemently to fight against. The other issue that ought to be tackled is the issue of how the western and eastern traditions perceive God, and how through this understanding we can begin to work toward a better understanding of Christianity.

The first thing we need to do however is to once again look at ourselves, and reflect on the society in which we live with its relation to religion. This is essentially my Psychological Examination of Western Christianity, again when I speak of the West, I do not mean all Westerns act like this but the dogma and rules that Westerners have put down that dictate there relation to God and society around them. I first want to restate briefly on my earlier conflict that I mentioned we see in the Atheists and Theist debates of our time. After this I want to discuss the issue of how Westerners for the most part have been told to have a Blind Faith as opposed to a faith that is meant to lead to understanding. Finally, I wish to just state the ideas of how we are supposed to “feel good” and why this is not spiritual but purely psychosomatic (or mind and body).

As I had stated earlier concerning my observations that I made in my essay on Atheist-V-Theist Debates, the issue with the western approach is that the Religious parts of our society seek to project out what is meant to be Internal, those who do this are doing it based on that old thinking that we can apprehend God with the Reasoning Mind often related to the idea of Scholasticism, however it is well- known that the realm of reason is complementary to the realm of the extroverted sensate which is empirical and logical. This suggests and creates a sense that those who hold power in the religious realm are uncomfortable with religions primary nature which is meant to be an introverted and intuitive approach to the whole awareness of the human experience, and basing our thoughts and feelings on those principles of looking within and using the internal senses of the intuition which are meant to be aimed within not without. This is why religion is in conflict with the secular these days, at least in regards to its arguments that try to “prove God’s existence” and for example why certain Christians feel

that creationism is a thing from God and evolution from the devil, like as if God and all these spiritual entities were something that can be physically grasped by the reasoning mind and like as if the End Times was going to be a physical and historical time in the future. Because, this is all in the realm of the extrovert and the sensate there is misunderstanding in abundance between these two quarrelling parts.

First of all this is the height of human arrogance, to think that we can rationally apprehend God, it absolutely is, it is no different that someone arrogantly saying that they know the whole personality of another being, it is impossible to do so, and will only lead to assumptions that will be at most partially true or all false. Let me finish by simply quoting the words of Evagrius of Pontus, “God cannot be grasped by the mind. If he could be grasped, he would not be God.” This mind is the rational soul, God like the people around us is a mystery to be experienced like two lovers meeting and getting increasingly intimate with each other, not something that we merely try to disprove or prove the existence of. For God is “everything and nothing, everywhere and nowhere,” as St. Gregory Palamas states. This is a mystery, a paradox, a contradiction in terms, yet this is what God is and it is because of this that the reasoning mind cannot hope to comprehend.

The next observation I have made about the Western approach to faith in God is how we are told to simply have a Blind Faith, a mere sense of Hope that is not living and dynamic, but static and essentially dead. This blind faith we are supposed to accept unquestionably, and it is this blind faith which makes many people call “the leap of faith” because it is faith in something seemingly irrational and not physical. However, in the words of Clement of Alexandria we see that,

“Accordingly, faith is something superior to knowledge, and is its criterion. Conjecture, which is only a feeble supposition, counterfeits faith; as the flatterer counterfeits a friend, and the wolf the dog. And as the workman sees that by learning certain things he becomes an artificer, and the helmsman by being instructed in the art will be able to steer; he does not regard the mere wishing to become excellent and good enough, but he must learn it by the exercise of obedience. But to obey the Word, whom we call Instructor, is to believe Him, going against Him in nothing. For how can we take up a position of hostility to God? Knowledge, accordingly, is characterized by faith; and faith, by a kind of divine mutual and reciprocal correspondence, becomes characterized by knowledge.”(The Stromata: Book 2 Chapter 4)

The “Conjecture” he speaks of however is Blind Faith, and Blind faith is best described as not true faith. Blind faith leads one to accept religious tradition and dogmas without seeking greater knowledge. For does not the Apostle Paul say himself that, “till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting…”(Ephesians 4: 13-14) True faith leads to the pursuit of knowledge, knowledge leads to understanding and understanding leads to wisdom and wisdom leads to truth and of course truth is freedom.

The Final issue that I have observed with the Western Theological approach is the “Feel Good” Religion of our time. We all see it, everything from the super churches that are really large concert halls

for a particular charismatic man who speaks a message of charity, love and good feelings while he drives off in his BMW to his large estate or even to the people who have convulsions on the floor and blasphemously claim that this is the Holy Spirit inside of them. Both are largely foolish and ignoramus and it only serves to diminish the desire for others to find the true meaning and message of Christianity. This “feel good mentality” is a perfect example of the insecurity of religions true nature, rather than growing in awareness of God’s Love and Wisdom which is the introspective and intuitive path, we have become so insecure that we have looked to the “spirits” of Conversational NLP, Mass Hypnosis and Marketing techniques to generate psychosomatic (mind-body) “signs” of God’s Presence which is more of a sensation than intuitional approach, which is not the realm religion is supposed to be in. As you have seen in previous writings and will see in more writings there seems to be more of a higher purpose and pursuit within the Christian tradition, one that does not involve the hypocrisy of multi-million dollar charismatic’s, the political agenda of others cloaked in Biblical Verses, as well as the idea that Christianity is supposed to just be one big fuzzy, dreamy, and optimistic religion that has no realism to it whatsoever.

The next issue within my examination is the Western Approach is the Perception of God that has been generated within the Christian community. The Western Approach as we westerners know very well that our theology is based around seeing God more so as The Judge as opposed to the Eastern theological view as The Doctor. I do not feel it is my place to be espousing too much doctrine from one as opposed to the other, because I am merely a layman within the Church but a layman who has taken the time to read and investigate these matters. Essentially both views need to be grasped and understood but from the response of many people in our world today, one needs to be emphasized more so than the other if we are to maintain our Church and our understandings surrounding the issues we face from within and without.

As I have said the Western theological approach has decided to emphasize God as a righteous Judge, who has founded us guilty of crimes (sin) that we can never really pay off except through the Body and Blood of Christ. The Roman Catholic Church took this position just before and after The Great Schism which came about the same time that Rome was divided from Constantinople within the whole Roman Empire. But the Latin Rite has always been influenced by the Early Church Fathers who were from the Western half of the Empire more so than the Eastern Half. Nonetheless, one would think that as history went on and the Protestant Reformations occurred, the Protestants would rebel against such an understanding of God as they had rebelled from many of the other understandings that the Roman Catholic Church decreed. However this is not the case, for we see even in Protestantism not a rejection but an affirmation of the thing that Protestants had protested against, that being God as being seen as a Judge. Today many so-called “non-denominational” churches emphasize how God is Love but within the same understanding that God is still a Judge, they also like the Protestants emphasize the importance of Scripture over all other things relating to Christianity, luckily however they have not gone so far as the Protestants have in the belief of a more literalistic approach to understanding scripture, for this varies from church to church. However, the west overall still maintains the view that God is a Judge and like an courtroom one needs to expound reason and morals as if one was being cross examined.

Since the West has emphasized God as a Judge than the Eastern approach or point of view has decided to see God more so as a Doctor. From this perspective, God is the Doctor and his Church is a Hospital. Humanity overall and each individual is sick with sin, a disease within himself, that has also infected the rest of creation and this disease needs treatment a way to overcome his sickness, which is through Christ. Through Christ he becomes whole and healthy yet again able to commune with God, and through Grace become God-like since he was made in the image and likeness of God, it is through Christ we realize this. When I speak of the Eastern Approach, the geography is not the Far East like China or Tibet, but much closer to places like Greece, The Eastern Shores of the Mediterranean Sea such as modern Syria, Jerusalem, Turkey, as well as Alexandria, Egypt as well as going North into Eastern Europe and Russia, West in Iran, and South in Southern Egypt. The rift largely has to do with cultural divides and theological differences. In this Eastern Approach however, lies the Churches united under the banner of Christian Orthodoxy, or Eastern Orthodox, whose structure although Catholic is much different than the Roman Catholic Hierarchy.

Ultimately the issue here is that God is meant to be seen as both, but the words get in the way. We cannot deny that we see the words “righteous” and “judgment” in the Bible and that these qualities seem more having to do with a Judge more so than a Doctor. However we must not forget that upon examination of the text in its original language there is a sense that the doctor point of view can be taken up as well. The Bible is written by men, and inspired by God, we must learn that those who are coming to this awareness however often have a child-like view on the Bible and so because of man’s condition he has been given words that are meant to explain how things are like, not necessarily how they are. To illustrate the point imagine trying to explain something to a child that is a grown-up issue, in a way that the Child perhaps could understand, that is the point to the Bible, to explain things in ways we can grasp a as time goes on get a deeper meaning out of. This goes further in proving the case that we need an interpretation of Biblical Texts that goes above and beyond the mere superficial literal interpretation, for even the most direct commands in the Bible should still be contemplated upon for a deeper meaning. So this goes without saying that the more enigmatic sayings than should certainly be contemplated over as well.

The final section has to do with an expanded summary of what I have been talking about in this section covering the Problems. Overall the biggest problem is the Lack of The Spiritual aspect in the Western realm, it has either been turned into a mind-body “feel-good” session or we are told that we must wait until we die; I have covered the “feel-good mentality” of Christianity among other things. Now I wish to tackle this issue of needing to wait until we die in order to find out if it was worth it. As you might be able to infer from reading this far, this issue of waiting until we die is one that is tied largely to the idea of Faith of Conjecture or Blind Faith, it is best to uproot this idea of blind faith and the notion that we cannot have God actively in our life now in order to allow our living faith to turn into a greater understanding. For although the Apostle Paul tells us that, “When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see in a mirror, dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part, but then I shall know just as I also am known. And now abide faith, hope, love, these three; but the greatest of these is love.” (1 Corinthians 13:11-13). This does not mean that we cannot have a personal connection with God in this

life, for if we read the Bible we see a relation with God between others who are still in their bodies, others who are still on this earth, others who are still ALIVE and also we see that prayer is the dialogue between creation and creator, but to give up and just wait when the opportunity is present right now to really develop a true and real relationship with our true Father, now that a poor expression of ones faith.

For I must confess that for a time I believed it was true, but upon greater investigation into the faith I discovered was the biggest lie, that idea that We Hear about how great God and his Kingdom is yet, we are told to wait for it until we die. This does not do much justice for faith itself. Faith becomes static and lifeless, if we are told we just need to wait until we die. To me this is not part of the Ancient Church’s idea of living the faith, but a modern idea of passively living the faith, our modern society has this idea that we can “get rich quick” and likewise we have grown from that the same mentality that we can “get saved quick” and all we have to do is just “passively believe in God and hold to his laws and you will be okay, don’t worry about ‘understanding’ just adhere to said churches dogmas and you will be fine.”

Yet this mentality has us yearning for something spiritual, because this dry rational dogma that can never do any real justice for the Spiritual. This brings us to the greatest gift however that God has brought us to a Society that wants to experience it now. “It” is the divine, “it” being the transcendental, “it” being the way, the truth, and the life. People are beginning to wake up because they do not merely want to believe it like an all expense paid, life insurance policy where they can just assume they will be fine, in the event they die. Today some people are saying this is bad news that people are trying to be Mystics or seeking out that which is hidden or that which some who are in power cannot accept as true. Yet I say that this should be seen as a gift for the Church to help those who want to experience that awareness of the Divine in this life as a pure and genuine expression of their faith to have something with God now. The Church must work to facilitate that, not condemn it. It should be the role of the Church to make an opportunity out of any challenges we may face, if people are looking elsewhere for the Spirit, the church should not be troubled, but rather show the means of getting to the Spirit. This showing of the Spirit will reveal who the real church is, and who has merely mounted an idol called “god.”

We have forgotten our roots; we have forgotten everything that made Christianity appeal to the down-trodden masses in Ancient Rome that made them want to die for this religion. You must ask yourself, especially a Christian living in the West as to, what made the early Martyrs give up their lives and possessions for the sake of God? Rest assured it was not Mass Hypnosis like what we see today or the “feel-good mentality” present in those who want to appear as rational extroverted and sensation based individuals, conforming to a society that is also extroverted and sensation based. There was the awareness present in those times that only God could give, that made them endure the pains of Martyrdom and put themselves at peace when the pain occurred. That sense of awareness however is not present today for we are like a pot without water in it; we look the part but certainly are not filled with the whole awareness of the part. If martyrdom ever was to comeback to all of Christianity the way it did for the first 3 centuries of its official founding, I seriously doubt that even half of all self-described Christians would continue to call themselves Christians, not because they are bad but because, they

have not truly felt a genuine and real connection or substantial/insightful understanding with the divine in their life or perhaps they will endure because they are under the sway of the “spirits” of mass hypnosis and propaganda, either way the lack of the awareness of the divine still needs to be admitted. We need a solution and we need to apply it soon, for I can only wonder how bad things will get for our society – which is growing increasingly ignorant, apathetic and shallow – before we decide to turn it all around.

III. The Solutions

Now that the problems have been laid out on the table for all to see and understand the context upon which I am speaking it is now time to see the solutions that I propose can be offered to bring greater understanding to the faith Christians all share. From the get go I wish to offer you the view of how easily biblical words can be offered to change the worldview of Christians who fight so vehemently against an outlook that they think is already incorporated into the realm of religion, that being as I have spoken many times already is the outward looking, sensation feeling, intellectualizing realm that is better known as science. This is a solution to the Biblical Literalism that demands adherence to the idea of Creationism. After explaining the case for evolution in the Bible – which I dislike doing and will comment on why later on – I will then proceed to offer the explanation as to why it is important that Christians should look back to the roots of the tradition if we are ever to find the spiritual aspect, not just the dry morality that has plagued us contemporary Western Christians of today. Like the final section explaining the problems, I will again offer an expanded summary as to why it is important that we should restore the spiritual waters to the dry Western Canals of Christianity.

The first thing I want to in an attempt to perhaps offer an alternative that will show you a deeper level to Biblical interpretation in response to the things science shows us. So to model this I will be showing Proof of how Evolution can be found in The Bible, using lines right out of scripture. I must add however that there is also another way we can view creation as well. However which way you want to view it I must say that the focus should not be upon doing this, I know it is tempting for while writing this I have given into my temptation of trying to use the Bible for things that we should just view in the realm and understanding of science.

To begin with working with the Bible to show that evolution is indeed a possibility within God’s creative action we must use The Lord’s Prayer in it a particular verse from it where Christ, who is the Truth or Reality says, “Your kingdom come. Your will be done on earth as it is in heaven” (Matthew 6:10). This particular line should be thought over as it has very powerful message as per the structuring of the physical in relation to the heavenly. “Earth” is the realm of the physical and that which is seen, it is where our bodies have come from and where all things have a given form. This means that “Heaven” is the realm of the spiritual and that which is not seen with the physical eyes, it is the realm where the spirit of man and God reside. This is what gives man the uniqueness over the rest of creation in the animal kingdom; we can use our rational soul and our spirit in unison to live a full life in both the spiritual world and the physical one as well. Nonetheless I digress, the prayer says that we should do on earth the things which are in heaven, not merely because it is right but because it is in alignment with

the rest of reality; “the things below correspond to the thing above; the things above correspond to the things below.” This does not mean that they are equal in quality but the relation of the two works to aid in our understanding. This is the first part of the premise, which I need to address.

The next premise worth addressing is The Parable of the Growing Seed in which Christ tells us that, “This is what the kingdom of God is like. A man scatters seed on the ground. Night and day, whether he sleeps or gets up, the seed sprouts and grows, though he does not know how. All by itself the soil produces grain—first the stalk, then the head, then the full kernel in the head. As soon as the grain is ripe; he puts the sickle to it, because the harvest has come.”(Mark 4:26-30). This speaks of how the cultivation of the awareness in spiritual occurs, there is life because there is growth and change in the appearance of the seed to the point where the original seed is lost and a plant comes out of the ground, revealing a new part to the plant overall. This is the realm of the spiritual, but in keeping with the Lord’s Prayer is this not how life down here on earth develops as well? Don’t things evolve or change in some way; don’t things grow out and develop over time?

Look here again at what the Apostle Peter has written also on the basis of Spiritual Growth, “But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and forever. Amen.” (2 Peter 3:18). Again we are told to push further our awareness of God and his Kingdom even further, but the only way we can do this is through spiritual maturity or through spiritual evolution, as The Apostle Paul said it best while addressing the Corinthians, “I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for till now you were not able to bear it, neither yet now are you able. For you are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are you not carnal, and walk as men?”(1 Corinthians 3:2-3). Do you not see here yet again, an evolution a growth that Paul is saying that needs to take place, in order to no longer be “carnal”? Well than is this not the case of growth and life through time, that while we live on this earth we are bound to the laws of time and space, as well as natural laws which the body must abide to?

You put this altogether and the above or spiritual is shown that the below or physical must also be done, thus there is a spiritual evolution which is unseen and a physical evolution which can be seen, although the physical evolution is also built around an adaptation to the environment or space around us. Evolution can be as much a Christian idea of creation as well as a secular idea. If this is true (or accepted this as true) than the issue should not be whether evolution is the devils idea that cannot be accepted but rather if people must think of this as an issue - the debate should be on whether this evolution that took place happened for a reason or based on sheer luck? This then is a matter of opinion more so than conflict with information. But even still just mere luck, is implausible because, the individual organism seeks to strive to survive and adapt, so there is still a purpose which can easily be seen, my opinion would be that behind everything seen there is likewise an unseen aspect as well. As a side note Christians do believe that we have an animalistic impulse, we have the potential to lust like animals and covet like them as well, could we say that from an evolutionary perspective that we inherited these things as part of our nature from the days that our mere bodies were just animal skins of primates and flesh, not yet endowed with a fully rational soul and spirit?

The other way to view this issue is that every moment God is creating, creation is happening right now. “Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory and honor and power: for thou hast created all things, and for thy pleasure they are and were created.” (Revelations 4:11) Let us expand on this “are” and “were” distinction, why would it be written that “they are created” unless it is at this moment called into existence, this moment it is, not the past for the past cannot be repeated and the past is merely a memory. Yet “they were created” as well, for it did happen back in the past, they did exist, creation was and still is. So let us not view creation merely as something in the distant past but something that is now and present, there is no moment that God does not create, it is by him and through his loving grace that creation is called into existence. For is it not also said that, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.” (John 1:1-3) Is Christ not eternal and timeless; is not the act of creation something above that which is created? Again, God made and continues to make the Cosmos, the creator is outside of time and his act is likewise outside of time as well, because of this creation is eternal, not merely something that happened once.

As a Disclaimer or warning I must confess why this is a temptation to use lines out of Scripture to make the case for physical or scientific arguments. The truth is, as Christians we should be able to understand that whichever way God decided to create us is not the focus, the point is we were created, we were made by God for a purpose and with the endowment of free will, we have to ask ourselves if we will fulfill that purpose as being made in the Image (potential) and Likeness (realization of that potential). We must also be careful not to just fit the Bible into worldviews people wish to provide for us, after all we who are genuine Christians, genuinely love Christ; and by association must Love Truth as well. It would be folly for us if we used the Bible in such a subjective way to use lines out of scripture to try the prove the truth of “X” Scientific theory, only in time for that theory to proved wrong and then hypocritically use the lines out of scripture to prove “Y” scientific theory. We as Christians are best to simply incorporate what is revealed to us into the larger worldview, for does not Christ (The truth) also act in ways that disrupt the society and social order that most took for granted as well, they NEEDED to incorporate him into their worldview even if some if not most didn’t want to.

I believe that we as Christians can have a lot more to walk away with if we took the time to make a careful Re-Examination of Our Roots. This means than that we have to look East to figure out what it is that we are in need of understanding. There are many people who do not even know what the Eastern tradition is all about, and some think they know and misunderstand what it is about as well. However there is a very simple argument that can be made as to why we as western Christians can only grow in our faith and not be hurt by it with this investigation that I speak of.

The Argument I have to make as to why we should look East largely revolves around 3 premises:

1) Christianity Grew from a Religion of Nothing into a Religion Known Everywhere. It grew under the influence and found its identity around Greek Philosophy and Judaism. These understandings better serve to help enable the understanding and context Christianity should be put into and not just purely literal biblical interpretation, which is no different than throwing the baby out with the bathwater. 2) Christianity started in The East and because of that We Must Look Back to The East for Our Origins. The East is where the ancient church lies; it is the matter of geography that I make the argument for my

second premise. 3) We Need to View the Early Church Fathers Again, and begin reading there writings, they are much closer to the time of Christ than any of the amalgam of faiths that comprise Christianity today and because of that they are closer to the understanding and society of the time in which Christ spoke. I am not saying we should “Build-A-God” out of those writings, but the writings of the Early Church Fathers certainly do aid in getting a better understanding of what is written in the Bible. It is an issue of historical context that I make the argument for my third premise. With all these premises we see the need to look to the East and at the very least entertain the ideas that the Eastern half of the Church seeks to provide.

I just want to sum up by saying that we must work towards Restoring the Spiritual Water to The Dry Canal of Rational Religious Dogma, which has long pervaded the western approach to God and Salvation, this approach has either aided in making more ignorance and enemies than understanding and friends who want to go to Christ or it has aided in people looking elsewhere for their psycho- spiritual needs. We must look and see that many Christians are looking to other spiritual waters to drink from in order to experience things related to the spiritual dimension, but why aren’t they looking within the realm they have come from? It largely has to do with the fact that the spiritual practices are no longer really shown or pronounced as well as they used to be to the layman who wants more than simply to have a static faith in going to heaven and waiting there whole life only to see God at the end of their earthly life, in fact this waiting has caused forgetfulness and apathy in really taking an examination in activating their faithfulness in God, in hopes of working toward an understanding that transcends mere intellectual love of God.

I must say also that in researching more into the issue the Conflict with Science should not exist the way it does today. Science is meant to find out the workings of creation, what it reveals should show how God has created the universe from which we came from. Religion is aimed at finding out how we come to the creator. One is rational, horizontal, and physical while the other is symbolic, vertical and unseen. In a way of using the study of language to convey what I am trying to say, we could compare science to syntax (what is) while religion to semantics (the meaning behind it). The point is to have religion abide in the symbolic and spiritual nature from which it was created; religion was never meant to be something that espoused rational and physical truths, in the way that science is meant to. I see the effects of rational thinking being taken to an extreme throughout human history that has caused people to feel compelled to think that religion is meant to be backed up with logical, superficial and literal thought. If we are to recover the spiritual in Christianity today and seek to undo that which it has become (at least or especially in the west) than we must surrender to God the fact that what religion shows, is symbolic, metaphorical, and allegorical in its expression and a mystery in its understanding, one that cannot be apprehended with reason but Spirit. To deny this is to deny religion and to deny God.

With this I conclude my case for finding a solution by saying that, we must begin to seek and re- discover the spiritual waters that we are meant to drink from in the west, without having to turn to the east (now meaning Asia) for our spiritual satisfaction. We must go on a journey to find water in the desert and begin to re-discover the things we are meant to already have but have surrender to our own insecurity of how the rational world we live in would ever accept such “irrationality” that religion states. It is “irrational” because the reasoning aspect we have been endowed with cannot apprehend it and

because it is symbolical and paradoxical, it automatically transcends reason; so because of this we must become it in order to understand it.



It is my hope that the problems proposed were thought-provoking and controversial to those who made an assumption in these problems being true, do not think of me as someone who arrogantly is talking down to those who believe in Fundamentalism and Literalism, for I used to be in that boat for a short time in my life as well. It is my hope that the solutions proposed will also not be seen as arrogant talking down, but as a means to helping others see and learn of new ways that get them out of the logical and narrow-mindedness of Literalism and Fundamentalism. The point is to use the soul in unison with the spirit to discern the true meaning of the scriptural verse(s) in question, for if we only emphasized the rational soul over the spiritual intellect, we will only be able to discern a moral code, but no awareness of the context of the morality surrounding it. Likewise the over-emphasis of the spiritual intellect and neglect of the rational soul, will lead only to an understanding that we could not possibly hope to know how to apply. This is why man was made with a threefold nature, of body to act or move; of soul to apprehend things that can be rationally understood; and of spirit to experience the mysteries of things that cannot be rationally expressed. If we as individuals in today’s world brought the spiritual intellect to the level of emphasis of the rational soul, we would indeed be able to truly commune with God, in this life to the extent that God would allow it. Lastly, let me re-affirm what I said earlier, things that are perceived as problems should not be seen as problems but opportunities to better understand the faith which we have taken up, such as the issue of people wanting to experience God in this life rather than in just the next one.

Section Four:

On Revelations:

Is Action or Inaction Required of Mankind

The Book of Revelations, it is a book founded in The Bible, the Christians idea of the ineffable word of God. It is 100% truth, but there is catch, behind the mask of literal translations and interpretations, much evil has been done in truths name. The most recent bout of evil that has extended from the literal/historical interpretation of the Bible would not only be the hate and fear mongering toward Islam but also the End Times Bible Prophecy as well. Why is it evil? The answer largely has to do with the fact that it has led many people into the arms of inactivity in the face of evil. We all know the saying “all evil needs to do to win, is for good people to do nothing” well, the End Times Prophecy is just that. People figure that we do not need to do anything, because now is the time for God to come down and save us, while we sit-down and do nothing about the evil around us. I personally feel that religion has once again been misunderstood by the faithful and the scholarly, in regards at least to putting the plan of God into some historical and literal manifestation.

The point of my essay is to address and expand on three things. The first has to do with what The Book of Revelations is and what the real message is. As I have come to understand it through research of my own through the years growing up and doing my own investigation into my beliefs. The second has to do with making the case for action in the world, in order to combat against the unseen spiritual warfare that we encounter in this world and we as Christians are called to believe and inevitably understand as real. The third is my criticism concerning the idea that we should just sit around and wait for God to come down and save us. In the end I will conclude but not before tying my idea of Revelations to the first claim that God’s Kingdom was nigh and how people have predicted the end for a long time and have always been wrong.

Before I begin however, I feel it is important to look at what Christianity was and is meant to be. Looking at the history of the Early Christians, even before the day of Pentecost it should be apparent and true that Christianity is a spiritual community, dedicated to the direct experiential knowledge of God, and to be in union with the One True God, as stated in the Bible when Christ himself accuses the High Priests of the Jewish Temple that they, “shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.”(Matthew 23:13) It should be clear that Early Christianity, possessed many qualities similar to a mystery religion, in that it was at first exclusive and esoteric. As time went on this became an inclusive spiritual community that had its own degrees of mysteries that were unveiled based on the aspirants own mentality and relationship with the One True God. It possessed the greater and lesser mysteries, which were found in its earlier exclusive and esoteric beliefs. Interestingly enough this religion grew large because unlike the cults of pagans, this

one was inclusive towards the weak and down-trodden masses, for them to experience the divine truth, that previously were closed to wealthy and well-to-do pagans.

Christianity started out first as an exclusive and esoteric community, like many of the other Mystery Traditions (exclusive to certain people) of its day. The one verse that made it exclusive was largely the requirement of being a Jew. Pagans were not allowed into this ministry, it was strictly for Jews. This is shown clearly in the biblical writing where it is written, in the story of Jesus and the Samaritan Woman that, “Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews.” (John 4:

22) Again, showing that the originator of Christianity made this salvation and inevitably this community open solely to people of Jewish origin or belief. Like other mystery religions it too had its own esoteric knowledge and wisdom, it is through this knowledge that people learned how to return back to the awareness of the divine. This understanding of esoteric knowledge is written throughout the New Testament but most importantly it was stated during Jesus’ ministry, while he was still alive and before his death and resurrection right after the Parable of the Sower and after his disciples ask him why he speaks in parables and replies saying that, “The knowledge of the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but not to them.”(Matthew 13:11) Again, this is a general observation, the community started out as both exclusive to Jews, for even the Apostles were all of Jewish Lineage and the knowledge within this community transcended the common persons understanding.

However Christianity than became an inclusive society, taking in many different people. It was meant to hold the esoteric and divine knowledge that it carried over from its first days as an exclusive society of followers. However the question is asked, at what point did Christianity start becoming an inclusive society of followers? It takes place in The Book of Acts, where Christ told Ananias to retrieve the Apostle Paul because, he was going to use him for an even greater act that would increase the size and scope of the society when it was written, “Go! This man is my chosen instrument to carry my name before the Gentiles and their kings and before the people of Israel. I will show him how much he must suffer for my name.”(Acts 9:15-16) It is by this act, that Christianity ceased being a community that was exclusive solely to those of Jewish lineage but became a community for all of humanity. However, just because it surrendered its exclusivity, it does not mean it surrendered its spiritual knowledge, quite the contrary it is exactly because it has within it “the pearl of great price” that it was to be shared with all humanity.

Christianity attracted the people who were outside of rank or the lower ranks of human civilization. The people most attracted to this Christian message were indeed the poor and down-trodden masses who were at a disadvantage in the corrupt Empire. Unlike the pagan cults, or Greek Mysteries, who were really open up to the educated and rich few within the empire this community was inclusive even to the uneducated, poor, and neglected people of the empire. This is why Christianity was such a threat to the worldly elite in the Empire, because the Empire neglected the masses and took advantage of them however Christianity embraced them and offered spiritual illumination to them, this was a concern because, if the people lived for something more than the world and the Empire, the world lost its power over them, hence why Christianity is a religion not of worldly success but of personal transformation and union to the one true God, regardless of race, culture, gender, and income. Nonetheless, I digress the New Testament is filled with statements of compassion for the poor and not being worldly but one verse

that speaks of the evangelization of the down-trodden masses, is found in The Parable of The Great Banquet, where The Master of the house, has a few specific people he wanted to invite but none can make it, angered by this the Master of the house says to his servant, “Go out quickly into the streets and alleys of the town and bring in the poor, the crippled, the blind and the lame… Go out to the roads and country lanes and make them come in, so that my house will be full.”(Luke 14: 21, 23) Although this was written during Christ’s ministry, when it was exclusive to the Jews, it should still show that even while Christ was still alive, this spiritual community still believed in aiding the poor, rejected and the neglected people.

Now that a correct and proper understanding of the early Christian spiritual community has been established, it is time now to seek out the understanding of what Revelations means. Because, the early Christian community was indeed a spiritual community that spoke of spiritual illumination and salvation, the point and purpose to Revelations was not to make an internal and allegorical truth and turn it into some literal and physical/historical occurrence, in the future. The Second Coming of Christ was not meant to be realized with Jesus as the one unique individual who embodied The Christ, as coming back, but rather Christ who is now spiritual being made to embody himself within you and each true believer of The Way. Likewise, there is a lot of misunderstandings concerning The End of The World and The Beast, whom which modern day “End Time Prophets and Pastors” have called The Antichrist.

I find it funny, and laugh at times when I see people holding out there Bibles saying now is the time for the end of the world and now is the time for his return. Yet, every time man has made this prediction since the early days of Christianity itself I have not seen the world end, in fact I have seen a lot of evil being done, before, during, and after these alleged last days has been claimed. So it is clear, that every time this has occurred man still has not seen a transformation take place in their existence, they do not embody the teachings of Christ any more better than they did before those last days were claimed.

I think a point needs to be established, Christ himself made it very clear in two facts, the first was that the coming of the Kingdom would be within and that this coming through working and living in the world but not for the world would come without warning. Christ made it clear to us, long ago that The Kingdom of Heaven is with you when he said that, “The kingdom of God cometh not with observation: Neither shall they say, ‘Lo here!’ or, ‘lo there!’ for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.”(Luke 17:20-21). This should immediately establish the precedent that any attempt of someone to tell you to ‘look here or there’ is deceiving you whether purposefully or not, the act of looking ‘here or there’ is done with the understanding that it occurs in the temporal or physical realm rather than the spiritual or internal realm. Likewise, Christ made it clear anyway that the time of God’s coming will be unannounced for not even Christ himself knows, it is solely the act of the transcend aspect of God to make such a decision. He made it clear that, “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only.” (Matthew 24:36). Again, what worth is it to us to try to guess when he comes? Does not Christ tell us to worry about Today, for Today has its own problems? Look at the evil that is happening today, tomorrow never comes because when it does it becomes today. Do not be deceived, let us be really allegorical or even literal with such an allegory, Christ told us the signs of the times, about wars, famines and disasters, but there is always these things, I cannot think of one year

when it was ever peaceful in my time or anytime when two or more groups of people did not conflict or someone starve to death.

The second coming is within you because, the kingdom lies within you, Christ told us it would come unannounced as he proves this coming of the Kingdom with Paul on his way to Damascus leading to his REVELATION of Christ. It is in Paul that he communicates one point, that being that Christ lives within him and the second point is something Christ communicate to Pontius Pilate that his kingdom is not physical. Christ makes it clear that the description of the Kingdom, the way, the truth, the light, every word he speaks, is not for some physical sake but for the spiritual sake. He states this clearly that, “My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.” (John 18:36) His Kingdom, his plan, will transform the world, but this transformation is done on the spiritual and internal level, within each and every true believer. Also to reinforce this point, look unto the Apostle Paul who while speaking to the Galatians says, “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.” (Galatians 2:20)

It should be clear once again, that the presence of Christ should not be seen as something outside and foreign but rather internal and more real (true) than even our own selves (ego?), it is a matter of transformation from the “ego” self to relinquish all control unto Christ. The ego self being the entity that the world, the flesh, and the devil seek to satisfy and seek to deny the ego the awareness of Christ in its short and corrupted existence. But the point is to turn the center of attention away from these three enemies of the divine which will transform the ego-self that is pre-occupied with the physical over to the realization of the True Self, the inner self which is focused upon and surrenders to the divine and spiritual and which Paul says is real when he states that, “he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might by his Spirit in the inner man…” (Ephesians 3:16) Again, it should be clear that God will not save us, unless we want to be saved, unless we want to be transformed in our own lives, at this very minute. However the question that is really begged is who is willing to make such a real and genuine commitment?

The end of the world and its great defender is the beast. Again the beast is another allegory, it has of course today been better known as the Antichrist. The Beast is essentially all the power of the world giving its last grab for power and although we know it already lost, we must decide if we will end up as the unsaved or as the saved. The end of the world is essentially the illumination of man, that critical mass of illumination while still living in the world that essentially allows man to realize that we need to stop feeding the system that continues to exploit us and hurt us. This why I find it to be wrong to say, that “we are rewarded in the afterlife and this life is filled with toil and suffering,” and although it is true it still seems like a paradox, I do believe that this toil and suffering is, not out of our hands, or in other words not meaningless and random. I find it that if man was able to realize the potential God had given each individual, as God’s good graces reveals, we have it within us to end the world right here and right now. For what is the world, but human society, and every ending is a new beginning, one that will inevitably transform human society and where God governs man, not in some theocratic bid for power,

but in a spiritual awareness that is present within all of humanity. Likewise, we have all heard of the expression that “you are your own worst enemy” and this should ring true in the case of the Beast.

Again, viewing Revelations as an allegory and not literal, would you say there is a part of you that is filled with hate, or that hates, a part of you that wants for itself, a part that is hurt and wants to hurt? I think we can all agree that this is essentially the shadow and the untamed forces within man that must be mastered and conquered by Christ, the True Self if we are to hasten this ending. Christ had told us to give it the one thing that it cannot stand to bear, and that is LOVE, for Christ had told us that it would be right to, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 5: 44-45) I will go over the concept of loving thy enemy in the next section explaining myself in the defense for action. Nonetheless, however, man is given freedom, this can only be done in you and others who agree, and those who disagree cannot be forced and certainly must be given the chance for God to awaken them in their own time.

In my Case for Action that I have made to people over and over again I have but one point, but it is arguably a very strong point to be made and that is the case that Man has it within his ability to change things. This change if it is aligned with God will be made manifest, but it is only through us - by the order that God has established - that God acts through and moves through us. It is only through physical acts that things were changed and God’s true will be made manifest. God moves us, whether we are against him or helping him, whether we are aware of it or not. I also spoke in the previous paragraph about how loving our enemy is meant to bring transformation to the world.

Before I start however on the power of love and what love I speak of, I must first go over the idea that it was only through Physical acts that things were changed and God’s Will made Manifest, we are moved by God. This point was made clear, when during A Prophecy to the Mountains of Israel was made, it was revealed unto us that God really is the one who moves through us when he himself said that, “I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.”(Ezekiel 36:26-27) It should be clear that as true and devout believers, we are also meant to, “set his seal of ownership on us, and put his Spirit in our hearts as a deposit, guaranteeing what is to come.” (2 Corinthians 1: 22) For how can we say that God is in us, if we are against God’s Will to change the world? I think it is really our own egos and divided small selves getting in the way, but we are confusing it for God. Do not think I am radicalizing you, but I do want to make it clear that we must choose God’s will over the worlds, and God wishes to grace us with a sense of concern both for ourselves and others.

So when Christ spoke the famous line that we should, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.” (Matthew 5: 44-45) what does he mean? Well because we cannot stop hating the world until we come to terms with it or Embrace it, than we cannot even begin to Reconcile with it. The point should be clear, the world must be loved, but not in the sense of what it can offer, for the world is dead, but loved as God loves us, for this is how God reconciles with all things. The love I speak of is strong almost like a tough love as it is often called, it is not meant to be interpreted as one acting as a pushover or “mushy.” Why is it tough? Because we are

called to suffer and go through pains, in hopes of gaining spiritual growth and development when we contemplate over these experiences, for does not the Apostle Paul say to us that, “Not only so, but we also rejoice in our sufferings, because we know that suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope. And hope does not disappoint us, because God has poured out his love into our hearts by the Holy Spirit, whom he has given us.” (Romans 5:3-5) This is the point I want to make about love, God’s Love for everything fallen is transforming it is not static and “feel-good” but dynamic and very real. However, we know now that as humans we are not whole, we are divided even at the individual level, so again I ask is it not true that we are our own worst enemies? Is it not true that we also, because of our pride, tend to project our own shadow, or weaknesses unto things around us, in hopes that we do not have to admit that we are the one with the problem, but that “they are” or “it is” the problem? The point first and foremost is to work toward loving the enemy within you first, by embracing, reconciling, and transforming it. Only when you can even begin to do this with yourself can you begin to try to do it with the world around you.

For, “if X is troubling to me and I fight my whole life to get rid of X, only to see that Y is similar to how X troubles me, than I have wasted my whole life trying to get rid of one thing only to see it in something else.” But this is a projection of your own inner division, your own shadow, your own rejected self, you must work to make yourself whole and when you do, you will be able to love the world and thus end it. This of course is the likely paradox, that, in order to defeat the world, we must love God. But if we love God because we hate the world, than we cannot win against the world. The only way to defeat the world is to Love as God has and to genuinely Love God for God’s sake. For it is only through God that we can become whole and thus save the world. Therefore, my call to action for you and for all is to LOVE, embrace what you hate and know what you want, when you know yourself than you will be in a position of changing the world and your life. Apathy and Ignorance flee at the sight of Godly Love, for when you have been touched by Godly Love you know and you care.

Before I conclude, I must say that although I sound like a person of action, it is only because I was once a person of inaction. To this on reflection I must also make my case against inaction, for I feel that there is much Evil in Inaction. I have two points that I wish to rise concerning that evil of inaction. The first case is that, man always looks without to solve his problems, instead of within. The second point is one of a Christian origin, and that is on the sorely misunderstood beatitude of the one who is meek, for it has been misconstrued to mean weakness, but I can assure you that meekness is not submissive weakness.

First I must speak against the evils of inactivity by saying that while in the world, Man always looks without to solve his problems. This is the tragedy that for a while now has made man weak and complacent. However, I can assure you that this not meant to be the case; man is meant to look within. The World, is human society, it is that which is seen with the senses, it is the physical realm as well. After all don’t our human society and all human societies tend to tell us to look outside of ourselves, for our life, our happiness, our prosperity and security? If this is the case, than why would we assume that the spiritual which is at odds with the world, want us to see Revelations and interpret Revelations in a worldly, physical, and historical manner? I believe that the World wants you to look at objects and others and to neglect your own spiritual development, and because of that I feel that this is not in

keeping with ending the World. It does not make sense to me. If I want to end the world, I need to look within and not without but if you are going to interpret and live by the interpretation of some physical and historical future event, you already sided with the world anyway. I think we are giving the world an advantage over ourselves and others, by giving spiritual revelation a physical and historical perspective.

If you find yourself doubting as to the interpretation I have given the world, see how it is Biblical when Christ himself speaks of the world as being pagan and obsessed with material objects, he tells us as Christians, who put the spiritual over the worldly, “do not set your heart on what you will eat or drink; do not worry about it. For the pagan world runs after all such things and your Father knows that you need them.” (Luke 12: 29-30) Food and Drink, since this is allegorical, it can really mean anything you can consume. Whether it is food or items or ideas, all of which we give our time and energy pursuing and for what?

Again, Christ asks us the question that has become so well known, “What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul?” (Matthew 16:26) What good comes to a person who wastes there life away in pursuit of material things, focused on things outside of themselves, but neglects their own spiritual development. I think it is clear; the teachings of Christ, which are all about internal focus, are in conflict with the later external End Times Prophecies that have plagued Christians since the beginning of Christianity.

Some people have felt justified in saying that, we are called to be submissive and weak, and to do nothing except wait on God, but these people do not even know what God wants, for they have not looked within. I think it is time to really debunk that old beatitude that says, “Blessed Are the Meek” by examining how it has been used in the Bible for I can prove to you that Meekness does not mean it is good to be subservient and weak, but rather it means that despite being powerful those who were called meek did not advertise their power, meekness is the virtue of self -control.

Moses was called a meek man when it was written that, “The man Moses was very meek, above all the men which were upon the face of the earth.” (Numbers 12:3) Yet, how is it than that Moses was very pro-active in his actions? He was not inactive, God moved through him and communicated to him, he was sure of what he was doing and he did it regardless of how much was against him. Surely a man who leads an entire people out of slavery and into a promised land, cannot really be called weak let alone submissive, so let me make this clear meekness is not about being weak and submissive around others and the toward the world but rather to God and God alone, for he is the only one worth surrendering too.

Again, I will reaffirm this claim that meekness to the world is missing the mark for, Moses communicated to Pharaoh (King of the Worldly Egypt) God’s will when it was written, “And Moses and Aaron came in unto Pharaoh, and said unto him, Thus saith the LORD God of the Hebrews, How long wilt thou refuse to humble thyself before me? Let my people go, that they may serve me. Else, if thou refuse to let my people go, behold, tomorrow will I bring the locusts into thy coast…” (Exodus 10:3-4) Tell me, do you think someone who is weak and submissive to worldly authorities would ever speak up and tell them when they are doing something wrong and immoral? No, they will be quiet and not challenge the

authority of these worldly institutions. Also, keep in mind the things Moses had done, he brought three trials upon Egypt and he lead people to freedom, this takes a lot of power, but Moses never advertised it, he used it only when God told him to use it.

If you are thinking that it was only the Old Testament where meekness is exhibited, think again, for Jesus Christ himself said, “Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart:

and ye shall find rest unto your souls.” (Matthew 11:29) Yet how is it that the Son of God - who had done many miracles and used his power for good – be called weak and submissive? He is not weak and submissive unto the world for he too spoke of opportunities that he could, “call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels” (Matthew 26:53). Even the famous temptation of Christ is one that the devil himself said to Jesus saying jump off the building and God’s Angels will catch you. All these and more show of the power that Christ himself wields within and yet, he does not flaunt his power, he is humbled by it, he is meek and subservient only unto the one true God. Thus, meekness is not weakness but self-control.

In the end I feel that when yet another prophecy is missed, people will say maybe next time, but others will know that the only next time is right now. This misunderstanding, I feel will only lead to further blame against religion for the evils that transpired when we could have done something to stop the evil that made us think the end was upon us while it was happening, instead of thinking that somehow God without working through us, will stop it.

Let me be frank and repeat what I said, I think that the inaction is just part in continuing the constant cycle of making religion look bad. We do nothing, at the hour when something should have been done and we think someone else is going to stop it. Than evil once again wins another victory but by that time we see that no one came down to save us or them from the evil, and we realize that we should have done something to stop it. Yet we didn’t because we became infantile, thinking someone else was going to save us from our own faults and misfortunes. Do you not see what I mean? Haven’t we learned our lesson yet, that we should stop looking without, in hopes that we can look within and begin to allow God’s Spirit to come into our hearts with all humility, so that we can do God’s will on earth as it is done in heaven?

If there is one thing that I can’t stand – and thank God I am not God, because I probably would be a very judgmental god about the issue – it is how the masses will say now is the time and prepare for it, by suddenly getting religious but they will never understand how “now is the time” let alone really cultivate a love for God, for they only love him in hopes of trying to avoid the pains of punishment. First though, it makes me mad how all these people will hear the world is coming to an end and they will change because they think now is the time, for if now wasn’t the time they would still be carrying on with worldly concerns, but nonetheless they will get religious and put a mask of piety on themselves in hopes of scoring points for heaven but they are not doing this out of love but only out of fear and does it not say that, “There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.” (1 John 4: 18) So, I also ask you whether or not it is written that God is Love? If it is written that God is Love, do you think anyone who puts on a mask of piety because they fear rather than love, will not have that mask ripped off of them in the light

of truth? Again, End Times Prophecy creates dishonesty within the individual who believes it, and therefore, dishonesty and deception within society as well. When I say, “now is the time” I mean this moment, not some pre-determined date set by some being that lives outside of time.

Outside of religious text, I do recall a famous British man who went by the name of Edmond Burke and he once said that, “All that is necessary for evil to succeed is that good men do nothing.” I cannot express this or stress this in any other way, men must act to combat evil, for if they do not combat, then they do not learn and grow. If someone is apathetic about an issue it is more than likely that they do not know enough about the issue or lack a sense of relevance to the issue. However, evil is relevant to all people because evil is out to get all people. I am not here to say I want to end evil, for The Book of Revelations has shown that only God can do that. However, God has graced man with enough concern and reason to be able to lessen the severity and frequency of it.

So let me conclude by saying that I feel very strongly that Inactivity in the Face of Evil is a Sin, regardless if God is coming or not. I strongly believe that this mentality is a subtle form of selfishness. If Moses said ‘no’ to God’s order to stop the evil institution of Slavery on his people, than would not Moses have sinned? If Jesus didn’t go along with God’s plan by falling to each and every one of the temptations of the devil wouldn’t he have sinned as well (all theology aside)? To me inactivity in the face

of evil often reminds me of the poem entitled “First they came

know how it goes, will we just stand here and wait until the problem becomes so relevant for us that by the time we react our chance at nipping a particular cancerous evil in the bud, those chances become so slim that we ultimately die from it? I digress, the poem reads:

” by Pastor Martin Niemöller. We all

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a communist;

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist;

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew;

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak out for me.

Consider the case of The Past, John of Patmos wrote Revelations during two crucial moments in Western History. The first is the decline of the Roman Empire and the second is the Evangelization of the poor and down-trodden masses, leading to an exponential increase in Christians. The Romans had made it clear also that there would have been no problem with Christianity if it kept to itself, and was not concerned with the large majority of people within the empire, in other words if it was not so inclusive it would not have gotten the persecution it received for about 300 years. The fall of the Roman Empire, was a time in the life of human history that showed that everything worldly rises and falls, economic, political, and social upheaval lead to a lot of instability within the Empire itself, there was a definite sense of ending and chaos. Likewise the message of one person had increased exponentially from just a spiritual movement within the backwaters of the empire to a mass following of people, whom which the common people were very receptive to.

This awareness of worldly decay coupled with a spiritual philosophy of looking beyond the worldly and temporary was the catalyst for the Christian community to see an ending that was imminent, and because all endings are just new beginnings, the beginning of Christ’s reign on Earth. The early Christians - those truly devout and who understood the Christian message as introspective and intuitive, yet all embracing – thought they saw the second coming in their time because many were being attracted to the Christian message of transformation and saw the failings of the world around them. However today, it would appear that many have lost the original meaning of Christianity and have essentially reduced it to blind moral adherence to rules and a sense of dogmatism that makes its message to the faithful too obscure for the modern man to understand, coupled with the extroverted and sensation nature of our human society today we have turned symbolic, internal and transcendental truths, over into literal, external, and temporal truths. It would appear to me that this type of Christianity is coming to an end, and rightfully so, for it has hijacked the message of true Christianity, but sadly those who refuse to identify with this outer and literal form of Christianity are replacing their belief structure with either humanism or other religions, instead of a further investigation into the transforming and whole heartedly involved aspect of Christianity.

Look at all the other times we have predicted the end of the world, and look at how this world has not changed despite these predictions. The end of the world is right now, now is the only moment to turn it all around. Now is the moment for you to dedicate your life to fighting the spiritual warfare both against your divided small selves and the world as well. Not with physical weapons of war, but the unseen spiritual weapons of war. We cannot afford any longer to do nothing as we look at the evil that is present in our world, we cannot afford to sit down and do nothing, waiting for God, misinterpreting the words of God and putting them into literal and temporal manifestation of his will. Rise up and act, God does his will through the true believer and the true believer cannot be bothered with the literal and material words written. God moves through us, the only opportunity for change you are given is this moment. The world ends, when you are actively working for God, out of genuine love for God. Do not sit around with the evil happening in this world and be inactive, for if you do that than you already have let evil win. But keep also in mind, that the only place to be actively against the world is first within yourself and then with the world around you.

I believe now that at this conclusion it is right to make a compromise with you the reader concerning the beliefs I have of Revelations. Is the coming in the future? Yes, but not as these End Times prophets and pastors say. No, instead this second coming, this end of the world will only occur when the majority of the population or even a large minority of the population, seeks first to be transformed in their own life, to allow Christ to dwell within them or as the Apostle Paul said so long ago “I have been crucified with Christ and I no longer live, but Christ lives in me. The life I live in the body, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.” (Galatians 2:20). In the Lord’s Prayer, Jesus Christ himself says “Thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven.” This should allude to us that the truth has shown us, ultimately that the things of the above are like the things of the below and vice versa. Well “As Above, So Below” can also show us that human society is only as good as the individual living in it. When the individual seeks to be transformed by Christ and allow him to dwell within the individual, than the world has already ended for the individual, but if enough individuals desire this than the world

has already begun to be transformed and is saved as it was written. So I ask again, isn’t now the time to change it all around, to put an end to the world in your life and if you are successful in doing it to yourself, spread the good news of how Christ and God’s Love had transformed you and inspire others to do the same?

Section Five:

The Connection Between:

The Allegory of the Cave and Christianity

I was in my history class, my professor was going over Plato’s Allegory of the Cave and it was only recently that I came up with an outstanding connection between The Allegory and its connection to Christianity as I understood it. The Allegory of the Cave is essentially about, a group of people who have lived chained in a cave all of their lives, facing a blank wall. The people watch shadows projected on the wall by things passing in front of a fire behind them, and begin to ascribe forms to these shadows which they seem to take pleasure out of seeing some and displeasure out of seeing others. According to Plato, the shadows are as close as the prisoners get to seeing reality. He then explains how the philosopher is like a prisoner who is freed from the cave, leaves the cave by making a rough ascent to the surface and comes to understand that the shadows on the wall do not constitute reality at all, as he can perceive the true form of reality rather than the mere shadows seen by the prisoners.

The focus of this essay is to look at how The Christian message works the same way as I focus upon comparing The Masses, The shadows on the wall and the Philosopher to the Christian message focus on living in moderation and virtue as well as on the transformation that man must make from being a mere being of flesh to an adopted Child of God. At the conclusion of this essay I will tie the two together and present a few more ideas that came to mind when I wrote this.

The masses (aka the herd, the majority) are people who must focus their attention upon the shadows on the wall. They are ignorant of reality and let everything around them determine what reality is. The masses, as the title suggests is the majority of people. They are missing out on life and never turn around, to see the source that gives the shadows there form against the cave wall. It is in this cave of the masses that Plato describes, three classes of people each class has a pre-dominant focus on a particular pleasure, however, I personally recognize that these “classes” are not so much separate people but make up the focus of just one individual. Also I must insist that these “foci”, like the rest of the Allegory represent a deeper and more encompassing action and thought process that means more than just “food, sex, and wealth”. Nonetheless, the Three Classes are:

The Artisans Class, who are essentially skilled manual workers who crafts items that may be functional or strictly decorative, they are also possibly the people in entertainment and their focus in life is sexual gratification. The focus, of sexual gratification to me represents a fixation with basic, animalistic, and impulsive pleasures. In order to get sexual gratification one must also be concerned with appearances, primarily how one looks, so it may convey are larger sense of superficiality.

The Tradesman class, are essentially your businessman types whose focus is predominantly upon selling the things artisans make in order to gather wealth and the collection of material possessions. The

collection of material possessions is often viewed as a life of quantity and as well as concern to impress other peoples with what you have, primarily from outer appearances. So to me this is the desire for praise.

The final class is the Farmers class, who sows and reaps food, it is there primary drive in life to have and be sustained with food. Like the other classes, I believe that food must be consumed, and this representation of food is supposed to mean consumption, now consumption is something we all must do to survive but then this would need to represent over-consumption as well as different sort of consumption that is different from the tradesmen desire for material possessions. Perhaps meaning an overactive drive for survival and the inability to enjoy life, I am not too sure, but it is some sort of over- consumption that just is not healthy.

So the question that most people ask is, “Why Do Most People Not Leave the Cave, and not perceive the light of reality?” The reason is twofold, the first is that the people think what constitutes reality is the shadows on the wall and the echoes of others in the cave, people stuck in the first reason are the most difficult to reason with because they genuinely will see anyone else as crazy for even suggesting that the things on the wall do not even exist and thus have no value at all. Those stuck in the second reason or have doubted in the first reason are those that start believing that there is more to life than just what is on the cave wall, they may become lazy or even fearful and then thus unwilling to leave or apathetic in wanting leave, feeling comfortable with the familiar shadows on the wall. The shadows keep in mind they have grown up with for as long as they can remember because, those in the cave have been there since they were born, so to speak.

To expand this allegory, know that these people are free to leave at anytime they like, because they have put these chains on themselves, keep in mind these chains are not physical because this is an allegory it is a psychological or mental chaining in this cave. So imagine these people chained to the cave floor and the key is right next to them in hopes that they may break free, the chains are semi-lose enough for each person to get the key, those who are too lazy are really at fault but there reasons usually come from the desire to stay behind with the familiar instead of exerting themselves and not make the rough ascent. Now what about those who are fearful, well we should be feeling sorry for them, but if the lazy one will not even reach over to the key to set him free than imagine the fearful one as trying to get the key further away from them. Now imagine these people in positions of worldly power, suddenly you understand why people want power over others.

So now we must ask what do The Shadows on the Wall mean, what is there representation or purpose? Well their purpose is supposed to keep people in the cave, in the darkness. Think about it, if you were alone in the dark, and your only source for light was in a certain location I am pretty sure you would stay there too, but if someone came along and told you about the true light, would you make the journey? Would you turn around to look, or would you be happy where you are? Most people say they would turn around, but keep in mind most don’t mean what they say so there is this hypocrisy prevalent. Nonetheless, the shadows are distractions, they are mere forms which we can be terrified of at times or comforted by too.

So the masses, than are obsessed with these forms and deceptions of what is real, so now you couple that with what their drives are for “food, wealth, and sex” you suddenly become aware that these are shadows, mere deceptions that prevent you from reaching reality and seeing things as they really are. Your energy goes where your attention flows and because of that, if you’re obsessed or distracted by these three symbolic desires you are wasting your energy on trivial pursuits.

The Philosopher is the wise one, or to be more precise is the lover of wisdom. He was once part of the masses that are distracted by the shadows on the cave wall, but broke free and overcame his fear or laziness. This fear and laziness often leaves a sense of pain if you try to break free from the shadows, but the philosopher realized that pain is only temporary and thus illusory and it is also a good example of how one is actually initiating some type of change, in one’s life. Think about the pain of deciding to leave behind - for good - some past obsession or something that was truly draining time and energy away from you but you thought was once good, it most likely can be traced back to one of the three symbolic foci of “possession, food, and sex”.

Nonetheless, there is one very important part, the philosopher has broken free the cave and the shifting shapes of the shadows are no longer appealing to him. His journey however is not yet over, for he must get to the surface to see the true sunlight, and live in the light of reality. This journey to the surface is the rough ascent, it is rough because the ascent is a vertical one, and he must climb on sharp rocks, and carefully progress upward to the surface without necessarily falling. However, if his drive to get to the surface and live in the true light of reality is strong than he will faithfully preserve, and perseverance or courage despite how many times you fall or slip or how much pain must be endured on the way up is a sign of wisdom. During his ascent his eyes become adjusted to the true light as the hole leading to the surface becomes wider and wider. It is at the moment when he comes to the surface, which his life truly begins.

Some people however, those who became philosophers and completed the ascent often are left feeling a sense of compassion and go back down to the cave, to alert people of the reality of the situation they too face and begin describing a different world, a better world that is worthy of one’s time and energy, a world where these trivial forms mean nothing and disappear in the illuminating daylight. Some people believe and have faith in this wise one who promises them a better life, some do not believe him and some of them curse him and even hate him, if not allegorically attack him. It is those who do not believe and those who say they believe but do not act on what they believe, who are truly fearful, lazy or both. The wise one however, cannot get angry or hate them back, because of their ignorance and non-receptivity to his message. The worst the wise one can feel is a sense of frustration. In this writing here than we see three characteristics of a philosopher, one who is preserving, courageous, and compassionate. When some do not listen to him, that is real pain, the pain of seeing someone not listening to the truth you speak and even attacking you, but he does not feel pain by his attack only by the feeling of being unable to help the one who is ignorant and inflated with pride, in what he thinks he knows.

From the Allegory of the Cave, we must now look at the Christian Message, with its relation to the Cave Allegory. There are two main ideas that I wish to focus on here, the first is what the two foci of

Christian Living are and the second is on essentially the transformation of the Christian from being someone in “the masses” to becoming the “Philosopher”. In the first half, the two foci that are connected to the idea of Christian Living and The Allegory is first the pursuit of moderation in life and second the Pursuit of Virtue in life as well. In the second half, I will explain the similarities we see as Christians who are just beginning the journey as someone who is still in the dark cave of the masses and the 3 aspects mentioned in the Bible that are similar to the beginnings of one leaving the masses and becoming the Philosopher, only in the second half to describe the free one living in light of reality as the Philosopher and the 4 relations that are tide to being a Christian.

Part of the Christian message has in large part to do with Christian Living. This encompasses the moral actions necessary to follow a good life under the eyes of God. It is more than just mere adherence to rules, it must be understood in order to grasp why we moderate from vice as well as why we pursue virtue in our actions. In the moderation of vice we see the need to neither fear nor love our temptations; we fall to them from time to time largely out of response to our old lifestyles or current events. We do not fear temptations, for they are mere illusions, tricks of an enemy who thinks it exists on its own likewise we do not love our temptations, knowing fair well that if we are too tolerant of our temptations they will consume us and in effect drain us of our time and energy. In response to temptation we pursue virtue, in hopes that we may perfect our actions as we get closer to God’s Kingdom. In response to trials we pursue virtue, in hopes that we will not be swept away or negatively changed by negative circumstances. But now one must keep in mind Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, and put this into context of Christian Living.

In the Moderation of Vice, the goal is to no longer about being controlled and swept away by the seven deadly sins. But more importantly, the aim for a Christian who accepts Plato’s Allegory of the Cave the focus for us here is de-emphasis on the masses desire for “sex, wealth, and food”:

We are told that the best way to curb our fixation with basic, animalistic, and impulsive pleasures we must be willing to be able to take up a life of celibacy or at least sexual moderation to the point of sex only within marriage, those who do not marry can still pursue sex, but it is greatly frowned upon, for the very reason of hoping the individual would not allow sex to take over a person’s life. It can be said that sexual gratification leads to an obsessive concern with appearances, so it may convey a larger sense of superficiality as well. So in the Christian Scriptures we are told to dress modestly and not to care with how attractive we will look, this I believe is done exactly to convey as sense of rejection of mere outer appearance in an attempt to seek and recognize the importance of depth in the life of a Christian.

We are told that we should not be obsessed with the collection of material possessions, for this pre- disposes one to live a life of quantity as well as concern to impress other peoples with what you have, or praise which leads to pride. So we must moderate our life of quantity by really thinking about quality, owning a few things of high importance to you rather than owning a lot of things regardless if it is important or not. This trains us to focus more on quality, and trains us to spot true quality around us. Likewise, we must truly combat against our desire for praise it is praise that leads to pride, pride is the chief among all causes why we fall short before God as humans and as Christians. A life that would not

prefer pride and praise, is a life that is dedicated to truth, for pride also leads too many delusions of thinking you are right.

Finally, in relation to the Allegory of the Cave, as Christians we are taught that over-consumption of worldly things and wastefulness is best fought against or moderated by a sense of temperance and self- control. If we did not fight against over-consumption and wastefulness we would be ignorant of how much one really has as well as lead to an over-indulgence, which shows a lack of discipline and discipline is a focal point to make the rough ascent out of the cave. The difference between consumption of material goods and “food” could be symbolic of the view of the seven deadly sins of Gluttony and Envy or Greed.

The second half of Christian Living is a life of being in Pursuit of Virtue, we spoke of trying to flee and what is done generally and why we try to flee them, it is clear that we must leave behind the cave completely, we must leave behind “food, sex, and wealth” not altogether because that is impossible, but we must be moderate in our relationship to them. In some terms, since we no longer make “food, sex, and wealth” the centerpiece of our lives, we must avoid them to a degree and because of that pursuit to the awareness of knowledge and, leaving the cave we must focus on virtue, if we move away from vice we must go to virtue. We do not pursue for no reason, or in hopes of scoring points for heaven, but because it is through virtue that we come to the understanding of God’s promise. Virtue is the rock we hold on to in the relentless and roaring river our trials and tribulations.

So the response than to the vice of an overactive or over-emphasis on “sex” or as I called it the obsession of the superficial as well as impulsive, is purity, which is being purity in mind so as to combat against our impulsiveness and gain the ability to no longer just see outer appearances but to understand or see an inner depth to one’s life as well. This is not to suggest that sex is wrong or ugly or disgusting animalism, I am not a puritan, but it is a powerful part of the human experience and I think people can all agree that too much of a good thing destroys the value of it and begins to make you numb to a gift from God and life.

In response than to an overactive or over-emphasis on “wealth” or as I called it the obsession with quantity and pride, for which wealth I believe is related to the seven deadly sin of Greed or Envy. We respond in kind, with the virtues of Charity, Humility, and Kindness. It is these virtues that will combat against an unhealthy amount of quantity and delusional pride, again I am not here to say that one should be “unconfident in oneself or feeling self-defeated,” because that is not humility. Humility simply is the state of being open to new things and being able to let go of old beliefs, humility is about honesty, with yourself and others around you. Charity is not about giving away everything, out of some social or moral obligation, it must be done out a free and genuine desire to want to do so. Charity is done to allow us to realize that if we live a life of quantity than we should be able to share that excessive quantity with those who do not have much. Charity is done to help us realize the quality of our lives as well as be, that example of loving thy neighbor, which is on par with loving God. Kindness is a response to Envy, kindness is understood as one having a tolerant and concerning behavior, we show kindness to others not out of weakness but out of the desire to destroy the focus on ourselves for trying to amass

things for ourselves, usually people with a general concern for others do not own much largely because their concern for others puts things into perspective for them.

Finally, in response to the over-emphasis on “food” or over-consumption on goods, gluttony and wastefulness we act in virtue of moderation or temperance and self-control. We do this not to starve ourselves but to discipline the mind to control its appetites and impulses, if one did not control these than one while in the cave, might as well be chained back down in it. We would constantly fall back down into the darkness of that cave if we bent over backwards for all our impulses and appetites, all of the time. It is a fact that abstinence, chastity, and modesty are considered sub-classes of the virtue of temperance, as it governs the practice of eating and drinking, practice of sexual intercourse, and the restraint of vanity. Likewise, without food one cannot focus their energy and time on sex and wealth, literally and symbolically.

A less thought of part, to the larger Christian message is On the Transformation that is supposed to

take place within the true practicing Christian. Sadly, like most religions of today we have reduced them to a manner in which we adhere to a moral set of rules and blindly follow them, but like the cave which is dark, we must find our way out of such blind obedience, in order to truly live and understand why we

are doing this. If you are acting nice to others in hopes of “scoring points for the afterlife” then, you have missed the point and have not really loved God let alone your fellow human. The point to the Christian living is not moral adherence but transformation, which takes works as well as faith to do. In relation to the Allegory of the Cave, we must move away from being the chained masses and like Christ, who we as Christians are called to emulate, we too must make the journey to become illuminated and united with God, or supreme reality. But what must the beginner do, in order to leave the cave and how does this find proportion in the Christian message? Also, what happens once the aspirant to God is reunited with reality and has left the cave in which he struggled to get out of? This is the focus on the second half to the Christian message, the transformation that takes place.

So, here we are, we begin with a man in a cave, he is dirty and like everyone obsessed with the shadows and is part of one of the three classes that the masses usually belong to. One day, someone who has spoken of a world outside of the cave walks by must ignore him thinking he is crazy, but to the man he believes so strongly that he wants to see and get out of the dark cave in hopes that he may break free of The Herd Mentality of the Masses. His first act as a new man was his change of heart and his initiation was taking the chains off of him. His next job is to walk to the rough ascending climb to get out of the cave, he has faith that it will pay off, he has hope of a better world which was spoken unto him by the man who had already experienced reality and he must love the light as he gets ever closer to it. Of course, this ascent is not called a rough ascent for nothing, for it is on this rough ascent where his trials and temptations are met, it is here that every time he acts on them he slips a bit or loses his footing. However one thing is sure, it is his quest for the kingdom, the real world, which is most important!

It is clear, that in the Christian mindset the beginning of the journey starts with a sense of

Repentance. However, the name carries with it negative connotations of puritanical zealotry. So, let us

refer back to the original Greek meaning of the English word “Repent.” The Greek word for repentance

actually is called “Metanoia” tracing this word back to a more modern English sense of the term it actually means “a change of mind, a reorientation, a fundamental transform-ation of outlook, of an individual's vision of the world and of her/himself, and a new way of loving others and the Universe.” So this total change is the beginning, it takes place not in the body but in the mind, we act on our Metanoia through Initiation. In the cave, this initiation takes place with the “unthinkable act” of taking off ones chains rather than keeping them on. In the Christian setting, the initiation takes place through submergence in cool Water (it is cold water that often wakes people up, so this cold water can be used to imply that the one who is being initiated is “now woken up,” so to speak) and being born again in the Spirit, which the true Metanoia is about. Initiation than, is a symbolic action but to fully appreciate the symbolism we must be fully involved in it.

Now that the Christian has both had this transformation and has acted upon this transformation, he must now begin to follow through with both the pursuit of Christian Living and Contemplation upon God’s word. He moves in time, with faith in God and the promise of salvation in the Kingdom of Heaven. He acts in Hope of achieving the highest he can achieve in the sight of God, and the desire for achievement to God however slight is good in God’s sight. But lastly, the Christian moves first in Love of God as he draws ever closer and a stronger relationship is built, it is through this love of God that man is able to understand his love for his neighbor, regardless if he is an enemy of God or not. Keep in mind however, that we act in Love toward God, not for what he has to offer but for God himself. Likewise, as I have said, the aspiring philosopher in the cave must climb ever faithfully with hope and love of reaching the sunlight or the true reality. Well the same is true for the Christian, as he ascends ever closer to God, which likewise is also reality or the highest awareness.

This climb however to God and his Kingdom however, is not an easy path, for there are trials and temptations. Just because we rejected the old life does not mean the things that once appealed to us are never going to tempt us or put us through a trial. God may allow this as well in order to advance the transformation within the aspiring Christian who wishes to get back to God. We should not love nor fear that which tempts us or puts difficulty upon us, this is not to say it is wrong to take on a challenge but rather, when we are challenged we must act in virtue and faith. We are like sand being thrown into a fire, we must hold strong in our faith and virtues while the trial of fire tempts us, in hope that we may be transformed into hard glass. It is here that I would suggest you consider that The Wedding at Cana be seen not only as a miracle in history but a deeper message that we too will be changed from common water to precious wine.

In the end, the man in the cave was on a quest for reaching reality, he had to climb and believe in the hope of what was promised to him from previous illuminates only than is it even possible to speak wisely and with knowledge, if the man gives up on his climb and goes back down into the darkness of the cave, he will be smarter than the others, but he will be lazy as well and I personally feel a sense of sorrow should be felt for those who, while climbing upward, turned back and gave up. It is like being given a great gift and breaking it purposefully. The same goes for the Christian as well, in the pursuit to God we are to seek him first and what he offers second. After this the understanding and use of virtue, faith, hope, and love must also be employed.

The Christian, who practicing the virtues and the acts described eventually reaches the entrance to the cave where he climbs out; only in Christian language it is called the Kingdom of Heaven, and it is at this point the Christian is no longer part of the masses, but is now equivalent to the Philosopher in Plato’s allegory. In the Gospels, we see 3 events take place after Christ has been tempted in the desert, which is supposed to represent the rejection of the world and of the things that the masses usually are attracted to. The first thing we see is a sense of Illumination or Knowledge, of how to act in light of supreme reality or God. We than see him teaching and becoming more notorious for his teaching as well. This notoriety however becomes such a threat to the people in worldly power that he is abused and put on trial and is tempted during the course of the trial. Afterwards he dies and is resurrected by God, this is the scene of Unification, in which he is no longer an isolated being but joined completely to God. Likewise in the Allegory, once the man see’s the true sunlight, his love of seeing reality allows for a sense of unification to the real and then the trial and temptations begin, they begin once he descends back into the cave, to tell people of the real world and he is met with resistance.

So the man in the cave has made it, he has made the rough ascent to the surface to see reality. The light is blinding at first and so he must adjust he has indeed been illuminated. This illumination only will lead to Knowledge and true wisdom. Likewise, it is also true that for the Christian, his journey is not entirely complete, but the most trying time is certainly completed. The Christians Trials and Temptations

is the rough ascent to God, and it was Faith, hope and love that got him out of the cave and into the

light. The Christian, now living in the light of God, is a child of God. He now moves in virtue and love of

God and men. It becomes clearer to him, that the virtues are practiced not to control his life but to free his life while making the ascent to the surface. This knowledge which is direct and intuitive, allows him to keep his virtue and know himself better.

Unification is what becomes of the illuminate; now in the Christian myth unification comes last, in the scene of Christ’s Ascent to Heaven and even his resurrection, despite the fact that Christ is already united with God in the Doctrine of the Trinity. In the Allegory it seems to come with his leaving the cave and accepting what is in front of him. Unification regardless signifies total surrender of the smaller self to the larger self, a reconciliation of conflicting parts and love. This maybe away of perhaps understanding the term to love ones enemies, for once they held you down but now all is reconciled and

a higher view is taken, this is done by the motivation of love and knowledge of how to make peace,

which in the Christian terms fulfills the “Peacemaker Beatitude.” For the greatest enemy we face is not what is outside of us, but within us, we are our own worst enemies and we must reconcile with our

conflicting selves in order to experience peace.

In the Christian myth, the story is clear, Christ acting on his illumination and even his own special unification to Supreme Reality becomes infamous in the eyes of those who hold worldly power. Because of this he must once again face Trials and Temptations but this time his trials and temptations are different than when he was tempted in the desert (making the rough ascent). What I mean is, he already made the rough ascent, he went through trials and temptations in the hopes of the adversary that he may fall down but he did not fall down while ascending to God for love of God. Now the trials and temptations are different, for now he knows the truth and will not leave it or act unfaithfully, but he is on trial and is tempted in hopes that the powers that be may try to silence him from sharing the truth

with others and in the hopes of God that the powers that be may destroy their own power over the masses. This is no different than the man going back into the cave to alert people of how dirty the cave is, how fake its images and forms are on the cave wall, and how this world (the cave) is not good but a prison designed to keep you from getting back to reality. The man alerting others is attacked, punished, made to doubt, accosted and heckled at for his beliefs. The man asks for people to believe not because he is trying to trick him but because they have had their backs turned to the light from the above, which at their level is dim; it is dim because the cave is deep.

So to conclude, once the man becomes a philosopher or has made the rough ascent, he is now mirroring Christ, and this according to the Bible is the perfection of man. In the Bible it is clear after all that we must not just believe and act like we do not, but that we must believe and seek to understand, in hopes that we may be able to emulate him who had freed us. In the Allegory of the Cave, we must turn away from the shadows on the wall the same way that Christ tells us to turn away from the world, yes it is difficult but only after a firm Metanoia and acting on it can it be completed, once it is complete it symbolizes dedication to the cause of making the rough ascent and during this ascent we are tested and tempted to build our spirit and character, to directly understand what must be done. We become illuminated like the one who alerted us to the surface and like the one who alerted us we too must go back down to alert others in hopes that they too may seek Unification. This is the perfection, by emulating the one who taking people out of ignorance and darkness to bring them to light and love. We see throughout the Christian message a story not of mere adherence to moral standards, but rather the desire for a transformation in ones entire being that transcends anything we thought of.

So as we get toward the end of this essay I wish to share with you some startling realizations that I find between The Christian Message and Plato’s Allegory of the Cave. The first has to do with the nature of freedom and where it really lies. The second realization has to do with largely the view we should have on human kind, as we know these writings are Pre-Enlightenment thinkers and the outlook for humanity is seen as pessimistic, however, I will seek to reconcile and arrive to a more realist position. The final realization is a suggestion of re-considering certain meanings that are found in The Bible and not connecting it so much as religion but rather to the rank and progress of a Christian.

As we have looked at the Allegory of the Cave, we see that freedom does not lie in the things that the masses take up, in other words “food, sex, and wealth (aka possessions)” or better yet to be pre- dominantly focused on these things. Now a man is free to choose, but this does not mean these foci will inherently enhance his freedom, because, one can learn through experience that these very qualities usually end up holding people down. By turning away from the shadows on the cave wall one is no longer fascinated with the temporary or non-existent things. Likewise, in the Christian story we are told that a pre-disposition or even obsession with other created things, in particular things that are temporary (“food, sex, and possessions”) will not bring us one step closer to freedom or to true happiness, but rather if we allow these foci to determine our life we will be forever thirsty, despite how much water we drink, as the Christian adage goes. This is why the need for virtue is required for a freedom to take root in one’s life. Moderation and Virtue not only should be the focus, but is the only focus that will lead to freedom. Because the nature of freedom - as both The Allegory and The Christian message states - lies in no longer being dependent let alone obsessed on the transitory things of this life,

this is not to say it is wrong or evil to have them, but to not allow these things to be your prime motivation in your life.

In both the Allegory of the Cave as well as The Christian Message we see that The View of Mankind is one largely of pessimism, that mankind is ignorant and this makes him weak or that he is weak and thus subject to ignorance. Some may say that this is a pessimistic view of mankind, however keep in mind, that these people who suggested such things were not being subjective but were trying to be objective. So the view here is one that transcends optimism or pessimism, this is realism. So the point here is that there is a definite association between weakness and ignorance. The two coincide with one another the question that most people focus on is which occurs first. Well from the basis here of both of these Myths is that man is weak and that is why he is subject to ignorance, because he either has it within himself or has an “outside agent” willing to help him but he still will not take the opportunity to advance or change in a way that man never thought he could do, this is laziness or it can be fear, after all we do fear change or at the very least get uncomfortable about it. Nonetheless, my compromise for those who still disagree with me on the pessimistic view for mankind is this, my pessimism for man can only be change if and only if enough people leave the cave at one point in time, and that each generation that passes from this point sees to it that they stay out of the cave the first generation made the effort to leave behind. For the Christian adherents, perhaps than the pessimistic view of the Christian religion in an increasingly rationalistic world that passes judgment based on actions and not what one says can be changed to an increasing optimism if and only if, like the man who leaves the cave, enough Christians seek to be transformed from mere human flesh which is animalistic and impulsive to become emulators of God’s Son. So if someone asked if man can be perfected, I would say is perfection is conditional, because man has free will, he can only perfect himself if he is willing to overcome the conditioning of society, as well as the innate fear and laziness that are in him.

However, my pessimism for man will finish this thought by doubting in man’s ability to put in the effort and time to make such a transformation or to leave the cave and focus on reality and not their own small little world with its thought-to-be endless concerns, let us see how many try and fail to do the very opposite, in spite of what my pessimism had predicted, instead of a genuine desire to do the opposite of what my pessimism had predicted.

Lastly let me conclude by saying that in The Bible, many people’s lives had been lost over the issue of being “a witch (pagan)” or “a Jew.” To remedy this situation, I propose A New Way to View the Rank of a Christian who is along the lines of one that strongly desires to want to be freed from the cave and live in light of reality and ultimate awareness, or as Christians call the Kingdom of Heaven. As you know in the Bible the writers attack Pagans and Jews for the evils of the world and its problems, likewise they also attack people who call themselves Christians but in reality are wolves in sheep’s clothing. Each of these titles has a describing point that is often tied to but not limited to its historical implications. These are degrees of development within the Christian advancement toward the Kingdom of Heaven.

The Pagan in the Greek New Testament Scriptures is often called “hylic” which means “matter” and like the pagans, this life is there focus for everything before they die, they want to amass the most “food, sex, and possessions” to them the physical world is the focal point to living. The point I wish to

demonstrate is not so much someone who is actually pagan, but Christians who calling themselves Christians are really acting like pagans. We see them everywhere today, we often call them, spiritual materialists, people who tell you to be saved by Christ by reading someone’s book, or tells you to come to HIS CONGREGATION and only then will you be saved, while he drives off in a new BMW. This is a contradiction in terms; a Christian Pagan cannot yet do exist because one is primarily focused on the material things (“food, sex, and possessions”) of this life while the other is not. Nonetheless, Christian’s can be found here and their understanding is sadly limited to things that will serve them in a selfish manner, these are the ones that other people in the Christian community or outside the community often make fun of. In regards to the Allegory, the place the hylic fits into is the one, who does not even know of the world that lies outside of the cave, so to speak.

The next in the Greek writing of the New testament scriptures, is what is referred to as “a Jew” but this is often referenced with the word “psychic” not in the sense that he can tell the future but rather one who is partly spiritual but have not yet achieved separation from carnality, or flesh. Again the understanding is that man can change from an animalistic hylic to a psychic and furthermore to a pneumatic. Here we see one however, like the actual Jews themselves, obsessed over legalisms and most importantly blind moral adherence to the rules and doctrines, those who see the outer appearance but do not directly understand the spirit. Many people are here, in regards first and foremost to how one views religion, as a center for morality. However, because you see people have not yet completely separated from Carnality there is still room for hypocrisy. In regards to the allegory of the cave again, this is someone who attacks and heckles someone who has told him of a world outside the cave but will not listen or someone who acts good in the cave in hopes of being freed after his death in the cave.

The final advancement which is the highest is what is written in the Greek New Testament as the true Christian, or as in Greek it was written as the “Pneumatic,” or spiritual Christian. This is the true Christian, one who is born in the spirit and water of baptism and one who has had a Metanoia experience, truly these are the only people who can really call themselves Christians because they took off their chains and have began making the rough ascent to the Kingdom of Heaven. They will not sell Christ, in some way to make money to use Christ as some means to a personal and selfish, worldly end like the Hylics or “Pagans” and unlike the Psychics or “Jews” blindly adhere to laws and customs but contradict their laws and customs with their own behavior purposefully. No, they have one drive, love of life in particular the life that God had given them, and as the Christian mythos declares, God is only able to help you if you are a Christian and as I said earlier, not in body or title, but in personal transformation and position in life.

Remember, this is not static, it is life, the hylic can change to the psychic and the psychic to the Pneumatic, it simply depends on whether or not you are truly interested in aspiring to the kingdom, or in the Allegory of the Cave the Christian is one who has taken the chains off and is climbing up making the rough ascent and will see the surface. Throughout the Epistles of Paul we see many verses that speak of spiritual growth and transformation, such as in Galatians, Corinthians, and Romans. Such as the statements: “Milk for Babies; Meat for strong men.” – “For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.” – “But

the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.”

Before I conclude this essay of mine, I would just like to say that I must seek to reconcile the enlightenment thinker Thomas Jefferson with the two Pre-Enlightenment thoughts of the Christian Message as well as the Greek Philosopher Plato and his Allegory of the Cave. Now as you may know by now, the Pre-Enlightenment thinkers took a more pessimistic although I argue realistic view of mankind where as the Enlightenment thinkers, guided by a sense of logic lead to believe in a more optimistic view of mankind. However for employing their use of logic it could be argued that there will be a sense of realism to it as well.

Pre-Enlightenment sought to control man, Enlightenment sought to free man from those who sought to control him. I too believe in the enlightenment ideals of individualism and limited government as well as secularism. However, there seems to be a conflict remaining, as to what is more important:

the control and order of pre-enlightenment thinking or the liberty of the enlightenment thinkers? To me, liberty is the mother not daughter of order. One must be free to make mistakes. They say that without the freedom to make mistakes and the wrong choice you remove morality from the equation and it becomes immoral to control someone’s behavior because it pushes people in one direction.

So to conclude, I believe that a life of constant pleasure is symbolized by living in the shadows and that life is more than just the symbolic foci of “food, sex, and possessions”. I do believe that a life of moderation followed by people making a rough ascent is the only way that people can ever have hope of not only knowing themselves but the truth of the world around them. I believe that if people knew the truth, both about themselves as well as their environment, they would be able to make a change in the world around them. However, it is man’s fear and/or laziness that’s getting in the way, for we all must admit that the one who stay’s behind in the cave forever chained down, viewing the shadows on the wall and pre-dominantly focused on “food, sex, and wealth” never really changes. The only people who transform and grow up are those who overcome their own reservations and doubts, unlock the padlock keeping themselves enslaved, moderate on their own pre-dispositions to “food, sex, and possessions”.

My teacher in school once contradicted himself when he said that those who go to school to get an education who achieves the discipline of waking up to go to class every morning are those who make the rough ascent. Yet, from what I have seen school puts people in a box it does not take them out of one, also the teacher said himself said that it was through “education and propaganda” that made the masses want to be pre-dominantly focused on “food, sex, and wealth.” In the end, I think that people need pain, not for some sick person to gain pleasure out of others suffering, but rather to help people break their focus on the transient and trivial.

Section Six:

The Ten Virtues of Individualism

The purpose of this list is not to prevent you from living but rather to make you more aware of your life and the world around you. These are not order in any particular importance in an objective manner. However, I have organized this list in the manner that it is important to me. These virtues are interlinking to one another and all have their roots in one another. This list should be a guide not a control mechanism.

1. Independence- The first virtue is independence. It was the American Founders desire to become independent from the government of their motherland, so it must be our desire as well not merely at a national level but at an individual level too, for how well could our society function if we say we believe in a virtue but never really act on it? However, for us it is our desire to be independent from government and to a degree society. In other words the desire is to have self- sufficiency and to have as little reliance upon government as possible. Resourcefulness is part of the virtue of independence, largely because it takes the ability to be resourceful to find what you are looking for and to apply what you have around you so that you might be able to live accordingly. The individual most do as much as the individual can do to maintain as much self- sufficiency as possible.

2. Critical Thinking- Clearly the idea of classical liberalism was backed up by some of the most rational scholars around. Because so much reasoning went into the ideology of liberalism to manifest in our society it is apparent that each individual must value the critical thinking ability and literacy of their own mind. One should learn the basics of reasoning as well as understand the errors or fallacies associated with the reasoning mind. So as to avoid falling to erroneous actions that is not in alignment with reality. The value closely associated with critical thinking is that of a degree of balance between being skeptical and open-minded, this is done so as to not deny possibilities but rather welcome them. Last but certainly not least, the virtue of critical think must be backed up with the value of truth, the goal of all individuals should be to avoid the temptation or the blurring of the line between a constant searching for the truth and simply justifying your side of the argument. This will be applied by way of maintaining a light grip on any discoveries and understandings made. Clearly the purpose of this virtuous path is to go onward in constant search for the truth and a clearer picture on reality, if it is true synthesize it with something you know is true.

3. Introspection- The ability to look within the inner world of self is indeed a powerful ally in cultivating the individual self. All great members of our species are well aware of this virtue and some make specific references to the act of introspection. Thus the act of confession need not be towards another person in our environment but rather to ourselves, of course this act of confession needs to be a reflection on actions done during the day and objectively as possible ask yourself why you did what you did and objectively seek to answer these questions. Another art of the Introspective virtue is the desire to know yourself for who you truly are and not just accept yourself for what you or society thinks you to be. The act of knowing yourself is one where you put yourself in a difficult situation or find yourself in one and overcome it, much of our present society seeks to live a life of comfort and seeks to run away from problems but I say that you know yourself and stop trying to strive for comfort and familiarity all the time. Finally like the value of truth in the virtue of critical thinking, the value upon understanding is paramount to the virtue of introspection. The goal is to be able to build up a “mental map” of who you are and your thought processes as well as motivations from this you will have the understanding to make real change in your life.

4. Honesty- Of the most importance to an individual and likewise complimenting part to the virtue of introspection comes with it the virtue of honesty. Now one must first be honest with oneself in the most objective fashion as possible. Honesty with oneself allows one to be truly honest with others, if you lie and deceive yourself than every act you do will only be filled with deception. If one seeks to live honestly than one must not put too much value in rationalizing away ones faults, but rather seek to simply understand ones faults and judge oneself accordingly. Apply honesty liberally to all circumstances and as the first response to any problem you may encounter regardless of how trivial or profound, whether it is of your inner dialogue with self or with the dialogue of those around you.

5. Wisdom- Our country was founded as a Republic, so that all might have power in their own lives, so build and prosper within your own inner republic so that you might further understand the power a republic has. Of course, wisdom is the child of experience so seek new experiences so that you might grow in wisdom. Seek wisdom of those from the past, become the true meaning of the word “philosopher” which means lover of wisdom. Embrace her and understand her, she was meant for you. Do not run for worldly wisdom which only seeks to pervert the true wisdom that was designed to uplift you and empower you with a personal sense of power over yourself rather than over others. That is the truth, the person who has power over themselves and knows themselves accordingly will be more powerful than someone who is insecure of themselves and thus seeks to have power over others because they lack power over themselves. Your life is yours so empower yourself by having power over yourself rather than having power over others.

6. De-Conditioning- Some may wonder why I put in this virtue as part of the larger list of virtues. The answer is rather simple, if you are to live freely than one must not be attached to norms and conventions. The one who de-conditions themselves properly has these virtues as well as all other virtues and values work for their own improvement instead of being a slave to the virtues themselves. The one who de-conditions themselves successfully can see how things truly are. Truly the de-conditioned person is no longer dogmatic and demanding. Seek to de-condition yourself from your pre-conceived conceptions of whom you are and where you are going so that you might be the master of your life instead of the slave of everything around you. De- conditioning is part of the virtue of honesty which is part of the virtue of introspection, how well do you think you know yourself if all you do is identify with things outside of yourself? The only thing who should not de-condition from your mind is upholding the highest value upon the principles of Life, Liberty, and The Pursuit of Happiness.

7. Novelty- This virtue will prove useful to our nation. This is not to say that you need to believe in and follow new ideas so much as but rather accept new ideas. Our nation was based on the idea of it being an open society, not a closed society. There will be new ideas and discoveries, so accept them or embrace them as part of the fruits of open and free society. Give new things a chance and do not be afraid of exploring and experimenting with ideas. You are meant to raise your awareness of life and the world around you. Embrace all that comes your way and celebrate these things as fruits of your liberty. Novelty brings life to a dull and uniformed world. If you wish to do a social experiment than one need simply do it in a grassroots format, for in truth that is where the results of your reality really is shown, in the grassroots, the localities, that which is right in front of you.

8. Compassion- Here lays an important virtue, compassion or mercy is an act of the individual. Only the individual can be compassionate and direct their own compassionate behavior to those around them. If we seek to end the systems of government that have one group rely upon another group or have each of us enslaved to each other than we must be willing to be compassionate toward one another so that way we can find ways to protect our liberties and our own lives from the state who will act to counter-balance the behavior of the governed. Part of the virtue of compassion is rooted in the virtue of knowing yourself which means honesty must be cultivated. The compassionate person does what they do in love however, NOT necessarily in fear of losing something. A compassionate individual is fearless, so fear nothing but rather seek to understand and use common sense, for that which makes merciful action possible without “exploitation” is a discerning mind.

9. Moderation- Although balance and moderation would sound the same I seek to apply them in a different light. If one were to look closely at our present society it is based on the desire for extravagance and love of the extremes. Our present society is a society obsessed with quantity. This thinking must end, moderation would cultivate the awareness of and the gratitude for things you do less often rather than pervert them. Moderation is the best way to prevent abuse. The one who moderates on any form of consumption whether it is in some intellectual, physical or spiritual pursuit will almost certainly have value for quality. I do not wish to prevent you from enjoying that which makes you happy but rather through moderation one will understand how happy something makes you. There is only one thing I say that you should do in excess (within good reason) and that is to defend your right to a life of liberty and happiness.

10. Balance- Last but certainly not least one should seek to live a life of balance. Live a life of balance by being united in and encompassing both “the left and the right” try and breakdown division both in self and the world around you. See what the conflicting sides have in common. Find balance between work and personal time, to reduce unhealthy lifestyles. Seek balance between logic and intuition, so as to encompass the fullness of being a human. Seek balance between rich and poor, so that you might know the value of your work while not being enslaved to it all the time. Seek balance between extremes for our emotional nature is based in extremes but good reason shows us what we truly want as well as need to see. The balanced individual is able to understand the virtue of moderation intimately because the two are nearly the same. Rather than becoming one-sided, seek to understand, this is where the virtue of de-conditioning comes in.

Summary of Ideas:

Part One

1. Events Proclaimed in Scripture are not necessarily historical events, but are myths that are meant to convey a message that cannot be rationally apprehended. To this

effect we should change our understanding of myths back over to their original meaning instead of the more contemporary understandings that often try to associate myths with lies or deceptions.

2. The basic foundation of most debates over God’s existence [(Theism V. Atheism) or (Science V. Religion) or (Knowledge V. Faith)] is from the beginning an unstable

foundation. The true religious foundation is focused inward to the subject and comes from the realm of the irrational or that which cannot be rationally explained, this is not something to be shy or ashamed of but something to embrace as the true nature of religion, our hyper-rational western world has made us think that just because something is irrational it is automatically wrong, when in fact this is not the case. Paradoxes, contradictions, and things of the similar nature are irrational yet are not wrong and exist. The foundation of science is focused outward toward the object and focused on only one type of knowledge and the process for which to getting that knowledge because of the focus it has taken up. These two realms have an issue over semantics and will never really be able to understand each other, but this does not mean that one should try to become the foundation of the other in order to do so.

3. It should not be the modern atheist that theists should come to dislike, but rather the militant atheists whose goal is to essentially force there point of view down the throats of the “disbelievers” however, we as theists have seen a mere shadow version of the things we have prevalent within our own realm. For the militant

atheist is in character no different than the militant theist aka the fundamentalist. If we are opposed to militant atheism we MUST be opposed to militant theism – lest we look like hypocrites – and come to understand the higher meaning behind being faithful to said deity.

4. Religious Fundamentalism and Biblical Literalism than are not meant to serve God but serve a Worldly Agenda, for in this modern fundamentalist following, religious groups are using literal interpretations to justify socio-political ends, shrouded in Religious Text AS IF it were God’s will. It is because of this that we must

understand that the pursuit of power is a Machiavellian pursuit where the ends justify the means. It does not matter to the corrupt and worldly whether they use “faith” or “reason” to justify their agenda, they will use lies and deceit to get what they want, and either way will fall to fallacies for their immoral use of rhetoric and

sophistry that they must employ. Therefore the only to combat against fundamentalism and literalism is to genuinely welcome depth and metaphorical interpretation of religious text.

5. The biggest moral concern of our time, is that concerning these end of the world prophecies which in the present seem to place in the thoughts and feelings of people a sense of apathy or pointlessness to act now, to fix the problems of our day. In my

writings I expressed concern primarily about “End Times Prophecy” about God “Rapturing” people up or God coming down to save us from ourselves, in such an extraordinary way. It is not so much that I am faithless or skeptical of God’s Power but rather am merely looking at when such an idea as this was founded. The “End Times Prophecy” was not originally part of the Christian believe, but is rather modern stemming as far back only to the 19 th -century. Nonetheless, other similar prophecies we should be skeptical of as well, anything that seeks to stop people from acting and growing up in the present should be regarded as a threat to humanity not as a beneficent promise.

6. True works and True Faith should be turned in on ourselves; the point is to grow in loving relationship to God, to come out of the darkness of the world as best we can

at this moment. I used the Allegory of the cave not merely to show how this works but to also show how society is structured. We are born into a world that makes us ignorant or forgetful of whom we are meant to be. Through faith, love, and hope in God the Christian is able to rise up and out of the oppressiveness of the world around them. This active climb to make the rough ascent perfects us in Faith, Hope and Love as well as transforms our whole being that we might be able to save others who are still down below in the darkness and chains.

7. The virtues are not meant to hold us down but free us. They are for us, we are not for them. We abide to virtues in moderation never seeking to go to an extreme lest we should pervert the behavior into lack or excess. This balance is what we move in

and have our life in. There is a need to hold to virtue if we are to maintain our individuality, and not succumb to basic instincts which we all share in common. It is because we share it in common that it is called collective, and by surrendering to the basic instincts that one loses their individuality. Granted we will fall and make mistakes, but to surrender merely to the basic instincts on principle means that on principle you have surrendered to your individuality and humanity over to collectivism and animalistic tendencies.

8. God endowed man with the ability to reason, in hopes that we may be able to move and function in the world regarding worldly matters. God gave us a spirit to be able

to also understand him. The right place to ask “how” is not with God but with the world, everything from Science to Politics to just practical day to day things. However with God, reason must be surrendered to faith, not faith in people’s socio- political goals but rather in God and his relation to YOU. The Early Church Fathers

never deemphasized reason, but simply said that in the understanding of God and YOU reason must be relinquished to faith, so unless we should be like Nicodemus asking “how” when it comes to matters of God (John 3:1-20), we should genuinely ask “what” and then look within to contemplate over it, waiting for God to reveal it.

9. God gave us a rational soul and a spirit. The point to the rational soul is to apprehend the world around it. The Spirit is from a rational perspective meant to be irrational, not because it is wrong but because The Spirit is supra-rational or above worldly understandings, so in our ability to understand we have left it in the irrational category.


The Revelation of Liberty


The Outer World

“I have no fear that the result of our experiment will be that men may be trusted to govern themselves without a master.” - Thomas Jefferson

The point to this section of the book is not merely to offer opinions and conjecture regarding politics, economics, and the philosophies that shape individuals in regards to those around them but rather the point here is to help the individual find the moral courage to see themselves as individuals as well as give the individual the necessary philosophy needed to be dedicated to the larger Revelation of Liberty. When it comes to politics and economics, we need to know what philosophy and ideas will serve to empower the individual as well as keep the individual in alignment with reality. This section has in it 5 chapters in it they are as follows:

1. The Case Against Compulsion – I wrote this article back in January 2009 after hearing the possibility that President Obama would try to institute either mandatory labor programs or a mandatory paramilitary civilian service that would serve under the president in the event the country went under martial law or anything of that severity. So far this has not happened, but the plans as far as I know are there to make it happen. I wrote this essay as essentially like as if I was in a courtroom defending myself from being swept up into this government service, it has speeches and justifications as well as evidence to support my beliefs.

2. The Greater Good: Does it Even Exist? – I wrote this essay essentially inspired by the previous essay, but in this essay I wanted to tackle the essential source of government justification for the idea of doing anything mandatory. That essential source being that the argument the government would give would be that, anything they do is for the greater good. The people must be able to argue what they want and against the ideas that motivate the other side if they are to have a strong case and defend their liberties.

3. Individualism: Out of Many, One! – I wrote this essay to show that individuality is the source of what we live for in anything we do, I argue that there are both religious and secular examples for this belief that I have. The point of this article is to show that individuals are supposed to live for themselves and not be forced into giving anything that they do not want to give. The individual is the ultimate minority and it is the individual who should be protected.

4. A Look At Contemporary Western Society – This essay I wrote in a time when I looked down upon the failings of our society and people around me. I feel that there is still an essential part of this essay that is true nonetheless and because of that I want people to see what I am talking about when I speak of their environment around them and how this environment we live in is essentially part of the uphill battle that we must endure should we have liberty manifest in the world yet again.

5. Lunchroom Analogy – I wrote this analogy when I was debating a socialist concerning what government is and who the people are in the context essentially of a lunchroom, using the lunchroom as a means to give the metaphor a larger understanding. I explain which government is best and which is not best for rule, by this time you are probably able to see where this argument may lead off too.

6. Government Is A Business – The Lunchroom Analogy is a primer for the ugly truths that this essay will reveal to you. In this essay I explain what government really is and why government is evil, however I debate how this evil is not necessary and how we can create a society without it. Keep in mind there is many resources offered at the end of this book that goes further into how we can create a society without a state and experience true freedom.

Section One:

The Case Against Compulsion

I. Introduction

The state has told me to join in a service to protect this country; however, I have declined such an order on the basis of three premises. The first is that the state has revoked my right to life and by doing so has infringed upon my civil liberties. The second is that I will not infringe upon the people’s rights of self-preservation and survival for all I can see any involuntary, compulsory or universal service is our government using its power, which has been derived from the people, against the people of this country. Finally, the third premise is that I will not defend a failed status quo and refuse the very change that this country truly needs being that this state no longer upholds the very virtues that the people deserve. The overall conclusion based on these three premises will be addressed at the end of this case. But let it be made known that the statements made in this written argument are controversial, I invoke my constitutional first amendment right to protect me from any form of punishment based on the arguments made herein because popular speech needs no protection it is the unpopular speech that needs protecting.

II. Premise #1

The Government, The American Government at least, has only one purpose to protect the rights of the American Citizen. Those rights are stated clear in our declaration of independence. Those rights are "the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." If the government is expected to protect the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness it cannot negate these rights. However, the reality of the situation is that the state is negating my right to life by forcing me to join a compulsory service that I believe will not only endanger my life but the lives of others. Since government is forcing me to take part in a universal service that I believe is a threat to liberty as well as my life than it suggests in a very heavy manner that the state thinks it can determine my life. However, it is apparent that my freedom lies in it being my birth right and that the state has no right to determine what will happen to my life because, my right to life is unalienable. Therefore, I hereby express my right to life by refusing to join in this universal, compulsory, or involuntary service.

>>Potential Questions That Maybe Asked in Counter Argument:

1. Why Do You Believe that a universal, compulsory, or involuntary government service will endanger the rights and lives of innocent Americans?

History has shown us that the bigger Government gets the more liberties are lost and the more able government is to direct people’s lives. Often this involvement has shown itself to have a negative effect on the society in question and the end result is oppression and corruption which often is the undoing of said society. Another reason is the state our economy is in. Our economy is so fragile that when the economy falls apart people will commit extreme acts to aid in their survival and the survival of their families as well. Government has been known to be an entity that uses only brute force and therefore will only be able to counter the extremism of individual survival with extreme acts of their own. This however, is not conducive to the safety of the state or the people. An obvious source of danger is the tax burden, to have conflict cost money and inevitably, just like everything else in this country, this burden will be placed on the people who are already burdened enough. It is by proof of human behavior that when an individual has given all they can give they will do whatever it is they can to survive and I nor anyone else can blame them for such behavior because they had made the sacrifice of giving all they can give. The ones that can be blamed however are those who demand conformity to the state so that all will rely upon the state for one’s own survival. But this is un-American because America is supposed to be a free-market democratic republic not an oppressive welfare state with planned economic tendencies. “Which one are we?” This is something that the state is going to need to answer because the people know what we this nation is

supposed to be about.

2. Why Do You Believe that a universal, compulsory, or involuntary service is a threat to liberty itself?

In our American Tradition our police and military entities were never meant to be merged. For a time now this has been the case but this government program threatens to close the gap or at the very least greatly blur the line between our police and military forces. These actions suggest that the American government is moving far beyond the prescribed guidelines of our constitution, and that we are no longer being Americans. So, I ask the question are we The United States of America or are we the United Socialist States of America? Again, recent history has shown us that a Paramilitary force is used in only dictatorial governments and that the truly free and open societies have no need for a paramilitary force. I also wish to remind point back to the larger premise of this argument where I stated that the actions of this state strongly imply that the state thinks it can determine the lives of individuals , when in America it is the individual that determines one’s own life. So, are people truly free or is the government providing the illusion that the people are free? In an attempt to lull the populace back to ignorant sleep, by telling the populace "We will take care of it, just go back to sleep." Let I remind the government that in this country it is the people who are free and that the government gets its power from the consent of the governed and that in this country there meant to be few laws to allow the people to take care of any problems we face.

>>Proof and Evidence:

1. That Police and Military Are NOT To be merged:

Posse Comitatus Act The Act prohibits most members of the federal uniformed services (the Army, Air Force, and State National Guard forces when such are called into federal service) from exercising nominally state law enforcement, police, or peace officer powers that maintain "law and order" on non- federal property (states and their counties and municipal divisions) in the former Confederate states. The statute generally prohibits federal military personnel and units of the National Guard under federal authority from acting in a law enforcement capacity within the United States, except where expressly authorized by the Constitution or Congress. The Coast Guard is exempt from the Act.

1994 U.S. Defense Department Directive (DODD 3025) Allows military commanders to take emergency actions in domestic situations to save lives, prevent suffering, or mitigate great property damage.

2. That big governments throughout history have only oppressed:

Roman Empire The victorious legions, which, in distant wars, acquired the vices of strangers and mercenaries, first oppressed the freedom of the republic, and afterwards violated the majesty of the purple. The emperors, anxious for their personal safety and the public peace, were reduced to the base expedient of corrupting the discipline which rendered them alike formidable to their sovereign and to the enemy; the vigor of the military government was relaxed and finally dissolved by the partial institutions of Constantine; and the Roman world was overwhelmed by a deluge of barbarians.

The decay of Rome has been frequently ascribed to the translation of the seat of empire but this history has already shown that the powers of Government were divided rather than removed. The throne of Constantinople was erected in the East; while the West was still possessed by a series of emperors who held their residence in Italy, and claimed their equal inheritance of the legions and provinces. This dangerous novelty impaired the strength and fomented the vices of a double reign: the instruments of an oppressive and arbitrary system were multiplied; and a vain emulation of luxury, not of merit, was introduced and supported between the degenerate successors of Theodosius. Extreme distress, which unites the virtue of a free people, embitters the factions of a declining monarchy.

The British Empire An obvious entity that need be mention because we had fought against the empire based on resentment of the British Parliament's attempts to govern and tax American colonists without their consent, summarized at the time by the slogan "No taxation without representation" and other various forms of economic and political control that sought to undo the very values the colonist believed

in. We had believed in the principles of republicanism and libertarianism. These very ideas sought to separate us from The British Empire once and for all. Have we forgotten that it was oppression that made us revolt from our oppressors.

High Government Interventionism Under Socialism and Communism we enter the higher realms of Government Intervention, say a nominal 75%, where an increase in the power of government and the State is actively pursued. "Place everything in the hands of the State", the Socialists urged, "and the State will take good care of us all".

Set against the Victorian backdrop of widespread poverty, ignorance, ill-health and malnutrition, coupled with a concurrently growing sense of conscience and the need for reform, socialism appeared to offer the answer. Only a few there were who could foresee the implications of high and ever-increasing State control. One such visionary was British author Herbert Spencer, who wrote, back in 1884: "There is an increasing tendency for administrative compulsion and restraints. The increasing power of the State is accompanied by a decreasing power of the rest of society to resist its further growth and control." He had also said that the "influences of various kinds conspire to increase State action, and decrease individual action. The numerous socialistic changes already made by Act of parliament, joined with the numerous others about to be made, will soon be all merged in State-socialism, swallowed in the vast wave which they have little by little raised."

3. That paramilitary forces are indeed dictatorial entities:

Hitler Youth/SS The HJ (German for Hitler Youth) were viewed as future "Aryan supermen" and were indoctrinated in anti-Semitism. One aim was to instill the motivation that would enable HJ members, as soldiers, to fight faithfully for the Third Reich. The HJ put more emphasis on physical and military training than on academic study. The NSRBL, the umbrella organization promoting and coordinating sport activities in Germany during the Nazi period, had the responsibility of overseeing the physical fitness development programs provided to the German youth. After the Boy Scout movement was banned through German-controlled countries, the HJ appropriated many of its activities, though changed in content and intention. For example, many HJ activities closely resembled military training, with weapons training, assault course circuits and basic strategy. Some cruelty by the older boys toward the younger ones was tolerated and even encouraged, since it was believed this would weed out the unfit and harden the rest. The HJ wore uniforms very like those of the SA, with similar ranks and insignia.

The SS grew from a small paramilitary unit to a powerful force that served as the Führer's "Praetorian Guard," the Nazi Party's "Shield Squadron" and a force that, fielding almost a million men, (both on the front lines and as political police) managed to exert as much political influence as the regular German armed forces. Built upon the Nazi racial ideology, the SS, under Heinrich Himmler's command, was responsible for many of the crimes against humanity perpetrated by the Nazis during the Second World War, and most of the worst of those crimes.

Blackshirts were Fascist paramilitary groups in Italy during the period immediately following World War I and until the end of World War II. Blackshirts were also known as the National Security Volunteer Militia (Milizia Volontaria per la Sicurezza Nazionale, or MVSN). Inspired by Giuseppe Garibaldi's Redshirts, the Fascist Blackshirts were organized by Benito Mussolini as the military tool of his political movement. The founders of the paramilitary groups were nationalist intellectuals, former army officers or members of the special corp. Arditi, young landowners opposing peasants' and country laborers’ unions. Their methods became harsher as Mussolini's power grew, and they used violence, torture, gang rape, intimidation, and murder against Mussolini's opponents. One of their distinctive techniques was force-feeding castor oil.

The Red Army Like other armies, the Red Army used administrative departments (called Directorates) to develop, train and equip the many combat Arms of Service troops and their Service Corps support echelons. In regards to the Headquarters and Staff division they had Stavka & HQ directorates, Soviet military academies, army map and military survey service, Rear Services ('Tyl', Construction and administrative troops and finally they had Civil defense troops. Are we communist? Not only has Obama been a major force for change the change that he now represents through his actions suggest that he and

his administration want big government and the loss of liberties for all in America.

III. Premise #2

Government is designed for the sole purpose of protecting the rights of people. These rights are unalienable and are defined clearly both in our Declaration of Independence as well as our Bill of Rights. As The Economic situation deteriorates innocent people will turn desperate to feed and supply themselves as well as their families in order to survive. Government being known as the user of brute force will follow only such extremism in turn. Government is to blame for our economic mess, and now people are being forced to live hand to mouth just to survive more so than ever before. Yet, the same creators of this economic mess now purpose a solution to have a defense force for the homeland which only puts more pressure on an already stressed people. I will not carry out a solution purposed by the same troublemakers because, I firmly believe that:

1. I will be infringing upon the rights of others right to life.

2. The only person more concerned with self-preservation is themselves, and that if government

really wishes to "help the people" as it claims it does than gun laws should be greatly loosened so as to allow the innocent to defend themselves from the guilty. If the government does not loosen gun laws so the innocent may protect themselves from the guilty, than people will be under the impression that the real guilty party is the state itself.

Of course, the right to own a gun and the effects therein should not be infringed upon by government. To add to this I believe very strongly that this is going to become a tax on an already stressed people, the costs of this involuntary, compulsory, or universal service by far outweigh the benefits. As far as I can see the service the government is forcing me to take part in is simply nothing more than government swindling any hope for prosperity under the guise of taking care of the people.

Foreseeable Questions/Counter-Arguments:

1. How Do You Know If The Economic Situation Will Deteriorate? It is not a matter of "if" but a

matter of "when." Americans for the most part rely heavily upon two entities to acquire what they need.

Those entities are corporations and our welfare state. Our government has shown itself to be an unnecessary big spender being that all government has done is thrown money at our problems we are currently facing. Our big corporations however, rely upon lines of credit which will not last for long because our excessive spending is only devaluing our currency and in effect making our economic condition a whole lot worst. Therefore, the economic situation will deteriorate and this government will continue doing what it does best, waste money. This is a vicious cycle people’s lives, retirements and savings are being destroyed. People will become desperate and do desperate things in order to survive and there will be nobody else to put the blame on but the state itself.


1- Government Throwing Money A Our Problems

The War On Terror The nonpartisan Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments puts the cost of just the two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan at some $904 billion and counting since our war against in evasive few began. Yet the same state that claims to be defending this free country has resorted to only taking away these liberties as well under the guise of fighting an enemy that will never be found because they hide in places where our government is most despised. All this government will do is going to prove two things. The first is that, it uses brute force and deception to get what it wants. The second is that all our government will do to solve the problem is throw money at our problems, like a drug addict who thinks if they would just had one more fix they would be off the drug for good.

The War On Drugs According to the cost of The FY 2008 Drug Budget totals $12.961 billion. The war on drugs however is not only largely a waste of money it imprisons more people

for petty crimes than ever before. This is a tragic irony that the so-called land of the free has the largest prison population. The war on drugs is failed because it’s easy for a criminal to make a profit off of any of the illegal drugs that are on the streets, especially marijuana being that it is consider America's Number One cash crop. Directly below that is corn which our government subsidizes as well.

Security and Surveillance The security-industrial-congressional complex (SICC) makes much money off of this war on terrorism as well as its nearest relative The Military-Industrial-Congressional Complex (MICC). According to Paul Harris's September 10, 2006, report in the Guardian "Seven years ago there were nine companies with federal homeland security contracts." By 2003 it was 3,512. Now [In 2006] there are 33,890. The money is huge. Since 2000 [to 2006], $130 billion of contracts have been dished out." Harris adds: "With so much money on offer and such riches being made, there is a powerful economic incentive to exploit the threat to America. The homeland security industry has an army of lobbyists working for its interests in Washington. It grows bigger each year and they want to keep the money flowing. America is in the grip of a business based on fear. The question remains how much money is the state being given to further this vicious cycle of fear?

The Economic Situation According to the real cost of the bailouts will easily exceed $1.3 trillion. In fact, the real cost is likely to range between $1.3 trillion to $1.6 trillion, and is not unlikely to reach $2.5 trillion. According to CNS News "The total value of the bailouts undertaken by the federal government in 2008 now exceeds the combined cost of every major war the United States has ever engaged in, according to a comparison of war costs calculated by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) and the value of the bailouts as calculated by Bloomberg News or Bianco Research. According to CRS, all major U.S. wars (including such events as the American Revolution, the War of 1812, the Civil War, the Spanish American War, World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan, but not the invasion of Panama or the Kosovo War), cost a total of $7.2 trillion in inflation-adjusted 2008 dollars. According to Bloomberg, the federal government has made commitments worth a total of $8.5 trillion in the bailouts of 2008. That includes actual expenditures as well as loan and asset guarantees. Bianco Research puts the total value of the bailouts at $8.7 trillion."

This government is spending more money on this economic bailout than on all the major wars we have ever fought and on top of that we have spent even more money on the following previous examples. The question left now is how much money is remaining. Who else but the American taxpayer to put the burden on them, now the state wants more from the people? This only further makes me say I will not join because the state has been irresponsible to the people with all of this unnecessary spending. Now the Obama Administration seeks to have a civilian defense force that is "just as strong and just as well funded" as our own military? This is a waste of money and energy and it only allows for further oppression another reason why I refuse.

IV. Premise #3

There are two entities that have the most to lose should any strife occur in this country. The two entities I speak of are Big Corporations as well as Our Welfare State. Should any strife occur the first targets will be banks and corporations that provide necessities. These are obvious targets after all people will do whatever they can for their survival and rightfully should. People will target banks to get any personal effects as well as any savings they may have in the event that banks are forced to close, and rightfully they should protect that which is theirs. If the state should interfere in people’s right to life and property than they are not upholding the interests of the people who elected them into office but rather are only looking out for the interests of the few, the elite also known as the special interests. This bring me to my other point that the welfare state is the root cause of our economic condition and that this involuntary, compulsory, or universal service will only protect the interests of those responsible for our economic situation. Therefore, I will say it again, that I will not defend a failed status quo. My final case is that I will not defend an oligarchy of special interests and abandon the Federal Constitutional Republic that our country was founded under, for I believe that our government has abandoned its own American Libertarian Ideals.

Questions That Maybe Ased as Counter-Arguments

1. How Do You See Government Abandoning Its Own Libertarian Ideals? The government has completely or almost completely given up on the documents that made America a free society by the various laws legislation that has been passed during the Bush Administration, there has been no effort shown even at this time to repeal any of these laws despite the promise of “change” this current administration has made. The economic actions taken by this government although may help in the short term has damaged us greatly in the long term. People in this current administration represent a Globalist Agenda NOT an American Agenda, we did not elect our leader for the world we elected our leader based upon the desire to undo what The Bush Administration had done against liberty as well as our prosperity.

2. How has the Status Quo failed you and others? Just look at the world around us, that should be proof enough that the status quo has failed and that if it will not change peacefully than it is the right of every citizen to “alter or abolish it [the status quo that government carries out] and institute a new government as well as a new status quo.” One that will protect the rights of every individual living in this country not just a few.


1. Unconstitutional Laws

#1 USA Patriot Act - A 342 page document presented to Congress one day before voting on it that allows the government access to your bank and email accounts, as well as your medical and phone records with no court order. They can also search your home anytime without a warrant.

#2 USA Patriot Act II - This one allows secret government arrests, the legal authority to seize your American citizenship, and the extraction of your DNA if you are deemed a potential terrorist.

#3 Military Commissions Act of 2006 - Ends habeas corpus, the right to an attorney, and the right to court review of one's detention and arrest. Without this most basic right, all other rights are gone too since anyone can be detained indefinitely. Now anyone may be arrested and incarcerated and nobody would know.

#4 NSPD 51 - A directive signed by George W. Bush on May 9, 2007, that allows the President to declare martial law, effectively transforming the U.S. into a dictatorship with no checks and balances from the Legislative or Judicial Branches. Parts of this directive are considered classified and members of Congress have been denied the right to review it.

#5 Protect America Act of 2007 - Allows unprecedented domestic wiretapping and surveillance activities with a reduction in FISA court oversight. Probable cause is not needed.

#6 John Warner Defense Authorization Act - Signed by George W. Bush on October 17, 2007, this act allows the President to declare a public emergency and station troops anywhere in America without the consent of the governor or local authorities to "suppress public disorder.

#7 Homegrown Terrorism and Radicalization Act - Passed overwhelmingly by Congress on October 23, 2007, is now awaiting a Senate vote. This act will beget a new crackdown on dissent and the Constitutional rights of American citizens. The definitions of "terrorism" and "extremism" are so vague that they could be used to generalize against any group that is working against the policies of the Administration. In this bill, "violent radicalization" criminalizes thought and ideology while "homegrown terrorism" is defined as "the planed use of force to coerce the government." The term, "force" could encompass political activities such as protests, marches, or any other form of non-violent resistance.

#8 Executive Orders:

10995: Right to seize all communications media in the United States. 10997: Right to seize all electric power, fuels and minerals, both public and private. 10999: Right to seize all means of transportation, including personal vehicles of any kind and total control of highways, seaports and waterways. 11000: Right to seize any and all American people and divide up families in order to create work forces to be transferred to any place the government sees fit. 11001: Right to seize all health, education and welfare facilities, both public and private. 11002: Right to force registration of all men, women and children in the United States. 11003: Right to seize all air space, airports and aircraft. 11004: Right to seize all housing and finance authorities in order to establish "Relocation Designated Areas" and to force abandonment of areas classified as "unsafe". 11005: Right to seize all railroads, inland waterways, and storage facilities, both public and private.

2. Obama Administration With Globalist Members

Just like President George W. Bush's cabinet, Barack Obama's cabinet is going to be brimming with politicians affiliated with the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg group. For those of you who are not familiar with these globalist organizations, we would suggest that you read The True Story of the Bilderberg Group by Daniel Estulin. When you realize how much control these groups truly have over American politics, you just might be shocked enough to wake up and start demanding change.

Obama's national security appointees (like all his earlier ones) aren't "change to believe in" or what people expected for their votes. They're recycled establishment figures. Their agenda is business as usual, and they'll continue the same failed Bush administration policies at home and abroad. Washington's criminal class is bipartisan. Obama was chosen to lead it and is assembling a rogue team that's little different from the one it's replacing.

Hillary Clinton (Bilderberg Group) for Secretary of State She's co-heading the team (with Robert Gates) as Secretary of State Designee, so it's clear no change is planned given her hard line neoconservative ideology. As one analyst has put it "it's why many on the left 'are grinding their teeth' about her and other former Clinton administration appointees."

Back in May, CounterPunch co-editor Jeff St. Clair referred to her "Gothic politics" that offer no hope for needed change. He called her "constitutionally wedded to a stern neoliberalism, a disposition (she's unable to) camouflage."

Darker still is her hawkishness, far enough to the right to be indistinguishable from Joe Lieberman or John McCain. It's why one analyst calls her a "war goddess" and with good reason. She supported the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan and still does. She voted for the Patriot, Homeland Security, and other repressive acts.

She's extremely bellicose, endorses attacking Iran, supported Israel's destructive 2006 Lebanon war, praised Israel's apartheid wall, demeans the Palestinian people, equates them with terrorists, calls any Israeli criticism anti-Semitism, is close to AIPAC, and at its June convention said "The United States stands with Israel now and forever….We have shared interests….shared ideals….common values. I have a bedrock commitment to Israel's security. (Against Islamic extremists) our two nations are fighting a shared threat….I strongly support Israel's right to self-defense (and) believe America should aid in that defense….I am committed to making sure that Israel maintains a military edge to meet increasing threats."

"I am deeply concerned about the growing threat in Gaza (and) Hamas' campaign of terror….Its charter calls for the destruction of Israel….Iran (also) threatens to destroy Israel….I support calling the Iranian Revolutionary Guard what it is: a terrorist organization. It is imperative that we get both tough and smart about dealing with Iran before it is too late." Yet, I am expected to defend such hypocrisy?

Robert Gates (CFR) for Secretary of Defense Robert Gates was an integral part of the gun-running, drug-running, and death squad murders lumped under the heading of the Iran-Contra scandal. Gates started in Iran-contra as a stooge of William Casey, and continued under Bush the elder.

When Gates was nominated by Reagan to be head of the CIA in 1987, his role in Iran- contra crimes was already so filthy and so blatant that he was forced to drop out of contention under questioning. In doing this, Gates was seeking to defend his new master, George H.W.

Bush, who at that time was preparing a presidential bid for 1988. The elder Bush was the czar of all Reagan-Bush covert operations, including Iran-contra. Gates fell on his sword to avoid revelations which would have doomed the candidacy of Bush the elder. Payback for Gates came

in June 1991, when he was nominated once again to be head of the CIA, this time by Bush the

elder. Sam Nunn and some others posed embarrassing questions, but this time the cover-up of Gates' Iran-contra role was supervised by Sen. David Boren of the Bush Skull & Bones clique. The Democrats, intimated by the elder Bush's apparent victory in the first Gulf war, rolled over. If Gates was too dirty to even get to a vote in committee in 1987, how can he be acceptable today?

If Democratic Senators like Levin and Biden opposed Gates in 1991, how can they find him acceptable for a much more important post at a time of far greater crisis?

The Bush regime has become infamous for fixing the facts and the intelligence to suit the pre-determined policy of aggression and adventurism. As Pentagon chief, Gates would control the majority of the US intelligence budget. His track record promises nothing but more faked intelligence. In September 1991, Time Magazine cited widespread reports that Gates "cooked the books" while he was at the CIA to support the political demands of the Reagan and Bush regimes. A New York Times editorial of November 4, 1991 concluded that "charges that Mr. Gates slanted intelligence assessments, leaving Congress in the dark and more amenable to

administration policy, stand as not refuted." George Shultz reports in his memoirs that he "felt that Gates was giving me an idealized picture of what was an altogether different reality," and complained to Gates on January 5, 1987, "I don't have any confidence in the intelligence community I feel you try to manipulate me. So you have a very dissatisfied customer. If this were

a business, I'd find myself another supplier." The Senate would be well advised to find itself

another supplier today. Will Gates resist the new attacks on Iran, Syria, North Korea, demanded

by Cheney and the neoconservatives? His assurances in this regard are worthless. Is this change? I am expected to defend this!

Janet Napolitano (CFR) for Department of Homeland Security ( reported that far from being a border hawk, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano frequently blocked efforts to curb illegal immigration, say enforcement advocates concerned about her expected nomination to be the Homeland Security secretary under President Barack Obama. In July 2007, Napolitano signed what she called the toughest employer sanctions law in the country. During her first term, she established a state task force to curb ID fraud. She was also the first governor to call for using the National Guard on the border, though she subsequently vetoed legislation to grant funding for more Arizona National Guard troops on the border. But Napolitano opposes a border fence, supports expanding a controversial technology visa program and favors a "stringent pathway to citizenship." She has also vetoed a bill requiring voter ID, vetoed a bill requiring local law enforcement to enforce immigration law, and later vetoed another proposal to allow local sheriffs to enforce immigration law.

She also vetoed a bill prohibiting Mexican consul ID cards that critics say are prone to fraud, vetoed an English-only bill, and vetoed a bill to criminalize illegal immigration. Napolitano's

tough rhetoric on enforcing immigration laws – often chastising the Bush administration for not doing enough – was rarely matched by her record, said Arizona state Rep. Russell Pearce, a Republican, who as chairman of the state House appropriations committee, wrote numerous immigration bills that were vetoed by the governor. "She issued in 2005 a declaration of emergency, yet she has done nothing to really secure the border," said Pearce, who was recently elected to the state Senate.

"The governor has done everything she can to be an open borders governor. If not for a supermajority in the House and the Senate and 80 percent of the public for it, she would not have signed the employer sanctions bills," Pearce told "She was backed into a corner. Yet people continue to give her credit." Securing the border is a chief responsibility for the Homeland Security Department, which includes agencies such as the U.S. Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Napolitano's state of Arizona has a 376-mile border with Mexico. The governor has spoken several times about seeing first-hand the problems with drug smuggling, human trafficking and other crimes that result from poor border security.

Susan Rice (CFR, Trilateral Commission Executive Committee) for Ambassador to the United Nations

A former assistant secretary of state for African Affairs under Clinton and a Rhodes

Scholar is a minion of the Brooking Institution. Brookings is a neoliberal "think tank" par excellence. It is funded by the Ford Foundation, the John D. & Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, American Express, the Bank of America, Lockheed Martin, Wal-Mart, Goldman Sachs, and the United Nations. Rice, who the neoconservatives consider a "leftist," is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Aspen Strategy Group, the latter where she rubs elbows with the likes of Brent Scowcroft, the neoconservative Eliot A. Cohen (a "leading champion" of the war in Iraq), Madeleine Albright (a proponent of mass murdering Iraqi children), CFR president Richard N. Haass, and other crossover neoconservatives and neoliberals.

James Jones (former CFR, Trilateral Commission) for National Security Team

Former Marine general and former NATO supreme commander James Jones will be Obama's National Security Advisor. Jones sits on the board of directors of the Boeing Company, Chevron, and NATO's Atlantic Council of the United States. Jones is cozy with the Council on Foreign Relations. He is reportedly a good friend of John McCain and is respected by Republicans.

In essence, Jones will serve as Big Oil's security chief. "Jones is currently a director of

Chevron Oil. He also heads of the Chamber of Commerce's Institute for 21st Century Energy — a group lobbying on energy issues in DC and described by the Grist as 'part of the Republican machine, dominated by — and lobbying fiercely for the interests of — Big Oil, Big Auto, Big

Pharmacy, and other such Bigs,'" writes Mitchell Anderson.

"Jones would be reflective of two huge Obama priorities," notes Spencer Ackerman. "First, Afghanistan. As NATO Commander, Jones ceaselessly lobbied the European allies for greater assistance in the Afghanistan war. Second, energy security, Jones is widely known to be an advocate of alternative energy sources, and, as Politico notes, chairs an energy task force for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. And of course there's the good optics of such a well-respected general being Obama's closest White House aide on foreign policy."

Incidentally, even though former Sec. Def. Rumsfeld exiled Jones to his mostly ceremonial NATO post, the general is onboard with the coming attack against Pakistan and possibly Iran. During a September, 2006 Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Jones testified that it was "generally accepted" that Taliban leaders operated out Quetta, Pakistan.

Finally, Jones "has pointed to Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo as a 'model' for US bases

elsewhere," writes Chad Nagle. "Anyone who has seen the gigantic and ominous Bondsteel, set amid the wasteland of bombed out and destitute Kosovo has an idea of what the US-imposed New World Order will look like - destroyed dumps where a fortress houses thousands of American military personnel behind its walls and the fearful population outside can rot in hell.

Eric Holder (Big Business) Former Clintonite and Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder will be Obama's attorney general. Holder is probably best and infamously remembered for his role in the controversial pardon of billionaire fugitive Marc Rich, the FBI Most Wanted criminal who colluded with Iran at a time when that country was holding U.S. hostages. In private practice as an attorney, Holder represents Merck and helped negotiate an agreement with the Justice Department for Chiquita Brands International in a case that involved Chiquita's payment of "protection money" to the United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia, a group on the U.S. government's list of terrorist organizations.

Most disturbing, however, is the role Holder played in the D.C. v. Heller ruling on handguns. Holder joined the Reno-led amicus brief, which urged the Supreme Court to uphold Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban and said the Department of Justice from Franklin Roosevelt through Bill Clinton had always believed that the Second Amendment does not protect the rights of individuals to own guns for personal use. In short, Holder is a gun grabber who is opposed to the Second Amendment. As attorney general, we can bet he will work tirelessly to outlaw all firearms in the United States. Finally, Holder has advocated government censorship of the internet. "It is [going] be a difficult thing, but it seems to me that if we can come up with reasonable restrictions, reasonable regulations in how people interact on the Internet, that is something that the Supreme Court and the courts ought to favorably look at," Holder told NPR after the Columbine massacre in 1999.

V. Conclusion

In conclusion, due to the three premises addressed the only conclusion I am forced to reach is that the state no longer belongs to the people as well as to the constitution of this country. I will not defend the interests of a few at the cost of many who deserve what was, is, and will continue to be theirs. That which was, is, and will continue to be is their individual liberty and their right to determine a life of their own and to be able to protect their own lives and nourish their own lives. I will not defend the welfare state or the warfare state because both go hand in hand and also because it diminishes the individual liberties as well as the various possibilities life truly has to offer. In grade school we were told that America has many enemies, those who do not like it when people are free, are among one of these. Our country has spilled much blood fighting against tyranny and oppression in the world wars and spent half a century trying to dismantle the communists during the cold war. Wouldn’t these lives be lost in vain if we become the very things we spent trying to fight against? This is why I will not join in any involuntary, compulsory, or universal service that would have me take up arms against the honest, hard working, freedom loving American.

VI. Solutions

In America problems occur whether they are local, state or nationwide. In America, the government’s role is only one thing to protect the rights of individuals. So, solutions are meant to be addressed by the people while the government protects our individual liberties. We face major issues in this country. Therefore, all liberty minded and peace loving Americans will agree when I say that Government should do two-things simultaneously:

1. Return Freedoms Back To the People 2. Return back to a Non-Interventionist Foreign Policy as well as a limited government

domestic policy.

The solution of returning freedom back to the people will be applied by way of contracting the size of government back to constitutional proportions and in affect dramatically lowering taxes. This solution will also be applied by way of revoking all unconstitutional laws and practices, a clear example of such practices would be the ending of all involuntary, compulsory and universal services. Some might ask what the state should get rid of in federal government. I say we should get rid of The Department of Education because our quality of our education has declined greatly. We should get rid of The Department of Homeland Security because our safety lies in people being able to protect themselves. We should get rid of FEMA and allow the states and local authorities to determine what they must do in their own location during any emergency. We should get rid of The Federal Reserve because it is the instrument through which our economy is being destroyed. We should dramatically reduce the cost of Department of Defense as well, because the welfare states appetite for war also makes it the warfare state as well. We must break down or complete remove these entities because they do away with liberty under the guise of taking care of the people. The solution of returning back to a foreign policy of non-interventionism and a limited government domestic policy will be applied by way of no longer accepting corporate lobbyists who attempt to influence our domestic policy and no longer accepting foreign lobbyists who attempt to influence our foreign policy as well as any other organization that tries to influence our country to go outside the boundaries of our constitution. The policy of non-interventionism will be applied also by way of removing all foreign troops abroad and actually defend America from any attackers not defend other countries. Doing this will dramatically reduce government expenses. These solutions must be carried out immediately! If they are not, then I fear that there will be a revolution in this country to make these changes possible. This is not a threat, this is written in our own divinely inspired Declaration of Independence. It is my strongest conviction that this compulsory service will only attempt to deny the very change that truly needs to take place because it is our American Duty for it to do so.

VII. The Speech / Closing Defense Since the beginning of time men have sought to enslave other men. Since the beginning of time men have lied, cheated, and killed to have power. These men who have the insatiable lust for power are the ring leaders of collectivism. Collectivism comes in the form of governments and ideas that seek to denounce the individual and subdue the individual for the sake of the community. Today we know these people merely as the personification of their oppressive ideologies. Socialist, Communists, Fascists, Oligarchs, Aristocrats, Bureaucrats and Monarchs are the representatives of their ideals. These people seek to put the collective above the individual by making the individual sacrifice everything one has for the so-called “greater good.” Should we surrender our individuality to this collective, we surrender everything about our own individuality, identity and our lives to some illusive greater good. We as individual’s are asked everyday to sacrifice our freedoms, our work and our dignity under the guise of someone to take care of us. I am an individual! I am selfish in that I refuse to give up my dignity, I refuse to surrender my freedom and I refuse the governments demand to take away my work, my property, and my life. I am an individual because, I am of the strongest conviction that man is meant to be free! I for one still believe in the motto of our country, which states: “E Pluribus Unum” which is Latin for “Out of Many, One!” Out of the group, the collective is one person because without the individual nothing is possible. Without the individual mind, without the individual heart and soul, without the individual human spirit that refuse to submit nothing is possible. I refuse to submit my life to the collective. I refuse to dedicate myself to the state which will only grow in power as well as corruption. I am an individual I demand my right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness to be represented in this nation. I know the truth so that the collective cannot lie to me and deceive back into the collective mentality. I refuse to submit to fear of punishment and to fear of the unknown. The beauty to life is that things are uncertain, that the oppressive state does not have to last forever. That my freedom can last for as long as I wish it to last, that this is determined by me and not the state nor the states entourage of special interests. We live freely and die freely in this country that is what the founders wanted and that is what every individual wants. To be able to be left to one’s own devices and one’s own life without infringing upon the rights of others is the greatest desire of all liberty minded people. The desire of happiness is that one can be happy as they see fit, not as society dictates to them

how to be happy. To me the greatest happiness that can be founded does not lie in losing weight, or in possessing a lot of items which is something that society, the collective tells me would make me happy. To me the greatest pursuit of that happiness is overcoming one’s own fears and weaknesses; this is my own source of inspiration, joy, happiness, and power. I will not submit to joyless and self-sacrificing servitude when I can have the ability to live life freely and happily, deep down I know that this is the wish of all people and that they know it to.

On 9/11 former president George W. Bush gave us his Televised Address to the Nation to tell us and to gather us in order to describe who the terrorist are. He said and I quote “America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world. And no one will keep that light from shining.” Out of all the lies that the Bush Administration had made this is the only true statement in and of itself that the former president had made. We are supposed to be a free nation, where no one forces anyone to do anything and that everything is done voluntarily but the mercy of the individual. The irony seems like a tragedy however, the state told us terrorist hate us because we are free yet the very state that made such a claim than sought to pass a series of unconstitutional laws that limited our freedoms greatly and empowered the government to unconstitutional proportions. This leads me to believe that the real terrorist is not or not at least some man in a far off cave but that our real terrorist threat lies in the tiny intellectual elite in Washington who think they can determine your life far better than you can determine it yourself. Why would I defend our own terrorist state and its corporate as well as international affiliates whom which have conspired to take away my liberties under the guise of fighting taking care of me?

The welfare state is designed to take care of you from cradle to grave. We live in a welfare state a

state that seeks “to take care of its people.” The welfare state educates, feeds, and informs its populace. This could be a utopian dream world if people did not have a corrupt side. Unfortunately, people do have

a deceitful and corrupt side in which the education can be filled with half-truths leading to conflict and missing pieces of information that should have been mentioned to help create a better worldview, the food they eat maybe of bad quality in order to maximize the very profits of those who produce such food, the information maybe as well half-true and deceptive so that you might see only the view of those who inform you. The welfare state is a breeding ground for tolerance, apathy and ignorance. I say this because if someone takes care of you than, you are more likely to tolerate or not care about the actions the state

takes, instead of taking care of yourself one relinquishes the hard work of self-knowledge and growth of individuality for some convenience and the relative ease of life. What is this self-knowledge I speak of? Self-Knowledge is the awareness of who you truly are not just accepting who are at the present moment.

It is pushing your own boundaries, being put into situations in which you are unsure of or even

uncomfortable in and overcoming to ennoble ones character and ones self-worth. When one knows themselves in such away than one is truly free and will understand all the more just how important liberty and life truly is. Therefore, the welfare state and in affect the warfare state seek to make you ignorant and afraid both of your own weakness and fears. They exploit your weaknesses and the most common fears, in particular the fear of sudden death and fear of the unknown. They have a vested interest to see that you do not have your highest potentials realized such is the characteristic of the collectivist mindset, that we all realize our potentials or we all stay ignorant and afraid of our potentials, but for all to realize their potentials would suddenly make you into a true individual therefore, the collective (or as religious texts have called “the world”) would only seek to hold you down.

So, I will not defend ignorance when people should have the right to truly know themselves, I will not defend tolerance and apathy because these are the last virtues of a dying society and the American Destiny is to live on so as long as there are people dedicated to it. Finally, I will not defend the ones who insult us because the welfare state is an insult to everyone in this country because it tells me that the elite, the few are smarter than the rest of us and that they know how to run our individual lives.

At the end of the day the so-called “almighty state” has forced me to defend it, to defend its own status quo and to defend its ideas. The state has asked me to defend death, slavery, and personal as well as economic depression because our state no longer defends my liberties being

that it is more concerned with trying to micromanage my life.

The state has forced me to defend joyless and self-sacrificing servitude. I am an individual; I am a human being I will not submit my self-respect and dignity for the convenience of someone else taking care of me. Such characteristics are founded in only totalitarian regimes where the people are willing to do what the state says and all they have to do is sign away their freedoms for it to be done. This is America, it cannot be done and it will not be allowed.

The state has forced me to defend us against terrorism and civil unrest but what must be made know is that the terms surrounding a terrorist would be anyone who dissents from government. So a terrorist hates us because we are free but the state calls terrorists dissenters. There is only one real terrorist threat and that threat is the state itself. I am not defending liberty, I am being forced to defend power and control over the masses. I will not defend that oppression.

The state has forced me to defend ignorance, tolerance and apathy to state programs, laws and activities. I will not defend ignorance of self when in this country there is supposed to be an abundant knowledge of self. I will not defend tolerance in which people think that government can do better than what we can do and that somehow we should let them do what they want to do. I will not defend apathy! For America was based on the idea in which apathy is supposed to be non-existent because it was supposed to be the common people who were supposed to be the government and the people would be involved in the political and economic soundness of this country but today the people are no longer are heard and possibly the majority have lost faith in their own ability to lead. THEREFORE, I will not defend the welfare nor the warfare state because of all the evil that has come from it.

If I Should Be Found Innocent: I am truly grateful for the call of innocence that my peers have given me. Today is only the beginning of the series of battles that must be won in the name of liberty. Today’s decision serves as a reminder to all Americans that my point is clear and it is just. That liberty is worth being put on trial for and even potentially facing punishment for. Let it be known that the average people, such as those who had founded me innocent of any crime, still adhere to the principles of liberty and justice for all and that those who fight for such virtues are not guilty of wrongdoing but are guilty of doing the right thing! What is the right thing but standing up for liberty, for individuality, for life, and for courage. This land is, was and will continue to be The Land of The Free and The Home of The Brave. There is much work still to be done, I must go now, I wish you all the best of what life, liberty and true happiness has to offer you.

If I Should Be Found Guilty: It is a sad day today that I should be founded guilty of standing up against tyranny and the destruction of our once free state. The illusions that a few can take care of the many are still strong within many and our movement still has much work to do. I may have been considered guilty by the state but I am innocent of any crime against my country. I love America more so than what some people may think. I am a defender of peace, an arbiter of life and liberty. If I am condemned to be punished then so be it. I will serve it out faithfully, and I will not rebuke my actions when I come out of my punishment. The world seeks to hold people down, it is my hope that individuals everywhere are willing to stand up to the world and say to the collective that we have a better appreciation and understanding of life and liberty than a collective will ever have. I am saddened that those who have judged me this way are confined in their hearts and minds to live a life of uniformity and ignorance. My anger however is not towards them but towards the state that compels them think this way. As for the people I will only have compassion for their current state of spiritual and material poverty. I recall the words of American writer and philosopher Henry David Thoreau “”Under a government which

imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison

which a free man can abide with honor.” So I leave you all now and hope to see more people imprisoned to further prove my point. This land is, was and will continue to be The Land of The Free and The Home of The Brave. There is much work still to be done, I must go but I will return, I wish for you all to realize the best of what life, liberty and true happiness has to offer you.

the only house in a slave State in

Section Two:

The Greater Good

The idea of the greater good is one that has been around for generations. We are a species that has within it a compassionate side and yet we are a species that can also use compassionate intentions for much evil as well. One need only to look into recent human history to understand that many evil things have been done in the name of “defending liberty” and one could go back even further in time to see how much evil had resulted from “ending suffering and evil.” This is all done in the name of the greater good. However there is a clear process that take place, and it usually starts with a genuine if not pure intention. So we follow through with this intention and as time goes on the people go through hard times in hopes of something being for a greater good for all humanity. Ultimately, this power given to the genuine if not good intentioned behavior is going to end up creating the circumstances we wished to avoid. The issue at hand here is not an issue of “how many” but rather “whom” in other words the definition of the Greater Good is a qualitative understanding not a quantitative one. The aim of this essay is twofold: First to show how the idea of greater good is qualitative and not quantitative. The second is to give form from the chaos that will come from understanding the first aim.

The first thing to show here is how the greater good is an issue of quality. Our story is simple enough to prove that the greater good is a qualitative property and not so much a measurable quantity. This is a 4 step storyline, and although short it offers an intense amount of truth to those who have the capacity to contemplate on the story presented. There are four aspects or groups in this society; they are as follows: The Dissenters, The Complacent, The Leadership and finally, those who enforce the leadership’s commands. Now the dissenters can be anyone however, let us just call this group the informed citizen who works against the interests of the leadership. The Complacent are those who tolerate the actions of or are ignorant or apathetic toward the leadership and the enforcers, these people however have the potential within them to become dissenters. The Leadership is the central pillar behind “doing what is best for the greater good.” The enforcers obviously enforce leadership commands. This is the way it is and for all intents and purposes the leadership nor do the enforcers become the dissenters.

To begin at Step 1 let us set a prelude to the actions that are about to come. Let us use something from recent history as an example of how powerful institutions use events to further their agendas. After 9/11 security and protection from an elusive terrorist foe was of highest priority. Our leaders and experts told us that security was the highest goal to achieve, even at the expense of civil liberty. Our executive branch of government told us this continuously and was given an unconstitutional level of powers granted by congress (our elected representatives) so as to protect American interests and civilians as well as to go to war with terrorists who pose a threat to us. We being fearful and complacent gave that authority to our president. So our story begins here as we see that the powerful institutions of our time use “expanded powers within certain branches of government for the improved security and protection of the Greater Good.”

Now we arrive to the present situation at Step 2. In Step 2 dissent is silenced. It need not be through mass arrest and execution. It can be through intimidation techniques or pressure on public figures and mediums regarding sensitive information concerning “the improvement in security and protection of the greater good.” Ultimately, dissent is stifled or hidden so well that a critical view cannot be heard or seen without much work. What makes this situation even harder is that usually after some large tragedy or incident there are only a couple of dissenters who protest the actions of those who “have the security of the greater good in mind.” They will of course be demonized if not out rightly be accused of treason.

In Step 3 we arrive to the hastening of the process of silencing dissent in the nation. However, the dissenting movement has grown in its numbers and now becomes a threat to the “security of the greater good.” So now either progressively or immediately the empowered leadership begins the process of imprisoning dissenters and punishing dissenters by rewarding the enforcers with more power to battle against the dissenting population. Over time should nothing be done by anyone else, the dissenters are silenced or become (like in step 1) a minority group again. This is the climax here, if half of the population or more is dissenting against the leadership than the quantitative idea of a greater good goes out the window. Even if a quarter or an eighth of the population is sacrificed for the sake of the “protection of the greater good” an issue of morality will come into place and a critical view will be cast upon the leadership, which allows the dissenting movement to grow further.

In Step 4 we finally arrive to the end result if the society fails to act appropriately. The end result is that only a few permanently compliant remain and the leadership becomes brutally oppressive. The few compliant will remain complaint because they have realized when it is too late that they should have dissented back in Step 2 and maybe even Step 3. However, they certainly will not now largely because they have grown completely terrorized by the power of the leadership and its enforcers as well. The government will have grown increasingly oppressive only because, of the actions of the dissenters who “threatened the security of the greater good” from this the power that was once the peoples has been transferred over to the leadership, this power will not be transferred back to the people unless they come out of their complacency. Thus we have a slippery slope of possibly good intentions gone badly.

The truth is that a quantitative greater good leads to a quantitative greater evil. However, the true greater good that we as the commoners should be striving for is a qualitative greater good in our lives and our nation. No more fake prosperity, we should be able to live within our means so that we might be able to advance as a species but also as individuals as well. The term “Greater Good” needs to be rephrased to “The Greatest Good” in other words a life of quality and not quantity. The greatest good comes to those who value the quality of their lives. Not by societies definitions but rather as your definitions.

The Concept of Greater Good is based in quality. Goodness cannot be measured by some unit. It can only be detected seen, heard and felt through thought and action alone. It can only be determined in a subjective and yet reasoned manner. The truth is quality can only be detected by those who know themselves, are pure of heart and humble in their own lives. To those who follow such advice will see

that they will reach their potentials and understand what true and lasting quality really is. So seek to create the greatest good in your own life, not necessarily by the quantity of physical possessions or be led astray (all the time) by worldly passions, but by achieving a goal to master your own self while you are young and to embrace all that comes your way.

A Lesson can be learned here concerning the greater good and that lesson is that one should always Question the Purity or Intentions of a “Greater Good/Compassionate Leadership”. If you recall from George Orwell’s novel 1984, there were a few ministries present within English Socialism (IngSoc). There was The Ministry of Love, The Ministry of Plentitude, and The Ministry of Peace. Each of these ministries however, was responsible for creating the exact opposite circumstances of its entitled intention. So it is with the idea of any government to try and make “it look good” in front of the people granting them power, that is what happens to all elected officials, they need to make themselves look good. However, it is the job of the citizenry to see through their rationalized compassion and simply see the government for what it is: a threat that may progressively or quickly encroach upon the rights of the Citizenry with or without even noticing it.

To begin to finish this, I simply can only warn you the reader that the Steps are Simple, they are Subtle and yet they are the road to a Dangerous Path that will only lead to the abuse of power. The elected will first say “may we do that?” Every time the state asks the governed body for more power (whether directly or indirectly), we must say no every time, regardless of how our government plays on the emotions of the citizen. Employ common sense at once regardless if the state is playing on compassion and empathy or if they are playing on fear and hate. This good intentioned nature sets up a slippery slope mindset in the state that “If I Do X than why not Y and than why not Z?” So in other words, that “May I?” will turn into “I Will!” The Argument over the concept of The Greater Good is Qualitative. Every time we hear the elected (or selected) official speak of something being in the best interest of The American People, which is of course just masking “the greatest good” concept it should be the duty of the citizen to ask government “whose greatest good?” Not “how many will benefit?” After further investigation into such matters inform the citizenry who will be affected by the speakers’ actions. The Evils of the welfare state are clear example with the “good” of The “Greater Good” the welfare state needs to end as it spreads more evil and vice than it promises virtue and good.

Section Three:

Individualism: Out of Many, One!

1. Introduction

Our western world, our western society speaks of the importance of the individual. America for one is the prime representative of individual liberties and equality for all in the sense of individual rights. But the question here is, what does it mean to be an individual? Do we go with what society today thinks is an individual or do we choose to make our own definition? From that we need to come to the realization of what true individualism is and what collectivism is. There are our personal experiences, I will be sharing mine and there are ways of thinking or belief systems and mindsets that also seek to provide instances of true individuality. Once we become aware of what a true individual is we need to ask ourselves how do we get to being an individual from the collective to the state that I call “E Pluribus Unum” which I choose to use this phrase as an emphasis on the power of a true or realized individual. The individual is important and deserves so much more than what our current society is allowing.

2. What Society Thinks

So our journey begins with us asking what is an individual by seeking the input of others, since we were young we based who we are and what we believe largely upon our environment, whether it be your friends and family or what the television and other various media have to say. I must say that the first observation I can make about individuality is that it starts out highly subjective. Usually in the beginning our various social interactions help define and give boarders to who we think we are. As we progress in age we seek to expand our awareness and understanding as we grow both in knowledge and experience. Generally speaking however, the local interactions and our local experiences therein should be enough to help us understand ourselves in relation to the world. These interactions are natural as they are a part of the interdependence of society.

Nonetheless, we begin to look at the TV and various forms of media out there to help us seek out and understand who we are as well. We look at TV as an outlet to the rest of the world outside of our local environment. This in and of itself wouldn’t be a problem however, it is the content on TV that makes the difference and how it is sold off to you as well. Most people are unaware that the TV Shows they watch hypnotize them and use subliminal messaging / propaganda techniques to develop the pop culture. Now this in and of itself can be dangerous only if the viewer is unaware of the fact that when they are interacting with any form of media they are being sub-consciously embedded with mental suggestions and being conditioned. The danger now lies in what the content of the TV and the various media have in it. This will only than serve to build uniformity within localities across the nation. Now does this mean Television and any form of media is to blame? No, its how it is used that makes the difference and whether or not you choose to be influenced by its suggestions. Many would run to extreme ends in the name of trying to stop the conditioning. But there are a few rational answers that can be given to remedy the situation. Instead of having the nanny state that only seeks to ban everything for your

“safety” and “protection” trying to censor things that may stop reality from setting in we could always be individuals and decided to auto-govern ourselves and our families by turning off said media, we could begin realizing that most of what we interact with in the various media was paid for and only expects payment back for the advertising or message that was put on, or we could find a counter-argument that may refute the claims advertised or propagated. There is no need to shield everyone from graphic things just because a few are weak of stomach or faint of heart. We Should Not Have to Appease Everyone!

However, a large portion of society does not contain the understanding and are unaware generally speaking and choose to obsess over whatever the media has to say about what makes an individual an “individual.” I find this ironic and puzzling; the free world that values individuality has managed to create a strong wave of conformity concerning what makes an individual a so-called “individual” in the eyes of society. It is the goof of all time, individuality is about uniqueness and most people know this yet the people either sub-consciously or not still remain in conformity to what society has to say. To add to this irony, it is corporations who have the power over the airwaves for the most part. So what does the media reinforce in our society as something that is popular and in effect make the people believe is the definition of individuality? Beauty, not the true kind, but the outer appearance is emphasized, in effect emphasizing superficiality. Sexual Prowess, everywhere you go in our society it needs to relate to the pleasures of sex, in effect emphasizing our more animalistic nature which is impulsive and emotional. Personal Gain, not the gain of intellectual or spiritual experiences and treasures but rather physical and material gain, in effect emphasizing our desires for extravagance and trivial things.

Now these things exist, so I cannot deny their existence nor deny that they have no value, everything at has value, if they did not exist than it did not have value. So I will not be an extremist and say “we need to get rid of appearance, sex, the trivial or materialistic mindset.” However, as a unique individual it is my decision as to how much value I give these “glorified values” and base my decision on the introspection of who I am and who I want to be or how I want to be seen. From there take the personal responsibility of my decision.

3. What is the difference between a group of individuals and a group of individuals?

So now that we arrive to a greater understanding as to what it means to be a truer individual. That from the outset the truer individual is capable of saying “NO” by devaluing the desire to appease everyone and not being an extremist but in return capable of introspection and personal responsibility as well as awareness of a societal definition as opposed to an individual definition on a truly subjective topic.

Earlier I pointed out an irony to the definition of “individual” through media as opposed to the individual itself. The greater awareness is that, it is corporations that decide these things, so what we are conditioned to accept is the corporate definition of individualism which is a farce on individualism because corporate culture is about collectivism, a hierarchy of rulers where we trust the owner to do the right thing but if we dissent or undermine the owners and higher-ups we find ourselves on the chopping block for next month’s lay-offs and terminations.

Now, the question must be asked than, what is the difference between a group of unaware or unconscious individuals and true individuals? It is rather simple. The individual in a group has relegated

or sacrificed his/her own uniqueness for the sake of the group. If the group does not need the talents of A, B, and C than those talents, that uniqueness of the individual, is ignored and not allowed to grow or be worked and shrivels and is possibly lost all for the sake of the group. The individual in the group is a collectivist without possibly even knowing it. It is a tragedy that the gifts bestowed upon the individual for whatever supreme cause you believe in go by unused and quite possibly lost. I ask “where is the life in that?”

Now if we are to look at the true individual who has been awakened and is conscious of him or herself than the story is much different. The true individual within a group of true individuals carries with it much power and respect. All talents are used and applied by the mercy of the individual not by the mercy of the group nor does the group demand a sacrifice. Yes teamwork is important for any group work however, what good is teamwork if the true individual were not insightful and knowledgeable enough to improve the outcome of the group? Someone may say, “Well, if they are all true individuals than what happens if a problem occurs?” The true individual and the group of true individuals need not worry because, the emphasis for understanding would be there and to work towards the best mutual outcome would be set.

4. Personal Experiences

So now we arrive to an even greater awareness of what a true individualist is. That a true individual does not sacrifice anything because sacrifices are defined as giving up something in the name of something greater than you. Instead a true individual or individualist does things based on their own level of mercy. An individualist uses and develops the traits of insight and knowledge-ability to further improve the outcome of the individualist group so as to arrive at point where there is a win for all not a win for some unless by the mercy of the individual they agree to take less than what could be fully given for example, a job you collect your wage from your job and from their you also have employment as such you agreed to take this job even though you don’t own the company and its fuller privileges the owner enjoys.

Nonetheless, I must speak now of my own personal experiences for sometimes leading by example is the best way a follower (a collectivist) becomes a leader (an individualist). When I was younger say back in grade school my desire was to become popular yet at the same time I was reserved so in a sense sought to become popular but not speak much. This desire thankfully didn’t last long but I had seen that some of my classmates as we entered into middle school were more focused on popularity than on developing a true and lasting friendship, they sought quantity I sought quality as I got older. As we arrived in high school it was the same story but becoming increasingly mature I had developed my introspective nature to a degree where I had tremendous inner power and awareness but my social life had suffered I had friends but even they didn’t keep in touch with me all that much anyway.

That would change after a couple events that occurred in my high school career where I was reinvigorated to leave old friends behind that I decided lost their quality that I had enjoyed throughout the years previous to these events, so we grew apart. I found a group of new friends and quickly they took me in, we were a small group but the quality time of that group was great, I found a job and invited one of my friends to join in on it. To this day we both still work there with a second handful of co-

workers who turned into friends. But, what can I say, it was work we had our fun times, we had our hard times. It was my determination that didn’t make me quit from this job even when I was fed up with it and the people at certain times.

I had a desire to grow and expand in knowledge and understanding because, high school education

generally speaking left me unprepared for college life and the world. I had interests in politics, religion, philosophy and writing. I learned critical thinking and logic skills within my first year of attending college

because I believed that being critical of the society we live in and ourselves will in time improve our lives and surroundings. My interests in religion, spiritual and occult philosophy is at the highest at this time than ever before. I had sought to improve my writing skills and enjoyed the philosophical viewpoints the college offered coupled with my own understandings of life. My life has only begun in the time allowed

a typical person but nonetheless I look forward to all of which life has to offer including its difficulties. This was not just schooling that offered this awareness but it was my own life experiences guided by whatever supreme cause you belief in.

5. Religious/Scientific Examples

There are spiritual and philosophic as well as a scientific appreciation for the ideas of individualism. Within this section my intent is to sow some of them, not argue doctrines and dogma but rather show that even belief systems are there to help in the liberation of an individual to come out of the collective mindset. I was born and raised in Christianity and had developed esoteric interests because of that I have a larger understanding of these two mindsets than I do of Jewish or “secular” mindset. Nonetheless, I will put my own insights into these understandings to help show that the individual is the focal point to life and that the collective seems to only old people back.

a. Christian Tone

The first important example that can be shown is the Judeo-Christian Story of Creation. God made Adam

and from Adam made Eve as the story goes. God breathed into Adam with his breath of life. Now many say that by eating the apple on the tree of knowledge of good and evil caused the fall of mankind from my perspective it was a necessary event. God gave Adam and Eve the willpower to be free and to not need the consent of anyone but their own consent to do what they did. Freedom was sacred in the eyes of God according to the Genesis story, because, even though God knew that free will would make mankind fall and even though he knew that freedom would bring much suffering and death to the world

it was still given to us. This comes back to the point, that even if something brings negative

consequences it does not necessarily mean it has no value. So our existential questioning began what would it mean if God did not make us into beings of free will? We would be herd animals, we would be collectivists by birth and our will wouldn’t exist we would be mindless and soulless robots living out a meaningless life.

So knowing this, we understand that God’s will was for us to have life by being free. So now we must ask ourselves what is the relationship between man and the serpent who tempted eve into eating the apple and in effect Adam as well. The serpent made the couple aware of their “nakedness” and fundamentally changes them to the point where God threw the couple out of the Garden. Many say the serpent

brought upon them ignorance and suffering but the serpent only showed them reality because; the garden was a locality in the rest of the world. The serpent brought upon them the hardship and difficulty of reality. It is our job than to hold on firmly to our individual liberty during hard times and know ourselves by not yielding our freedoms to adversity.

I am not playing devil’s advocate either. This is what the serpent has done, what God has willed and what we have done, if God did intervened to stop the serpent, than we would have never learned to take the consequences of our actions, which proves that personal responsibility is an important value that must be learned in our desire for freedom. If the serpent did not exist, than we would have never learned the hardships and challenges our freedom brings. If Eve or Adam fought the temptation not to eat the apple, than they would have continued living in a naïve ignorance of the world in which they came from. So some values to be instilled in an individualist would be personal responsibility, the desire to overcome adversity, and awareness of who we truly are.

“I desire mercy not sacrifice” (Matthew 12:7)

Christ whom which Christian doctrine espoused is the Son of God was an important lesson to be learned. Because, God was the being that bestowed free will and desired freedom for all humans. It is God’s son than that would be representative to true individuality. This phrase that Christ used was meant to convey an important lesson. I had mentioned earlier that mercy was an individualist or free persons value and sacrifice was a collectivist or enslaved persons value. To expand on this it is by the mercy of the individualist that progress is made, it was the work of Christ that bestowed the message of love to the world, and it was not the work of the collective that made such a message known. It was by Christ mercy on the collective that love was made known.

Mercy is defined as an act of kindness, compassion, or favor. The acts of Mercy start from the individual and go outward to whomever. However sacrifice is defined as the surrender or destruction of something prized or desirable for the sake of something considered as having a higher or more pressing claim. The act of sacrifice is imposed upon the individual in the name of whatever or whomever. People consider the Passion of The Christ to be an act of Sacrifice however it was not it is an act of Mercy. Because, Christ represents the light of a true individual in the Christian mindset than it is the idea of the followers or anyone else that follows with the teachings of Christ to provide mercy not self-sacrifice. Christ knew that the individual is higher to the collective.

Someone may say “God is greater than I am, so I must sacrifice X in the name of God.” This is deceptive the son of God asks for mercy not sacrifice, he was tired of these hollow acts of sacrifice they meant nothing to him and in effect nothing to the father. So what should be done or said is “God is greater than I am, so I must show mercy to others by doing X in the name of God.” Not only will this keep you more honest with yourself but also with those around you. Sacrificing brings problems someone may say “I sacrificed X for you, so you owe me!” This only feeds self-aggrandizing and pride. Mercy brings peace because it was your will to do what you did. It keeps you honest with yourself.

We must know of course that an individual must carry balance within him/herself if they wish to not be exploited by those who seek to exploit the mercy of the individual for less than noble or genuine

reasons. The gift of discretion must be developed and applied in order to better judge the genuine nature of one’s application of mercy. Too much mercy invites weakness by way of developing an unhealthy toleration for people or groups. However, too much severity invites hatred by way of developing an unhealthy judgmental if not elitist personality.

So to review what can be learned from this verse we know that an individualist is capable of honesty not just towards others but towards themselves as well. The true individualist is capable of mercy but will not be overly sympathetic in order to deny exploitation. To deny exploitation the individualist will balance their merciful side with their discretion but will not allow the gift of discretion to be perverted into being overly judgmental.

“You Are The Light of the World” (Matthew 5: 13-16)

The whole verse that I had selected was that of two verses. The first verse states that “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men.” This is an interesting verse. At first it may seem like a call to collectivism, because someone may say “what is one grain of salt going to do? Wouldn’t you need to have several grains of salt to make a difference?” I would say this is true insofar as each grain of salt maintains its unique salty characteristics. Because if salt lost its saltiness which is the thing that gave it meaning than it has lost its purpose. This is the point of this first verse, that each of us is unique.

Uniqueness is the gift, we are each unique individuals on this planet. Therefore, we must be able to maintain our uniqueness in the world that only seeks conformity to uniformity. This is the larger lesson to being an individualist, that a true individualist will be a non-conformist or someone who will not blindly serve common standards, conventions, rules, customs, traditions, norms, or laws unless they are in agreement to them. In the name of true individualism the individualist will not submit to peer pressure unless they can see the genuinely beneficial aspects to said pressures. Also the individualist will see to it that they will not submit to the groupthink mentality which is a type of thought exhibited by group members who try to minimize conflict and reach consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas. Individual creativity, uniqueness, and independent thinking are lost in the pursuit of group cohesiveness, as are the advantages of reasonable balance in choice and thought that might normally be obtained by making decisions as a group. During groupthink, members of the group avoid promoting viewpoints outside the comfort zone of consensus thinking. Some people know this as “drinking the kool-aid” in which one becomes a strong or fervent believer in a particular philosophy or mission, wholeheartedly or blindly believing in its virtues without being critical of them.

The second half of the verse we arrive to the message that “You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.” You are the light of the world is the beginning of this verse that each of is light, something usually related to a divine nature. That this light because it is divine is capable of so much power and contains so much life that it serves as an

empowering inspiration to the world. Each of us who has aspired to true individuality is a city on the hill but because you are exalted by the humble position of true individuality you cannot be hidden by anyone, people sense that you are different than the rest of them and they revere you because of that. The hallmark of true individuality is not to run and hide or to be ashamed of any of the gifts you have but to use and apply them wisely and with a humble stance, a true individual has no desire to lead people but rather to guide them so that they may develop their own individuality so that they may lead themselves.

This power I speak of is the power of life itself without it individuality would be dead. Remember God gave life and gave freedom simultaneously because without one the other has no point to exist. When the true individual has aspired to life and liberty they understand its power and become that power, this power which the true individual posses empowers the individual and those around the individual to the point where it is an inspiration at every level of being. It would do well to keep in mind that the city on the hill is something not to boast about hence I remind that the true individual posses a humble spirit because of their maturity. I also say that the true hallmark to true individuality is not to lead but to guide; an individual needs to be guided out of or toward something. The true individual guides because experiences must occur within the growing individual to aid further in the development of true individuality whereas if they were lead down a path than their experiences would be limited to the leader’s will which is not helping in developing true individuality.

“Greater love has no one than this that he lay down his life for his friends.” (John 15:13)

When I read this saying I thought about what the larger lesson meant in the eyes of true individuality. It dawned upon me that, there are ultimately two emotions and all other emotions are related to one of the two or both indirectly. Those two emotions were love and fear. Anger is can be found in compassion, which is rooted in love, for those who suffer from injustice or ignorance and it can be found in not getting your own way. But I came to a larger realization that love and anger are also perspectives and ideas. This to me was the message behind the message that Christ shared with his apostles, that when you dedicated yourself to an idea, in particular a good idea, and are willing to lay your life down so that others may understand and celebrate it in such an existential way than the individual is powerful.

Christ dedicated his life to love and died for that idea, that experience and that emotion. It was by his mercy that he died for such an idea. According to the myth he died to save the world through love. Likewise, the founders of this country and countless true patriots died to see to it that the idea of freedom be maintained and have a place in the world to maintain it. The founders wanted peace and prosperity with all, they wanted other countries to emulate us and celebrate liberty. Freedom is after all based on the principle of love. That I love all equally enough to fight for their own freedoms even when they wouldn’t and that I love all equally enough that I would want them to be free despite any shortfalls that they may have. The founders wanted us to be emulated in the world not by sacrificing our liberty for security or by forcing countries to change by force of arms. Where is the love in sacrifice, when the man of love demanded mercy? Where is the love in unnecessary violence to spread the idea of liberty, which is based on love?

b. Jewish Tone

“Go to Pharaoh and say to him, 'This is what the LORD says: Let my people go, so that they may worship me.” (Exodus 8:1)

Although I am not Jewish and do not impose my own commentary to be the final say on the story of Exodus I still must say that from an individualist perspective however I find the story of Exodus to be quite liberating. The story of Exodus is about how Moses led his people out of slavery from the land of Egypt. I find it interesting that the Pharaoh who represents the will of a powerful hierarchal collectivist society demands that slaves do the labor of his own nation. From an individualist standpoint it represents how collectivism does not value personal responsibility but puts all the responsibility on others for their own maintenance. Also the story seems like a message of religious tolerance, that the Jewish people just want to worship their God freely without someone trying to interfere in their worship. Finally, I have observed that from an individual perspective, that the collectivist Pharaoh viewed material possession as the highest end he could establish for his nation where as the minority of enslaved Jews saw its inconveniences of such a viewpoint. This tells me that perhaps an individualist see’s material possession as something that is a means to an end.

So to review what seems to be considering a hallmark of individualism in Judaism would be again personal responsibility, tolerance in other people’s viewpoints, and finally that things should be used not worshipped. Again, I do not impose my commentary as the final say in the matter because I am not Jewish.

c. Gnostic Tone

Gospel of Thomas: "I shall choose you, one from a thousand and two from ten thousand, and they will stand as a single one."

I have great respect for the Gnostic message and the world we live in. This phrase is unique as is what the promise is. This could not be any clearer form of the importance of individuality. That out of the many people or society comes one person who has the power to make a difference. These representatives of true individuality are indeed unique and yet are the same in that they share the quality of uniqueness. It is a message that the focus lies on ourselves in order to realize the potentials life has to offer and to be liberated by being aware of and applying the realization.

The Secret Book of John: “And the man came forth because of the shadow of the light which is in him. And his thinking was superior to all those who had made him. When they looked up, they saw that his thinking was superior.

This is part of the Gnostic story of Creation. In this man is seen as something more powerful than the maker himself. Which is a metaphor for just how powerful the individual self is and how much life they posses. According the Gnostic creation myth our light, which is part of the divine, is sought to be exploited by the forces of ignorance by way of fear. It is humanities choice as well as each individuals choice to decide if they will allow the light to be exploited by the forces of ignorance or if they will reside in the light and be empowered by the light by way of love and knowledge.



Ralph Waldo Emerson American philosopher, essayist, and poet: “Place yourself in the middle of the stream of power and wisdom which animates all whom it floats, and you are without effort impelled to truth, to right and a perfect contentment.”

The idea behind this is that this is only an individual’s ability and experience. A collectivist cannot do this because they are either told not to or they do not know how to. The individualist for one is a realist with an open mind, the individualist must be determined and seek truth for the truth sets all free and the individualist cannot be an individualist if they are not free. This awareness of truth leads to an inspirational sense of power and joy. As Emerson has said it “animates all whom it floats.” This is life itself and nothing short of that, this is what empowers the individual. Therefore, the individual must seek wisdom, for a fool is a collectivist even if the fool thinks themselves as true individuals, they are not because, fools like people who are stuck in the collectivist mindset do not think, they sacrifice their individuality to conformity and their uniqueness to uniformity. A fool laughs at the wise but it is the true individual who has the last laugh.



In Jungian psychology individuation is a process of psychological differentiation, having for its goal the development of the individual personality. "In general, it is the process by which individual beings are formed and differentiated; in particular, it is the development of the psychological individual as a being distinct from the general, collective psychology." (C.G. Jung. Psychological Types. Collected Works Vol.6., par. 757)

Carl Gustav Jung (26 July 1875 – 6 June 1961) was a Swiss psychiatrist, an influential thinker and the founder of analytical psychology. Jung's approach to psychology has been influential in the field of depth psychology and in countercultural movements across the globe. Jung is considered as the first modern psychologist to state that human psyche is "by nature religious" and to explore it in depth.[1] He emphasized understanding the psyche through exploring the worlds of dreams, art, mythology, world religion and philosophy. Although he was a theoretical psychologist and practicing clinician, much of his life's work was spent exploring other areas, including Eastern and Western philosophy, alchemy, astrology, sociology, as well as literature and the arts. His most notable ideas include the concept of psychological archetypes, the collective unconscious and synchronicity. From the psychological perspective CG Jung forewarned that people should seek balance and harmony. He cautioned that modern people rely too heavily on science and logic and would benefit from integrating spirituality and appreciation of unconscious realms.

Concerning his idea about the collective unconscious, it is just that unconscious. There is no such thing as the collective conscious but the one we create. We are not meant to be born like heard animals, like a hive of bee’s or sheep. The collectivist is to relegate their position for the sake of the group because of some fear or mentality. Therefore, the collective is unconscious, which only further makes my point that like an animal the collectivist relegates themselves to basic survival rather than realizing their potentials.

Individuation is the development of one's individual personality through a bringing-to-consciousness and assimilation of unconscious tendencies (both complexes of the personal unconscious and archetypes of the collective unconscious). Individuation is both a goal (one that will never be completely reached) and a life-long process with a twofold movement (see Wehr 50). Acknowledging that these unconscious tendencies are part of oneself, of one's personality and then, refusing to allow one's personality to be compelled by these tendencies through possession or projection.

We can understand individuation not only through discussing how it is manifested in our psychological development (see Wehr 58) but also through analyzing how it is portrayed in narratives. Individuation appears in myth, fairytales, literature, film, etc. in the form of a narrative or story because it is a process. Frequently the narrative portrays a journey or quest of a hero/heroine who represents the individual ego in the process of individuation. To analyze such a story, interpret all images, symbols, actions, etc. from the perspective of this individual ego, as personifications of various aspects of his/her unconscious that need to be integrated and/or distanced for the person to move toward wholeness.

6. What makes an individual a true individual?

Based on all of that which I have gone through the awareness and values that go into building an individualist I could say that everything above is what makes an individual and I wouldn’t be wrong. However, I wouldn’t be right as well, to suggest that if you listen to my advice above you will become an individual does not do justice to the claim that the individual first and foremost is the source of power and life in fact it would be arrogant of me to make such a suggestion of following the morals and values set above since the beginning of this essay. Morals and values may lead to a better life however; following morals and values is just that following. The individualist is not a collectivist and only the collective follow, whether the individual leading is of good or bad intentions.

So what makes an individual a true individual and not just a unit of the collectivist body? The answer lies in the awareness of one. In other words, the awareness of what you are and what you are not. The individual is everything but nothing in particular. What I mean by this is that the individual is free from all forms of identification whether it is a title or calling yourself the adherent to some type of mindset. By doing this the true individual no longer follows or runs after something everything runs to the individual. The acting out of the values described throughout this essay are no longer done because the individual does it in spite of the collective (also known as the counter-culture) but rather does it genuinely from the heart because the individual is just being themselves. If this is understood intellectually than good on that person but my hope is that the person understands it existentially and can experience what I am trying to say.

Also the true individual adheres to no dogma and no doctrine but their own. This is a paradox, a contradiction to everything I have said. First I say adhere to these values as the hallmark to true individualism. Then I say that these same values I told you to uphold mean nothing unless one understands how to use them. Now I just said forget about everything I told you and adhere to know rules in particular. I acknowledge this and say its part of the process of becoming, where people say contradictions do not work or paradoxes are mishaps we still must acknowledge that they occur. As a suggestion instead of running from contradictions and paradoxes embrace them. Values and morals are merely the acting out of what we know. This is the secret to true individuality rather than accepting who you are, know yourself. I am not suggesting that you must know the trivial things about who you are to the world like “what you like and what you dislike” often society determines that until the individual has come to the realization that collectivism is not the way. So instead, know yourself by pushing your boundaries and overcome that which holds you back. Truly, the individual who has come to know themselves is free because they are no longer in bondage to anything that may stop them from living life to the fullest and they are aware of themselves.

7. On Becoming an Individual

When a person is ready to travel the many paths that lead to true individualism they must be ready to essentially die to the world around themselves. This death is no different than the concept of being born-again like in Christian concept of the idea. However, unlike the religious undertone my intent is not to put people into groups. Rather this process is lifelong process and yet has many sub-processes that occur as events throughout one’s life unfold. This process is more so like the Alchemical idea of changing oneself from Base Lead to The Gold of Great Price. The base lead is common and is boring because it is plentiful it is not valuable but it is a necessary place to start. The gold of great price is the end result and in the time it takes to get from lead to gold there are many new and promising transformations which come in the way of physical, mental, and those open to the idea spiritual understandings, realizations, actions, and experiences. Throughout our lives we have events and consequences of those events that transform us, the difference between an individualist and collectivist is that one is conscious while the other is not.

However, to give a procedure on becoming a true individual would be wrong of me to do because; it limits your ability to become what you truly are. There is usually a process one that we all share but the experiences that the process encompasses are dramatically different for all. Like the theory of individuation it is a lifelong process but it is a daily process. A true individual is aware of more than a collectivist is aware of because they are not limited to one mindset. I will share with you the beginning of the journey and it starts with being critical of yourself and your own beliefs. At the conclusion of this article is a poetic short story, I hope that the story will provide for you a better picture concerning the path to the development of individuality.

a. Question Your Own Beliefs

In the journey of becoming the first stage to take part in is, being critical of your own worldview. This is difficult for most because, people build worldviews and belief systems so as to seek comfort in their own

lives rather than seeking comfort in life itself. When one wonders why there are more collectivist in the world it usually has to do with the fact that they subdue their critical thinking abilities with group think mindsets afraid of the journey of self-discovery. There is a childish fear of the unknown that is prevalent within the psyche of all humans. The collectivist “group thinker” seeks comfort in and demands others to submit to their own beliefs, regardless if those beliefs are set in reality or not. The individualist seeks comfort in embracing the unknown and to share their experiences as well as knowledge concerning that which is unknown. The collectivist lives in a naïve bubble in which they do not want to know and also seek to make those under their influence not to know either. We know such a fallacy to truth as Ad Populum or appeal to popularity, also known as “it is right because everyone believes it is right”.

So, you must begin to question your current beliefs and values. Regardless of the pain, listen to and accept some if not most of the counter argument to your beliefs. The point is not to make you into a convert because that would only switch your worldview and “group thinking.” The point is to go into a full 360 degree critical introspection of your beliefs and the counter-beliefs you discovered. You are trying to grasp the idea turn it on its head and then take the counter idea and turn it on its head as well. Not merely accepting one over the other.

As an example, in this country we as a collective say to the world that “you are with us or against us in the fight on terror.” However, when one becomes critical of such a “group think” viewpoint and investigates the counter argument of the claim say in your mind “US Sponsored Terrorism” you discover that the history of this country during the late 19 th century to present day has done nothing shy of causing people everywhere to hate us, and in particular one finds out the our government was responsible for destroying democracies or propping up dictators under the guise of fighting communism than we arrive to an even broader awareness that we should not have such a group think mentality as arrogant as the one we have because our government is just as guilty.

The effect of course is that the worldview you had has changed a bit and you as an individual may begin to define yourself a bit differently. Now again earlier I said that one should not be concerned merely with how the world see’s you; you must be honest with yourself otherwise you will just fallback to a collectivist mindset. The point of course to being critical of your beliefs is knowledge. Now the above example was an external one but what about the internal world, what about your personality? It would be good to find out why you have the negative qualities you may have and how you act upon them. Therefore, the more you know yourself the more critical you have become of your old worldviews and what they really mean.

Short Story on The Creation of The True Individual:

It all starts out as fire, burning away at my world.

The Monuments Fall and Tributes End, Only Chaos Ensues.

My Heart Aches and My Mind is Splintered


hear the voices in my mind saying “this must be right and that must be wrong.”

The feelings in my heart kill me and I am sickened, all comfort ends.

My Old World Is Gone burned away by fire, the rest charred and useless.

I must make do with what remains, death has come and done its worst, all is quiet and bleak.

I begin to pick up the pieces of the old world, in my journey I find things that the old world never knew.

This novelty is powerful but the old is what I had grown used to.

Curiosity takes the best of me and I begin to forge a new world.

My Curiosity has shown me something that the old world kept me in fear of.

At the entrance to my new world says “E Pluribus, Unum ”. I have grown powerful; look survivors have come to marvel at my new world, they begin to worship me.

The old world was about worshipping, so disgusted I was by their actions, I told them to stop and I showed them how to build a new world.

My Work and Determination saw me through, I have built a new world one better than the old one.

I have built much but my world is vulnerable, in time this world will remain charred and useless by the very same fires.

The old world I was a part of made me worship things outside of me, it did not ask, it forced me by fear.

I know now, that I am timeless and homeless, worlds may end but I am still here.

In times of Difficulty, I draw my strength.

In times of Uncertainty, I draw certainty.

In times of Quiet, I find myself.

In times of Melancholy, I become motivated.

In Times of Fear, I embrace Chaos.

Only one question remains, where does one build their new world?

Yet, I know that I must build by the grounds of the underground river.

Section Four:

A Look At Contemporary Western Society

1. Introduction

We live in hard times both as Americans and as human beings. Our world is falling apart, largely thanks to the corruption and ambitions of a few individuals who have no desire but to see us enslaved to them through some vague common action and manipulated through a few choice words. Their intents are clear; their objectives are becoming more easily understood. Luckily, history shows that when the weight of corruption becomes too much on a society that old world falls apart and something new and pure takes its place. We live in a time, where we feel the world is coming to an end, but this is not speaking of the physical world for it will remain but what will be coming to an end are our old understandings of the world and society we live in. If you wish to know where we as a species are going than the word “transitioning” would describe what is occurring.

2. Raise Awareness of the Old World

We must begin to become aware of the problems we face if we are to begin the process of truly breaking free. To begin I must say that the Western World has for the most part been distracted by various mediums which have only emphasized superficial concerns over our more pressing issues. We must become aware of the various illusions which have been set before us that seem to give an impression that everything is fine, when in fact everything is not fine for everything is being destroyed. Finally, we must admit that we are being influenced by the Court of Special Interests who would want to maintain their stranglehold over us through Distractions and Illusions.


When you turn on the TV what does the TV emphasize, what is its focus? When you listen to the radio why is it that the radio emphasizes what it emphasizes? I am not talking about the news so much as I am talking about our entertainment whether it be the music we listen to, the movies we watch, the various reality shows that are out there even when these shows are so far outside the reality of the truth of our situation. So what does the media reinforce in our society as something that is popular? Our entertainment industry regardless of what form it comes in has put the emphasis on the following:

Beauty, not the true kind, but the outer appearance is emphasized, in effect emphasizing superficiality. Sexual Prowess, everywhere you go in our society it needs to relate to the pleasures of sex, in effect emphasizing our more animalistic nature which is impulsive and emotional. Personal Gain, not the gain

of intellectual or spiritual experiences and treasures but rather physical and material gain, in effect emphasizing our desires for extravagance and trivial things.

Now these things exist, so I cannot deny their existence nor deny that they have no value, everything that exist has its own level of value, if they did not exist than it did not have value. So I will not be an extremist and say “we need to get rid of appearance, sex, the trivial or materialistic mindset.” After all we use these things in some degree or another to help give definition to who we are especially in America. However, when one peels away at this we see that these things are merely distractions. Their value has been overhyped to keep the populace focused on things outside of themselves and keep society in a perpetual chase towards a perfection of the superficial desires. The idea that we must be as attractive as possible is born from such a distraction, the idea that we must have the mansions and sports cars and focus upon our material possessions is a distraction! So, what is it we are being distracted from?

We are being distracted from reality, we are being distracted from the things that are opposite of that which we have been trained to put emphasis on. Obviously, when you distract someone you have a reason to do so, there is intent to do so. Why put emphasis on outer appearance? The only reason is to distract you from your inner life, which is what you really are; deep down within you there is some portion of your being which is screaming saying you are living a life that is not genuine. Why place emphasis on sexual prowess and lower more animalistic tendencies? The only reason is to distract you from your higher faculties that would help you live a more genuine life that is meant to empower you and liberate you. Finally why place emphasis on materialistic desires and goals? The point would be to distract you from goals that are meant to uplift you and increase your own inner awareness of who you are and what you real want, if you are broken and divided against yourself in your mind than, you do not know what you really want and you will be fooled by used car salesman and people of that nature.

This much is true we have been lied to. The society emphasizes things that are false in order to make us live in a false reality, a matrix of sorts. If one were to understand the idea of breaking out of the matrix they would see the world as if on a mountaintop, they are above the world and are able to see that everyone else acts in very predictable manners, they are stuck in the matrix of thinking that is the routine, nothing more than a vicious cycle, and when we wonder why the poor suffer or why wars never end it is because we are stuck in the matrix of repetition and routine.

Our nation was founded in the new world or as it was called at the time. This new world is meant to hold in it novelty. What we have gotten out of it is the desire for independence and freedom for each individual to forge its own path. Yet we still seem to worship the old human ideas of materialism and consumerism. In America we use our money as an indicator of our self worth. These ideas because they are old do not truly serve the new world in a way it should, they distract us. Now am I saying that owning things is bad, that it’s not American? No of course not, what I am saying though is that in America when we see a poor person we think that their poorness is from a series of misfortunes.

However, it may not ever occur to us that some people may not mind having much, their poorness was their intent. Perhaps there is something we can learn as Americans the idea that less is more, that

quality and not quantity is something we should desire. I mean after all most Americans think that the idea is to make as much money as possible but do not realize that if our money was backed by gold and silver not by “the faith of the American people” perhaps than it would not take much money for us to be happy. Our currencies quality would be backed by its soundness. Likewise, if we did not desire to have big homes, sports cars among other extravagant things perhaps we would not be in such a large amount of debt and actually be able to save our money.


In our society we have come to the belief that the individual is first and foremost important, that the individual must be allowed to grow and expand. In order for this to occur we must be allowed independence to allow this growth to take place. This would be a true argument in and of itself. Each individual would be unique and different. However you look at our society for what it really is and throughout the land of individuality and diversity all I have come to see is collectivism and conformity to uniformity.

In other words even though we may dress different and look different we have all conformed to thinking the same way. We value whatever the Television and Radio tell us to value, we think, dress, eat, and do whatever these things tell us to do. But what if these things are hijacked, in order to undermine society, would we even be aware? Here is the irony it is corporations that decide these things, so what we are conditioned to accept is the corporate definition of individualism which is a farce on individualism because corporate culture is about collectivism, a hierarchy of rulers where we trust the owner to do the right thing but if we dissent or undermine the owners and higher-ups we find ourselves on the chopping block for next month’s lay-offs and terminations.

So since the corporations control the airwaves for the most part and most people listen to mass media they will walk away with an opinion that is biased, because the corporation who stands to profit from an event they are reporting will surely make the news highly subjective in order to make their profitable point of view heard and then you are left with a highly biased worldview, whether or not you are aware of it.

As I had said early all our society cares about is appearances’ but, when it comes to actually something substantial they act like a tape recorder, simply replaying the opinions and information that was given to them, is this really an informed citizen or a sad excuse for an informed citizen? That is the problem with our society we lack substance, we think our substance is only about our outer lifestyle, but in our lives we lack much, we lack knowledge, wisdom, power, and life, in effect we are not truly happy nor are we truly free. We do not know much, we are like children who need someone to direct us. But if we are free we would need to be mature enough to handle that freedom, but our nation is mostly a nation of children so we are not truly free.

That brings me to my last point concerning illusions, that we only have the illusion of being free, whether in thought, conscious or life. We are not free; we conform to the uniformity of the corporate

airwaves. I have not seen anything new in nation for quite some time now, rather we are merely building upon the things we already know and understand. A sign of freedom being present is that there is originality, that there is innovation, and that there is growth. We on the other hand have nothing like that we have repetition and stagnation. Our ideas and our actions are the same our lives continue to repeat the same routine, we are not free. This is not to say that I do not mind repetition but as William Blake once said “I must Create a System, or be enslav'd by another Man's; I will not Reason and Compare: my business is to Create.” When we are truly free than we create, we have novelty and all the things that I have said went into making a person free.

Court of Special Interests

The education system has failed us entirely, since the creation of The Department of Education our quality has declined and our overall intelligence has to. The private mind seeks knowledge in order to exercise its own private judgment and intellectual authority. High literacy gave the individual the means to seek knowledge independently. It gave individuals the means to stand on their own two feet and think for themselves. This was detrimental to the "social spirit" needed to bring about a collectivist society. Our literacy rate has declined as well as I am sure most readers are aware of how bad the literacy situation has become.

Without a proper education whether one from a parent or from a school the child is subject to being stupefied and lied to. Especially when the emphasis is placed on very distractive values set by society. The child is almost thrown into group think from a young age, and without the ability to be critical and express one’s own individuality from a young age they will almost certainly be damaged for life, unless they are educated as to how they might overcome crutches forced upon them during their youth.

According to there are 11 million people prescribed Ritalin each year. According to an article written in 2000 by production of Adderall and Dexedrine, also used to treat ADHD, has risen 2,000 percent in nine years. The rise of ADHD has also increased substantially since the year 2000, in effect leading to more prescriptions for the treatment of ADD and ADHD. Ritalin, Adderall, and Dexedrine are stimulants which are known for significantly increases levels of dopamine in the brain, thereby stimulating attention and motivational circuits that enhance one's ability to focus and complete tasks.

However, what if the child is not to blame for lacking sufficient attention? We blame a child because their ability to pay attention is impaired, but let us be honest with ourselves it would be nice to be able from time to time to get unfocused from a world that overrides the mind with stimulation and subliminal messages. We are bombarded from a day to day basis since before we could remember with society’s stimuli. The things are TV, The Music we hear and the people we meet who have also been hypnotized by these messages all serve to bring us into conformity with what the world demands. So those children and even adults who are unable to “Pay Attention” are punished by being drugged under the guise of course of being taken care of.

The next issue is my favorite issue, it’s called anti-depressants. I find that I am able to say a lot about it because; it is the perfect representation of our society’s detachment with reality. I am anticipating the day when “Soma” will be discovered, oh how the slaves will rejoice with their slave masters. According to an Article from CNN of the 2.4 billion prescriptions in 2005, 118 million were for antidepressants.

Now, it may seem like a rather small percentage I mean 118 million from 2.4 billion is only at best 5% of the medicated populace. However, assuming that one anti-depressant goes for each person that is a little less than half the country under happy pills. Now anti-depressants work by preventing the reuptake of one neurotransmitter, serotonin, by nerve cells after it has been released. Since uptake is an important mechanism for removing released neurotransmitters and terminating their actions on adjacent nerves, the reduced uptake caused by an anti-depressant such as (fluoxetine) AKA Prozac increases free serotonin that stimulates nerve cells in the brain. Serotonin is of course the main chemical within the brain that is responsible for ones mood and in effect one’s thoughts and feelings.

Here lies the problem of our society, we want to be happy and prosperous but when life rears its realities on us we seem to want to escape the situation it is rather sad. People rather than embracing the reality would rather medicate themselves back into a drug-induced dream world that makes one thing that everything is fine even though the world is falling apart. This reminds me of the Soma Drug from Brave New World or Substance D from A Scanner Darkly. Soma made people feel elated and happy in an almost ecstatic state of mind, they were given the pills whenever reality showed itself so that the populace may escape it, whenever something negative occurred they popped in their mouth something to cheer them up again. Substance D was a drug that overtime with the continued use of that drug made a person live two separate lives without even noticing it, in psychiatric terms Folie à deux translated, "a madness shared by two" is a rare psychiatric syndrome in which a symptom of psychosis (particularly a paranoid or delusional belief) is transmitted from one individual to another. However, according to Substance D from the plot of A Scanner Darkly the two individuals are really one.

This should not be taken literally, rather a metaphor for the dangers of a medicated society. If America was truly free as it says it is than why on earth would so many people need a fix to solve their problems? This is the legitimate drugging of the American populace, it would seem like as if it is a brand of mass mind control, to break the individual through drugs, in particular drugs that effect their mood.

The final situation is one that also represents our societies desire of superficial things, the medication I speak of is diet pills. According to diet pills range from common over the counter appetite suppressants such as phenylpropanolamine, caffeine pills and ephedrine hydrochloride (ephedrine is not an appetite suppressant, though often misused as one - commonly referred to as "white crosses" or "mini thins") to prescription medications like Redux and Phen/Fen. There are a wide variety of diet pills on the market that are available, many of them have addictive qualities, and some even contain small amounts of laxative. In fact the diet industry in collusion with the diet pills therein is a multi-billion dollar business annually.

Diet pills, both over-the-counter and prescription, (as recommended, continuously, or in excess) can cause the following: nervousness, restlessness, insomnia, high blood pressure, fatigue and hyperactivity,

heart arrhythmias and palpitations, congestive heart failure or heart attack, stroke, headaches, dry mouth, vomiting and diarrhea or constipation, intestinal disturbances, tightness in chest, tingling in extremities, excessive perspiration, dizziness, disruption in menstrual cycle, change in sex drive, hair loss, blurred vision, fever and urinary tract problems. Overdoses can cause tremors, confusion, hallucinations, shallow breathing, renal failure, heart attack and convulsions.

Caffeine pills and/or Ephedrine Hydrochloride should never be taken for weight control, and should not be taken continuously. Ephedrine is a medication used occasionally to treat asthma, but more commonly allergies and hay fever - it is a bronchial dilator. Both can cause all the side effects as diet pills, with an increased risk of addiction (both physical and psychological), headaches, high blood pressure and heart palpitations and arrhythmias, including heart attack. Ephedrine use can contribute to psychosis, anxiety and depression.

I just want to place emphasis on depression which I happen to find very ironic. We think if we lose weight than we would be happy, although we really do not think so we are told this by the media, whether on TV or the radio. Nonetheless we have this thought process whether imbedded in us or arising from our mind on our own and one takes these pills whose risks far outweigh the benefits and then when something terrible happens to us we are back and depressed all over again. Where is the happiness in this, if you are only going to be disappointed in the end and where the only thing that gotten lighter was your wallet/purse?

So I hope I have made you aware now that you are not really individuals anymore and your independency has really been replaced by dependency only to play a mean game of semantics and call all your dependencies – independence. Such action is absolutely Orwellian, we know this better as doublethink, in which one holds two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them. It is doublespeaks in that words, which not only had in every case a political implication, but were intended to impose a desirable mental attitude upon the person using them. So in a sense making the person think they are free, even though they are actually enslaved.

How independent do you think you are if you are un-educated and ill-informed? The answer is clear you are not, and the situation is even worse if you listen to the bias that comes from the corporate media point of view, without having the capability of being critical of it. How independent do you think you are if you are medicated and live a reality that is not true, that is unreal? The answer is clear you are not independent and you are not aware of your freedom, what makes this worst is if you think that the distractions and the illusions are good for you. We must become aware that we are being deceived and brought down to be handled by those who provide for us. It is time to throw off this old world but how? That is the question we must ask ourselves.


Im Mad As Hell… You Should Be To!

We must become angry! That is the first thing we must do like from the film “The Network” when the protagonist says “I want you to get mad! I want you to say ‘I mad as hell and I won’t take it anymore!’ I am a Human Being Dammit, My Life has Value!” You must get angry enough that you will no longer be tolerant and apathetic towards the illusions, distractions and dependencies. Freedom belongs to those who have the courage to fight for it, if you are an American you must have the capability to find your courage to fight for it. No more will I allow myself to submit to fear and the same with those around me. No more will I support the welfare state which is responsible for all the problems of this society. No more will I allow myself to die on the inside or allow others to die on the inside, if you want freedom than you want life and you cannot allow them to drain the life out of you through ignorance which has manifested tolerance and apathy. This is the case, that you have the anger to begin to want to create change, not the change some politician wants but the change that you as an individual would want, a change to enlighten humanity and free it as well. My anger is based on the awareness I have come to. I do not anger at those who have been living “the lie,” but I anger at the lie itself, thus, the old Christian saying “Our battle is a spiritual battle.

Society has fallen to Fear

I for one am disgusted by our society’s weakness, we have fallen to fear. Everywhere you look and listen that is all there is FEAR. We fear things as small as germs to something as big as each other, and something as mysterious as the unknown. It is through such fears that the powerful control us by. We must stop this fear by overcoming it. The powers that be are smart make no mistake, that is why they have provided the welfare state so that people will be too lazy to overcome their fears. I say I will not submit to fear but always work to overcome these fears and find the strength in my fears. If its germs I fear I will expose myself to them to increase the strength of my immune system. If it is a human I fear, I will not fear them but confront them with knowledge and love. If it is the unknown I fear I will embrace it in order to overcome it, I will not run away from it.

Where is there any freedom in being afraid all the time? How can you celebrate life if you are afraid and how can you really be happy if you are afraid? The government says “oh we want to protect you” but what I hear is “we will get rid of your fears but you must give up some of your freedoms in the process.” I will not do that, I have merely exchanged one form of slavery for another form, and because of that there is no trade off, rather there is a loser and a winner. You lost your freedoms and the government has won your power, it will expand only to oppress you further, where is the freedom in that?!

The Welfare State

The welfare state is designed to take care of you from cradle to grave. We live in a welfare state a state that seeks “to take care of its people.” The welfare state educates, feeds, and informs its populace. This could be a utopian dream world if people did not have a corrupt side. Unfortunately, people do have a deceitful and corrupt side in which the education can be filled with half-truths leading to conflict and missing pieces of information that should have been mentioned to help create a better worldview, the food they eat maybe of bad quality in order to maximize the very profits of those who produce such food, the information maybe as well half-true and deceptive so that you might see only the view of those who inform you.

The welfare state is a breeding ground for tolerance, apathy and ignorance. I say this because if someone takes care of you than, you are more likely to tolerate or not care about the actions the state takes, instead of taking care of yourself one relinquishes the hard work of self-knowledge and growth of individuality for some convenience and the relative ease of life. What is this self-knowledge I speak of? Self-Knowledge is the awareness of who you truly are not just accepting who you are at the present moment. It is pushing your own boundaries, being put into situations in which you are unsure of or even uncomfortable in and overcoming these circumstances to ennoble ones character and ones self-worth. When one knows themselves in such away than one is truly free and will understand all the more just how important liberty and life truly is.

Therefore, the welfare state and in affect the warfare state seek to make you ignorant and afraid both of your own weakness and fears. They exploit your weaknesses and the most common fears, in particular the fear of sudden death and fear of the unknown. They have a vested interest to see that you do not have your highest potentials realized such is the characteristic of the collectivist mindset, that we all realize our potentials or we all stay ignorant and afraid of our potentials, but for all to realize their potentials would suddenly make you into a true individual therefore, the collective (or as religious texts have called “the world”) would only seek to hold you down, depending on intent of said collective.

Mors Ontologica “Death of Being”

So the greatest threat we face at this time in human history is complete totalitarian collectivism. A Brave New World in which the only concern is to "Community, Identity, Stability" neglecting the individual, in fact it is Auldrous Huxley’s nightmare realized in which sterility and absence of individuality has occurred. The individual is indeed no more, conflict perhaps will be gone but at the great expense of the loss of depth of feelings, ferment of ideas, and artistic creativity. Intellectual excitement and discovery will be controlled significantly by governments and corporations. Each individual is conditioned and indoctrinated, from their youth. In this new world order of the elite the individual is never educated to prize thinking on their own. Instead everyone is happy and stable at the loss of all that which seems to make a human… a human.

The future is grim if everyone is stupefied and medicated. Reduced to mindless and soulless zombies there is no life and everything is death, humanity although maybe alive physically, its mental and spiritual capacity is reduced to uniformity and conformity the two things that limit life. The distractions and illusions will no longer be seen as unfavorable but all believe that it is the unquestionable “truth” that somehow it would be the only way to live life. When this happens the heretics will be the only source of life, but then again it always has been the heretics that have understood profundity. Our children and our future will be conditioned to believe that their slavery is their “freedom.” Even though we know it will not be!

4. Life is to Beautiful to Waste

So now we must ask ourselves, with this awareness and this anger what do we do? Do I attack and lash out physically to the slave masters? Do I think there is no hope and no future for humanity and allow my anger to turn into depression and resentment? No, we will fight and we will not go silently so that we can attract the most amounts of people to this message. We will build our own New World Order that was meant for the individual, by the individual and of the individual. We will live, we will be free, and we will prosper so as long as the individual is allowed to rise to the heights of its being and human dignity and rights be upheld. Anger is a powerful gift and it must be harnessed. Your humanity is what life is, it is what empowers you, if you give it up for the sake of something as trivial like convenience than you are no longer human by your own discretion. The Road will be hard, it always is, there will be bumps in the road and there will be easy moments but in the end the triumph will be worth it.

Anger is a Gift

It has been said that “Anger is a gift;” anger is based either in love or fear. Anger based on fear is what destroys us; it is the anger that is founded in fear of loss, loss of worldly power. This anger leads to oppression and war, it is this anger that the New World Order of the Elite is based on, they are fearful and they do not even know it. They oppress because they are afraid of the power of the people, the common people, this is where the people stand for, and they stand for love. Anger based on love is righteous indignation, it is this anger that we need to be based in, based in love and not fear.

Those who love want freedom and life. Those who love people enough not to “take care of them” but rather to allow them to grow as individuals and to aspire to life with as minimal restraints as possible. I love people enough that I think they should be free despite their shortfalls, I know that if given the honest opportunity to grow they will succeed and they will live a fulfilling life if they so choose to. I love all enough that I am willing to defend liberty even while they are stuck in the distraction,

illusion and dependency that this society has offered them. That is the power of love and when one is guided by that love when they are angry at the lies ignorance has made in order to deceive people than it is with love that we feel compassion towards those who are ignorant and through anger have the power to find the truth and destroy the ignorance that plagues us.

Defend Your Dignity

Human history is filled with people who desire nothing short of power over others. Throughout the earliest times people have sought knowledge that is the human mission, the desire to grow in understanding and knowledge, so that we might, as individuals become empowered. History is filled with two kinds of people. They are people who love and people who fear, those who loved; loved humanity enough that they were willing to spread knowledge to all despite their shortfalls. They loved even while, at the time, they were despised and punished even. The individual stood alone in this pursuit. Those who feared became powerful with their knowledge because, they used the knowledge to oppress and control humanity. They were fearful that if the truth was made known people might be free and live a life that was empowering. They feared this, and thus were feared by those who were ignorant.

This is the case that you must ask yourself, are you a human being or are you just some insignificant sub-human if not animal in the eyes of those who continue to manipulate you both in mind and body. The choice is yours, will you be a human being and uphold your own dignity and allow yourself to be free and live life or will you be like a pet, an animal, a sub-human and sacrifice your dignity for the sake of being “taken care of” and “protected” and “employed?” In a word, choose between life, love, knowledge, dignity or choose convenience, an easy life, and dependency. We all say we want the former but for the most part society, the collective and the individuals therein have desired the latter through their actions.

If we want to change, we must change the way we think both as individuals and as a collective, once we do that we can use our power over the government to make them change for our benefit, so that our deep desires for a life of love, knowledge, and dignity will be made manifest by our actions. I do not expect perfection as the word leads to many evils, if not understood properly. What I do expect is for individuals to make their world a better world and what I expect from humanity is nothing short of that as well. We are entering a new age indeed, not for a few but for all individuals everywhere, our answers will not come from government or big business appointed “experts” but rather from the grassroots itself where true human dignity and knowledge is represented.

The Road Will Be Hard

I am not here to promise you “the land of milk and cookies.” I am here to promise you a life of living in reality where individual integrity is upheld. The road will be hard, and it should be, as Thomas Paine said so long ago “The greater the conquest, the greater the triumph.” Embrace the forces resisting you; transmute them for your benefit and the benefit of a New World Order for The People. To defend human dignity is hard because the world seems to always hold us down. To fight for a true individual life, separate from and original from the collective is a quest it has its rewards and its hard times but do not bend or break during the hard times, embrace them.

Therefore, grow in love through mercy towards others using your discernment and you will achieve a better world. Live a life that is honest, do not lie to yourself and you will not lie to others. Do not try to rationalize or runaway, fear nothing, it’s a control mechanism that others may use to exploit you through. Grow in knowledge to empower yourself and share that knowledge to empower others, through mercy. Do not worry if they mock you or laugh at you, you know the truth, the idea is not to get everyone, it’s to get those who will listen, because in time everyone will listen and understand.

5. Solution & Conclusion

It is clear now what we must do, we are aware and we are inspired by our righteous indignation. We know what we must do and we must create a new world, as Thomas Paine once said, "We have it in our power to begin the world over again." That is what we must do, in our time. The fact of the matter is that it is the humble beginnings that we stand for, and live for. We are entering a new age for humanity. We live and stand for the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all! Therefore, we must know what we stand for in particular in order to undo this corrupted society and begin the world over again. This is the culmination of what we live for and fight for, nothing else matters anymore and in time we will all have nothing to lose. That is the only benefit to oppression, as soon as the oppressor has taken everything from us than we have nothing to lose so that we may be able to overcome said oppression.

What We Stand For

What we stand for, is not for the group to decide it is for each and every one of us as individuals to decide. We stand and fight for the things we are against. We cannot get rid of them but we can become aware of them. The illusion of being free even though you are a slave is shattered only upon awareness of it, which is what we stand for awareness. We are not here to remove problems but rather

to become aware of them and overcome them so that we as individuals and a society may progress further. We stand for life, liberty and happiness and we should do that in every act and thought we take.

What We Must Stop Doing

End the Distractions

So we need to be able than to find a balance between Outer Beauty and for a lack of better words “inner spirit” or our own life force. My intent is not to mystify such words but rather to express the words in a way that represents our inner lives which have been neglected in our society. We need to find balance between our animalistic and impulsive nature which our society has emphasized through sexual prowess with that of our more higher faculties of learning, merging the intuitive and creative side of our minds with the logical and detailed side of our minds in order to uplift our lives for a more fulfilling and aware lifestyle. Finally, we must be able to accept that even though we take part in the trivial we still must be reminded from time to time that the trivial is just that, it is unimportant in regards to the defense of life, liberty, and happiness we should be able to end trivial pursuits for the more profound pursuit’s should the need arise.

Show What Truth Is To the Illusion

The only way to combat against illusions is to find the reality in our own lives. It takes the introspective mind to discover that which will make you free and lead to the development of a better world. Do not feel like as if you need to be the humanitarian and demand that we care more about the group than about ourselves because at the root level we care about ourselves. The difference is how you care about yourself and others. That old saying about treating those the way you want to be treated goes a long way with this concept. Would you like to be forced to give up your freedom and dignity for the sake of some illusive greater good? I do not think so, so the collectivist mindset is wrong by its own discretion. Nonetheless, find the truth in your life because the truth will empower you and that is something that all individuals would want.

Breakdown the Court of Special Interests


The next things we need to do are breakdown the special interests especially when it comes to our education, medicine and remove our overall dependency. It has been argued that our education is failing. Part of the reason is that children are dumb down so that their true individual potential is not realized. We say we want equality in the classroom so that all children may succeed but the government hears the words “lower standards for children to pass.” It’s a collectivist scheme; equality really means uniformity to the state. Therefore, we need to address education and equality from the individualist perspective.

The Government should No Longer be a Monopoly on the education of our children. As monopolies no longer have any concern for quality rather they care about quantity, how many kids they can condition and brainwash to believe whatever the “entity” tells them is true. We should also put the teacher union back in its place, in order to protect the welfare of all teachers but have the teacher’s union work in unison with market forces to enhance performance and quality of education. After all is it right for one teacher who works hard to be equal to a teacher who does nothing but collect the benefits? If the idea I described was allowed, than the teachers would be the best and the students would reap the benefits of their education.

We should allow the Market to provide education this helps in two ways. First of all it allows for competition in order to allow for low costs at the best quality. Second of all only those schools with the best quality and the lowest costs will survive and grow across the country. Now the best qualities of schools offer the maximum variety of classes as well. Now I am a person who does believe in universal education, however, I am not a socialist despite thinking that education should be available to everyone what I mean to say is that the education should not be based on half-truths and should not be dictated by a monopolistic group.

The Focus should be on challenging and teaching skills; skills that promote the development of independence, critical thinking, and self-knowledge. Why these particular skills? It allows people choice and alternatives. The schools that are run by the market (not corporations) should teach these American values so that way people can truly be free and live a life of healthy individual growth. That’s what the desire for profit would be motivated by; the mantra of business led education is “we teach you the best ways that lead to the development of true individuality, for a reasonable price.”

Now does this mean we drop such things as the four core major subjects? No! However the focus on science should be based more so on mathematics and English should be based on literacy and the development of critical thinking skills. As for history classes they would be based on how government works and how the people can participate in government. Now for a time parents are free

to choose what classes their child may take so as to maximize the education in the child but not interfering with the values the parents would want to instill in them, perhaps the education could be made compatible with the values the parents want to instill. Now despite this, you should not have to be forced to go to school and children could be taught by their parents. Many people feel that parents don’t have the time or perhaps the money to teach all these variety of subjects. What would one do then? The answer is rather simple, the parents should be provided tax breaks or some other form of incentive for teaching their children only one subject. That subject would allow the child to maximize their own education and experience in a way that emulates the development of independence, critical thinking, and self-knowledge. This subject or skill is called being an autodidact or someone who has the skills necessary to educate themselves.


As for the medicine and drugging of than American Populace we need to learn to step back and understand the multi-billion dollar pharmaceutical industry survives based on our sense of vulnerability and constant desire for change. It is our job as individuals to be able to gain insight into how you feel about yourself and why. You'll be less likely to take chances ingesting pills and playing with the inner balance of your body. Imagine how much more fulfilling your life would be if you were to let go of insecurities and accepted yourself for whom you are? Greater equilibrium, happiness and new health choices are more likely to follow. Diet pills wouldn't even come into your mind as an option.

We need the return of medicine that is holistic and like my education suggestion it should be provided by the market. The pharmaceutical industry has grown fat and powerful because all forms of medical care are dictated by the pharmaceutical-industrial-congressional complex. This monopoly is what is destroying this country as well and we need to confront that and uproot it if we are to allow true medicine both in research and service to excel.

Many people feel that if someone discovered a cure for cancer the world would be a better place and that everyone would want it. This is true with the exception of the pharmaceutical companies themselves. If one were to think deeply about why they wouldn’t want a cure it is rather simple… It’s not going to help profits and companies would lose money because providing for treatment options brings in more money than a cure would ever do. Treatment you need to re-purchase again and again but a cure you would need only one time, from a greedy corporation point-of-view this is not very wise business practice.

This brings me back to my point businesses that provide the necessities (health, utilities, education, housing, food, clothing, transportation and information) should not be focused on profit so much as focused on the quality of their product. I say this because, these are necessities these things are needed to allow our society to run freely, optimally and openly. When people are focused on making profit off of the things people want more so than the things people need than that would be fair

business practice. Now this is only a suggestion, this suggestion would not be forced upon the people by government rather an organization or some association could be setup in which businesses would agree to such a suggestion and that way customers will shop at these necessity providing businesses allowing those businesses to grow and prosper (but because of the agreement to said suggestion) that larger part of profits raked in during the growth would go to the improvement in the quality of their product.

We need to get off the anti-depressants and embrace realities difficulties by understanding that life is about living, and living means experiencing the good and the bad. We can no longer afford living a life that isn’t real. We must be willing to embrace our vulnerabilities. Not run away from them with drugs all the time. This is the case; I made it clear that anti-depressants are symbolic for our desire to live a life detached from reality. Therefore, we need to get back in touch with reality and that means ending our over-indulgences in the superficial extravagancies.

As for the stimulants designed to bring those minds who refuse to submit to the over- stimulation of society their thinking and logic should be applied insofar as it is concerned with making sure that we to are not manipulated, believe everything we hear and do everything we see. We need the ability to disconnect and become unfocused from all these intricate details that society forces us to submit to all the time. Likewise, when a psychologist or some psychiatric doctor tells you that you are “depressed”, “aggressive”, or “insane” (not normal by definition to societal norms and standards) than do not be bothered by such an accusation embrace it. Keep in mind that these doctors are trained to make sure that you are re-conformed back to the very society that only has held you down. So when someone says you’re depressed because you know the truth to any situation and should try and be happier, do not listen to them. Negotiate and overcome the depression on your own terms not with drugs but with the power of mind which would be trained since childhood to embrace such values as independence, critical thinking and self-knowledge. The same with any other psychological condition, of course if you’re a danger to yourself or others I would suggest that one seek help.


We need to get off the dependency of government welfare as you know my previous writings I have attacked the welfare state pretty heavily. It is a danger to a free and open society, the government becoming the socialist entity that it is seeks to undermine individual liberty and freedom by allowing it to become the owner for the means of production and telling businesses what they can and cannot do. It allows for collectivism in which point allows for the subordination of the individual for the sake of the group. This will be (as it always has been) done under the guise of taking care of you. Whether it is by “providing jobs” or “for your own protection” we will relegate our own responsibility for the sake of conveniences, which makes no sense, would you feel more confident if you could defend your own life or if someone else defended you, even if it was from yourself? Thus expenses and taxes could be curbed if government got out of the way and was run by individuals who believe in a constitutional republic or even minarchism.

We need to get over our dependency of big corporations which work hand in hand with government, which allows for many regulations to occur. Think about this regulations only serve those who are powerful and rich enough to stay above the standards. Now I believe in the general welfare of the consumer to buy and sell products (as well as the employees who provide and make them). These Products should be made with highest priority set to safety and sustainability but corporations will only raise standards to the point where it would essentially disallow free entry into the market which any small or starting business would have to contend with not only businesses but government as well. So by restoring corporations back to their original position in which they will only be allowed to exist for a determined duration of time we can be a little bit safer in that corporations will only come into existence for big projects, such as building infrastructure or superstructures but personally corporations should be limited in their existence, and purposes so as to no longer pose a threat to our society and the free market system.

We need to get off the dependency of getting our news from limited sources. For the most part Americans get their news from the television or newspapers and magazines. Now this in and of itself is okay (so as long as the paper is recycled, of course) but more Americans are getting their news and information from the Internet as well. Why should I just be forced to be content with some corporate viewpoint? I want the full news, completely objective and with little to no interference from government and business. Internet journalism is supported by its viewers through donations and subscribers through some type of monthly or yearly payment with subscriber benefits as well. Now earlier I made a point that certain businesses should be founded not with profit in mind so much as but rather the quality of their product, I could not stress the importance especially when it comes to the business of providing information. I would also suggest that any media that are based on sensationalism notify their viewer accordingly so as to make sure that the viewer knows that what they are receiving is yellow journalism and not true journalist research. Again, there would be an organization or an association that would be set up designed to keep the honest and objective journalist valued and respected as they should be.

We need to become more self-sufficient in every sense of the word and that means the individual must be allowed to learn, develop and grow. This is addressed frequently throughout all of my writings. I am of the strongest understanding that the only greater good is maintained when the individual is able to discover and develop themselves in a way that will allow them to realize their potentials. Such belief should be for all not for some, I want true equality in its availability but I do not want uniformity from some monopolistic group to provide for such an opportunity because the opportunity would than never be realized.

With Freedom Comes Possibilities Something the Elite Will Never Have

Freedom opens the doors to possibilities and novelty, in which all individuals have the capacity to offer a new idea to the improvement of the free and open society. The Elite and Special Interests seek

to only oppress and with such oppression possibilities and novelty turn into stagnation and repetition, truly a lifeless society.

We will always Need new ways to defend liberty, some of the ideas I have proposed are only some ways to help in the protection of that liberty, as time goes on evil adapts to the purity of a free and open society and like the influenza virus a new strain of evil is able to attack liberty. The best way to maintain and defend liberty is prevention, the prevention I speak of is not attacking someone before they attack us (whether intellectually or physically) but rather a preventative measure designed as a buffer to prevent the rampant corruption we see now. I am of strong conviction that the former preventative action is actually paranoia which starts when you are always afraid and we must not be a slave to fear if we are to be free people who embrace the idea of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

So, in conclusion to all sections of my writing I know freedom is viable and it is powerful. I know that the individual must be valued and the individual’s liberty be defended. I know that if we are to survive as a free and open society we can no longer afford such unenlightened selfishness but rather we must as a society uplift our more animalistic selfishness for a more humane and enlightened selfishness. We can have cooperation by not cooperating with government when it becomes too powerful. We can have cooperation by not cooperating with businesses who become to exploitative and guide people down paths that lead to their enslavement. Instead of just putting the burden on government to take care of the elderly, why not use some enlighten selfishness and set up an organization to help in the care of the elderly. My point is, we need to stop our selfishness whenever we give up (because we are being inconvenienced) so that the state may take up the responsibility. That is the danger, if we have learned nothing that much I hope we learned

We are a strong, resilient and free peoples let us end the fear regardless of the form it comes in and let us embrace love and life so that we may repel ignorance from our land once and for all. This New World Order for the People is possible and worth fighting for, it is designed to embrace the principles of our founders. The beginnings are always the best times for anyone (country or individual), and we have it in our ability to begin the world over again, to reset the clock but keep the wisdom and lessons we have learned. Wouldn’t be a shame if such a marvelous opportunity to overcome the corruption be missed because we were too fearful to stand up?

Section Five:

The Lunchroom Analogy



The Lunchroom Analogy was made up when I was debating a socialist who will not listen to reason, in this analogy I tried to explain to him how I saw socialism as opposed to how I saw the lunchroom that would be ruled by no one or by a bully who was limited in what he could do. I go by the definition of what the state/government is which is seen as the only legitimate entity capable of initiating force. Its legitimacy is either agreed upon by those ruled or through a brutal and oppressive police state. The lunchroom is clearly representative of the nation itself. This analogy was been made up in order to show and defend the idea of “Negative Liberty” in which one is free to be from oppression by the state. In negative liberty, one is seen as a sovereign individual who must have their individual liberty respected. It is from this position I argue the Lunchroom Analogy. You may see also that I also argue from more of a market anarchist position, but in truth if people feel like they needed a government, than I would favor one that is small/de-centralized and limited by the law.

In this analogy I will be using 4 different types of lunchrooms, each used to represent a different kind of (non)rulership. The first is most oppressive, the socialist police state, in which the bully uses force and coercion to make people accept him and give him what he wants. The second is also oppressive but it is sugar coated with a democratic sound of majority rule, this is the Democratic Socialist state in which, the majority people have been taught to accept the bully as the overlord. Of course because this is a socialist state, things are re-distributed and the slightest wrong doing is severally punished. The much more tolerable is the Liberal Democracy of limited government, which the Bully is intimidated by the people to behave and follow certain guidelines. The final is the Anarchic lunchroom, in which bullies are discouraged because all understand that bullies are not to be tolerated in any way whatsoever in order to maximize freedom.

So who represents who in this analogy and what will we examine through this analogy? Well to start let us see who alludes to whom. The first are the kids in the lunchroom, the regular kids are your average adult people in any given society. Some are richer and some poorer than others, some are of different ethnic background and a variety of preferences, whatever the case maybe these kids just want to eat their food in peace. The Lunchroom Bully is the government/state, he exercises his will through force and coercion and always needs to take food from others because he cannot make his own food or own his own food. His gang is the police and law enforcement agencies, they do the Bullies bidding, and they are fed by the bully and taught by the bully. It should be obvious now, that instead of money or wealth, or more formally called capital, the payment in the lunchroom is food. Food is money in the lunchroom, and as we know money is the lifeblood of an economy and society. There will be 10 tables in the lunchroom which will be examples of districts in the nation, whether they are called states or provinces depends largely upon which form of lunchroom I will use.


(Day #1) The Police State-Socialist Lunchroom Allegory

Okay so let us begin than with the Police State-Socialist Allegory, it is obvious by the definition of this that the bully has power not necessarily through majority support, in fact a minority (the ruling class) could be supporting him with food but nonetheless this lunchroom is blatantly oppressive. The child in the lunchroom is coerced and threatened with violence by the bully’s gang if he does not hand over a large portion of his food. The food is used by the bully to feed his gang.

In a police state the greater majority of food is denied to the average child and is placed in the hands of those who defend the bully, this being his gang. His gang is large, to attack/defend himself from other lunchrooms or a possible uprising in his own lunchroom. It is clear the bully is paranoid and insecure of his ability to manage the lunchroom so he hires many thugs to enforce his will; he simply pays them food, the food of those they are oppressing.

The tables in the lunchroom are not seen as sovereign but as sources of oppression from the bullies own table. Crime is either rampant, due to scarcity of food among the kids to just fill themselves even half way or crime is unheard of because the bully simply no longer tolerates “the weak” children and makes them leave his lunchroom or use fear as a weapon to threaten their complaining about needing more food to survive.

The illustration is clear to all who have witnessed or read about police states, all of which follow some form of collectivism and all of which have been based on some socialist principle. The government uses fear and violence as its main weapon; it is unabashed and arrogant showing its blatant abuse of human rights and dignity. It does not try to win its approval it forces its approval. Those who labor in this system are exploited and oppressed to the utmost it can be done and the greater sum of their labor is lost to the hands of the state.

The question here is “Who are you really working for, the state or yourself?” The police force is most likely a paramilitary police force and is well equipped and because they see themselves as well fed compared to everyone else they are grateful to state and will defend accordingly to keep with this status-quo but just scared enough of the state itself to not dare challenge its authority. There are no states only zones of control for the one state to exploit. The Federal authority is seen as overlord to each zone as opposed to the zones being the ultimate authority of the Federal Authority. This state is a nightmare, and is overt in its oppression.

III. (Day #2) The Social-Democratic Lunchroom

Now on this day we are going to look at the Social-Democratic Lunchroom Allegory. Here, the bully is supported by the majority because the majority has been trained to feel that without the bully the lunchroom would be a very despotic and exploiting place. However here is the first dangerous perception put on the majority, that they have been trained to accept the bully’s authority believing that they can change him if they wanted to, when in fact any real change lies in the mocked minority.

However, the socialist side of the argument shows us that all food is to be taken and re- distributed according to the least common denominator of the people. But one must ask the question as to, who will be responsible for gathering the food of everyone in the lunchroom? Why the bully’s gang of course! This takes time and energy to do and energy is only replenished by the food they get, since they cannot make any of their own. So from the get go, food is lost through taking everyone else’s food to be brought back to the Bullies table for the work necessary to redistribute the food. However, during the re-distribution process back at the bully’s table it takes more time and energy to re-organize the food according to the needs of the lunchroom (or what the bully decides is appropriate), so even more food is lost in order to counter-balance the time and energy expended by the Bully and His gang.

Finally comes the part where all that is redistributed is brought back to the table through the bully’s gang, it is pretty clear and apparent, this to takes time and energy, so on the way over to each table some more food is taken out before what little is left is also cut up amongst the people at the table, which is scraps compared to how things were before the whole redistributing process even began.

The worst part of this is that the people have been trained to believe that this is what the majority of everyone wants, oh sure this is a democratic society and perhaps there is freedom to criticize but how much does this matter if you are part of the public that disagrees with what is going on and yet is still being forced to hand over part of your property for “what most people want”? That is oppressing the minority, is this true freedom? Hardly this would be the case, if people are not able to voluntarily hand over their possessions, but are being coerced, deceived or abused to do so.

But let us take this just a bit further now, clearly the point to socialism is a war on “the rich” so in the lunchroom analogy it is a war on who has too much food. So the question must be asked of us, who is deciding who has too much food? In this analogy the person deciding this is the bully and the majority accepts the bully’s decision believing that he is the voice of the people, being that this a Democratic Socialist lunchroom. However, I can assure you that this is a contradiction, the majority of people who work for their food, would never agree to handing over more than they can tolerate to give, but in this society you are forced to because the idea is to take from those who have “too much” and give back on the basis of a least common denominator.

So if the poorest kid in the lunchroom has only 2 units of food and the average is 5 units and the richest has 8 units, than the average man is going to have taken 3 units of food and the richest is going to have taken 6 units to be equal to the poorest man, totaling 9 units of food taken by the bully and his gang, the bully will redistribute this on the basis of a least common denominator making 5 for the poor, 5 for the average and 5 for the rich man. However, this will never work, not just because of the corruption of a big government but also because of the cost of re-distributing. Assume than that 1 unit of food is lost in each part of the “taking – dividing – returning” process, that is 3 units of food lost, making those rich who have not tied themselves to the state go down to 2 units, the average man go down to 2 units and the poor man being unaffected. Let us make this even more interesting let’s also assume that a half of a unit of food is also lost to the corruption of a big government that means even less for all but, especially for the poorer man than before the

whole process began! Where is the liberation of the poor if they are left unaffected or slightly worst/better off by a system of government that is supposedly supposed to help them the most?

This illustration is clear the majority is conditioned to believe that the government is on their side. When in fact it is the other way around, the majority are on the states side who will inevitably work against the common man’s well-being. The Bully and his gang actually have double barrier of protection, both his gang which as in the Police State allegory is large to protect the state and “the public’s food” as well as the majority of people who have been trained to support his gang. The tables in the lunchroom are the same as the police state analogy but are called provinces or re-distribution districts.

The wealth of the nation is greatly controlled by the state under the guise of helping everyone using money as weapon against those who disagree is the ultimate form of economic terrorism and a form government violence but certainly not keeping order. The minority which is hated by the majority is oppressed by the state, these people may be recognized for having rights in this so-called democratic lunchroom but they are never given power or the voice to really be heard, in the event the voice is heard it is mocked and ridiculed by the political correctness of media and academia which are both centered around the states survival as well as the status quo of the establishment. None of this really goes to helping those at the bottom, the common man, but it all goes to those at the top, the elite, those who said to God after the creation of the Universe “Thanks we will take it from here!”

IV. (Day #3) The Liberal-Democratic Lunchroom (Aka Limited Government)

Today we will look at the liberal-democratic lunchroom. This is above all the trickiest of the lunchroom bullies but let us begin the analogy. The Bully and his gang are watched very carefully by all in the lunchroom, all are able to defend themselves and unite in the event that the bully becomes too oppressive, in their lives. This oppressiveness is shown by the coercive acts by the bully’s gang or by higher and more food being taken from them for whatever the democratic majority believes is right.

In this situation it is believed that the bully derives his power from everyone in the lunchroom and they would be right, after all a bully is only powerful if you submit to it in fear or willingly. Thus the bully can only derive his respect and power from those in his lunchroom. Because of this, each table is not seen as a province or extension of the bully and his gang but rather that which gives the bully and his gang power.

If the people at a certain table are not happy with the bully they can either talk to it or they can leave from the other tables in the lunchroom. However the bully may not like this, recall that the bully and his gang never bring in food of their own, they rely on everyone else to give it to them. In the event that a table leaves and encourages other tables to do so that means less food for the bully and his gang. If he should attempt to reclaim the tables that left him by going to war he would not only need to make sure they can never leave again but also make the tables subservient to him, also the bully and his gang would need to muscle and silence any talks of leaving the bully from the tables that are too afraid or weak to leave the bully’s own protection. Clearly the risk runs very high here for the bully and his gang to overpower the tables that empowered him in the first place, assuming that the kids in the lunchroom

either stood up to the bully or failed to stand up to him. If this risk is realized, it will only be a matter of time before the bully ends up like the lunchrooms I had previously described.

The Bully also will be limited by the rules imposed upon him through those who agree to give him a certain amount of power to exercise authority to keep the peace and protect each child’s rights in the lunchroom. The bully and his gang who are limited in power will be very limited in the food they need to take from others, instead of what they want to take from everyone. In the event the bully breaks the law he will need to be replaced as well. Because, there is more liberty in the lunchroom people will work out most of their problems on their own and will not require the bullies own set of violently enforced demands.

The power base in the liberal-democratic lunchroom is held in the hands of the people at the bottom, not at the top. While political parties often destroy this lunchroom, if there is a group who want to enrich the bullies power than it is them who must be watched out for; for they will take the law and warp it, they will empower the bully to use his gang more often and they will take the peace that it was created for and warp it to its own definition of peace. A political party in this lunchroom can create a majority and minority debate which will only lead to division. One of these political forces will be created to keep the bully in his current form while the other to make it into a very large abomination, that will in time act like the previous lunchroom’s describe. In the end this lunchroom bully, is one who cannot get away easily with his actions and think that he will not be unanswerable to the people who he may work against despite getting his power from them.

V. (Day #4) The Anarchic Lunchroom

This is the final lunchroom variation of the lunchroom, but unlike the other lunchrooms were it was in the bully’s jurisdiction to rule and apply his will whether through democratic, legal, or oppressive means, this lunchroom no longer has a bully and the lunchroom itself is just a place, any large given area. The Bully and his gang no longer exist here, the entire lunchroom is based around voluntary compliance, and the tables are just certain areas in any given larger area. Whether the tables are small states or just the population density of any given area does not matter, what matters is that because these locations are small and de-centralized, they are owned and under the direct control of the kids who do not want to live in fear of a bully and his gang, because of this there is a direct and intimate understanding of the principle of libertarianism as well as voluntarism.

The anarchic lunchroom is not only the most moral lunchroom but it is also the most peaceful one as well. If a bully does attempt to grab power over all or some of the tables in the lunchroom, these people unite to stop his rise to power, understanding that his very presence will violate the social, economic and moral premises of libertarianism (to do what you want to do; so as long as you do not violate the will others to do so) and voluntarism (that a moral person is one who bases his acts on voluntary compliance not violence to obtain his ends). The closer you get to an anarchic society the closer you get to the focus of the grassroots and the actual people.

Of course it is my belief that those in the democratic socialist lunchroom, those who want food re- distributed would not want to this lunchroom to ever come about because it complete dismisses any

moral argument for the states own existence. Consider the re-distribution idea I brought up in my democratic socialist lunchroom, food is not only taken away from each child in the lunchroom by the will of the bully through the actions of the bully’s gang, but food is also lost by the time and energy the bully and his gang need to take, divide, and return, let us also not forget about the inherent corruption in an all-powerful bully. The anarchic lunchroom dares to be so bold and say “Why Bother doing this, how about relying on the good will and kindness of your fellow lunchroom mate to share a part of his food with someone who has less?”

The fact is that, the statist would not approve of this because; it is a solution to the state which will lead to its own demise and the state needs to assume that all people are inherently bad and selfish, to gain more power, it establishes a beachhead by conditioning the children in the lunchroom to believe that they are bad (or need to be bad) and that they need the state to actually be good. When in fact this is propaganda, the fact is people have good intentions it is just how they manifest these intentions that are messed up at times, this propaganda serves for the state to continue to exist and be justified in exercising violence. The irony to this is of course, the very people who have been conditioned to believe they are bad will end up in the bully’s gang one day, and thus the bully’s gang will become full of people who think they are bad and will fall to corruption more easily.

IF you built a society or had everyone take up the moral understanding that voluntary agreement is the basis to a free and open society, THAN the bully and his gang, which is based on the use of force, ceases to exist. The common child in the lunchroom would be more than willing to agree to such an agreement because, he is in control of himself and not forced by an outside force but acts on his own to any particular manner. The idea that a free and open society looks upon the poor in such a way that no one will help them is entirely a lie, freedom brings with it peace, tolerance and good will towards others. Oppression brings with it fear, violence and intolerance rooted both in ignorance and fear.

The allusions are clear than; the only people who make the argument for the existence of a state are those who like oppression and the use of force to get things done for the ruling class. A “good state” if people still are unconvinced of what I am talking about, is one that stays out of the affairs of those it rules and takes very little from those it rules, employing the least amount of force on all. A “good state” must be bound by strict interpretation of the law and be kept in the hands of the grassroots and most certainly not in the hands of some intellectual and economic elite. Therefore, a “Good State” is not a compassionate state that feels compelled to pick up after, bail out, or make the decisions for those who rule it. In the event that government does do so, it ceases to be a good government and begins to act bad even if it is being good.

To me I always viewed “compassionate government” as some sado-masochistic affair, a contradiction in terms. How can something that is by its very nature violent, forceful and in effect oppressive EVER show compassion and love for those who rule it? The answer is it cannot show compassion and love through its oppressive behavior but rather restrain its oppressive behavior to do show its compassion. In fact, the best state is one that can also have people be taught how to live without it in a manner that restrain its oppressive behavior to do show its compassion.



The answer is clear; those who want freedom are those who come closer to an anarchic society, while those who want the state to do all are closer to the socialist / collectivist system. This must be the new political paradigm, where politics and economics is not measured on “Pro-Life/Pro-Choice” basis and other things of that sort because one can be a “pro-lifer” and favor big government, I would suggest a new political spectrum based on the size of government, this must be called “The Liberty Spectrum” a system that measures liberty by the lack/size of the state, that uses the definitions I used in the introduction at the onset of my writing the analogies.

When this happens those who wish to build a moral society, will always be on the side of the liberty spectrum that is closer to lack of government, while those who wish to build an immoral society or a society that does not care about the plight of the common man will be more on the side of absolute/ big government. The lack of government side of the liberty spectrum will favor “negative liberty” (the right to be free from oppression) and those who are on the side of big government will favor “positive liberty” (the right to have something, regardless who one has to walk over to get it).

Before I end I just wish to share an obvious statement that, all bullies are insecure of themselves because they do not have power except the power others give it by accepting or submitting to their intimidation and violence. Therefore, to truly deny the extent of its oppression one must limit its range and application of violence or get rid of the bully altogether and build a society around the moral premise of respecting the individual rights of all and their property.

Section Six:

Government Is A Business

4. Introduction

I want to approach government as it is for what it is. Government is a business, and if at first you cannot perceive how, this essay will show how government is a business. I have taken the time to go over crucial understandings as to how one can see government being a business, but I can assure you it is the least respectable of all businesses, that’s right government is not something to be glorified as our saviors like Hollywood shows us in the media but rather it is meant to be despised and resisted every time it seeks more. The first thing I want to go over is the essence of how government appears as a business, the focus being its income and its products and services. After this I want to speak of crime and the government, and how hypocritical it seems that we have criminals punishing criminals. After this I want to expand on the inherent corruption of this business that we call government. Finally after this I wish to speak about our alternatives that we can take to greatly reduce the influence of this violent business we call government and conclude my thoughts.

5. Business Practices of Government

Let us examine the apparent business of government. On the outside one could say it has some connection to the same idea of the factors of production needed to make a business run. Government like business has Land (or more general property), People, Products and Money to make the business of government run. The Land is better known as public property, The People are better known as the Bureaucrats and Politicians these people have control over the various departments of the government there are also those being ruled over and they can be called the consumer as they are part of this factor of production as well, The Products are better known as public works and services. Finally the money that finances the maintenance of the above factors of production is called taxation, which comes in a wide variety of forms. However, there are two points I want to focus on that makes government much less respectable than business: The first is the factor of production called money and the second is the products and services themselves. I will than conclude with the remaining factors of production in its relation to government.

The first factor of production that is unique about government is its source of (or lack thereof) Income which is better known as Taxation. However this form of income is different than a business’s form of income, because unlike business revenues, government revenue is an Involuntary Transaction, it is taken from everyone under the name of everyone. Government is the taker, you are the involuntary giver, the one who is bonded in a contract backed up with government violence should you violate the contract you did not even sign with the government in the first place. One need not pay their taxes to find out how far the extent of such government violence will go to force you to pay your dues or your part of the agreement you did not agree to!

One interesting concept about war is the fact that as time goes on and no victory is really made war gets unpopular, many people today are against the many wars our American government takes part in today, yet these same people are forced to finance it through the violence and intimidation of Government. If this business called government were truly an agreement based on voluntary contract as we are told (I.e. The Social Contract), than those who are against such a war could stop paying their taxes that go to financing the wars we fight, right? Wrong, because, government uses force to get what it wants out of those it rules and subjects everyone to finance a war they may see as unpopular or ill-defined and thus not support the war effort. In case you are wondering, war is not good for the economy; it is the health of the State, as the State grows the economy shrinks. Nonetheless I digress; the same can go with various other ideas in the domestic realm such as the War on Drugs, Poverty… etc.

Another interesting point to make does not even need to include foreign policy, but rather domestic programs. Let me pick on my “favorite” domestic program, that being Education. For the most part the business called government, has tied education pretty close to itself these days, however, let us look at one glaring negative result of near government monopoly of education, that negativity being the decline in the literacy rate of our nation and the overall decline in our standards of education, as we watch the government lower the standard essentially to the least common denominator. Granted there are many factors present but all these factors have one thing in common, they always involve the government! The biggest argument we hear today from those who want to expand government influence in education is, that government needs more money to give to the schools. Yet, we have heard and heeded this warning for decades now, throwing more money at government for education and oddly enough we simultaneously see a decline in education. This product is not really allowed to compete, and the growing influence of a violent monopoly called government has allowed the quality to go downhill, this is a good time than to focus on the second factor of production, the actual product or service itself.

So now you know that when there is no or little Competition there is a decline in quality. Public works and services are nationalized departments of the violent monopoly called government. In our American form of government the constitution allows for government to have domestic control over, interstate highways and commerce, the mail, and courts. Let us look at the roads and the mail. Here is leverage for that violent monopoly called government. The Mail belongs to the monopoly that has no or little competition (FedEx and UPS) over what it decrees through its (policies) laws, and thus the quality of said service is lower than if the mail was allowed to be run by the free market businesses (because, their survival depends on the customers approval, which is gained by said quality of the product or service), I am sure at some point you or someone you know has “lost something in the mail” that this public service was responsible for. Ultimately, the quality is lowered because the government knows that there will be no free market mailing service to compete against because it is illegal too, so they will never have to worry about going out of business either. Why does this violent monopoly called government, need control over the mail anyway? Well to answer that, one could ask the same question, why does government need control over the roads? After all there are no privately owned roads, yet because there are no privately owned roads the

government has shown that it can force people off their land directly or indirectly in the name of any (policy) decree it wishes through the use particularly of Eminent Domain, one need to look only at the international highway that is still being built to connect Canada with Mexico and how farmers and small town residence alike are being hurt by such violence that this monopoly on roads has incited. One needs to only look now and see the various departments government has created to interfere in the private sector affairs.

Before I conclude, there was once a time in human history when there was competition between violent monopolies, that was the age of national determinism. However even so this age of competition between violent monopolies was also filled with violence as well, but now you know that the competition of violent monopolies is called War. War and welfare is the health of the violent monopoly, violence thrives in violence and grows more powerful, and why else do you think the founders of our nation feared standing armies in times of peace? The economy is made dependent in times of war upon the planning of that violent monopoly called government and this is why even during times right after war, these planners speak of the benefits of a peace time planning, it is an addiction of the state to plan or, better yet to control, the longer it plans the more it wants to do it, even when there is no need to do it. Look at the welfare state as well, that violent monopoly is simply setting the stage for division in people that should not be divided, it does this by trying to tie large groups of the citizenry to the continued existence of that violent monopoly called the government (e.g. social security for the elder population; financial aid for the college bound) and in the process the welfare warfare state is justified in getting larger and larger incrementally under the guise of helping everyone.

By now it should be known how people and land play into this as well. The people who work for and control the violent monopoly called government are the politicians and bureaucrats while the people who power and fuel the monopoly are called the citizenry, those being ruled by it (how exploiting can you get?). The rulers arbitrarily decide how much money to take from the citizenry and decide how much they will pay themselves as well. Those ruled can replace these rulers if they are not doing their proper job of representing those who elected them, assuming this violent monopoly is moderated with many rules to control that violent monopoly called government. However, I feel that the nature of the state is best showed not in highly regulated government but in a completely arbitrary and totalitarian one, because as history has shown us all states start out small and controlled and as time passes by they grow in there oppressive ways, like a child who is destined to be a tyrant, this is just how the lifespan of government has always played out since the agricultural revolution.

Look at the other issue concerning land, I have shown you that through a complete violent and monopolistic control over more products and services is only going to equal more property for the state and in effect more wealth as well (E.g. the lie that more money to government is a better education, or we need to nationalize X industry). While simultaneously taking away from the private sector the various opportunities to make not only better quality products at a lower price but also more wealth and employment to the private sector too. I have also shown you that the private businesses and residence also suffer whether directly or indirectly because of government’s

arbitrary control over roads. Now you may know the answer by now to the questions asked earlier as to why government wants a monopoly over roads and the mail, government wants control over two very important aspects of human behavior: communication and transportation or movement. Our government has shown us perfectly that although for the most part in the beginning we interpreted our laws literally, as time went on government has interpreted our laws loosely to justify the incremental expansion of that violent monopoly called government. So now, can I suggest that perhaps as the true nature of the state comes into view, the government will try to control all communication and movement? Does it seem so impossible with government attacks on freedom of expression (a form of communication) and conscience? Remember, the true nature of the state is revealed in governments that are arbitrary and totalitarian and history has shown us that this is the path all governments go as time goes on, even the small and controlled ones should not the populace rise up and either alter or abolish that violent monopoly called government, but I will speak of the lack of understanding that is exhibited in a revolution toward the end of this essay.

6. Crime: Organized or Not and Government

I want to turn my attention now, to crime and government. In particular I want to turn my attention first to victimless crimes that often carry the phrase “black market” around with them. But I also want to look at the situation, with even criminals that have victims, in particular the common thief whether we call them a mugger or burglary. After reading the above section you might be able to guess where I am going with this, and your right I am going to be talking about the similarities between a common criminal and the government. I can assure you even the criminal (organized crime or not) is one or two notch above government on the respectability scale than government is or ever will be. This may seem hard to prove, but with an open and reasonable mind this should not be too hard to accept.

First, let us go over the more respectable Black Market business operation. What is the black market? The black market, from a conditioned point of view, carries low moral associations, it sounds evil and corrupt. The black market, from a more objective point of view, can better be defined as the marketplace that the violent monopoly called the government has deemed closed off to the public. Let us use the most common black market product that is forbidden to the public, marijuana or for short weed. As you can see just because this violent monopoly says we cannot have it does not mean that we can still purchase it. On the black market, the value and cost of such “forbidden” products is high. The reason they are high, largely has to do with the fact that these businessmen need to protect themselves from the government and competitors so they need to sell the product at a higher price because of these pressures. Of course the black market businessmen know the idea of supply and demand as well, so they adjust their prices the best they can for that too. The black market is no different than the legal (as defined by the violent monopoly) white market, the only difference is that black market businesses are in the business of selling ‘forbidden’ things. These forbidden items do not contain an inherent badness but rather because the violent monopoly deemed it bad, showcasing the arbitrary nature of the State.

Let us examine Weed a bit further, for those who do their research it is a well-known fact that our government is the largest drug dealer in the world (via its CIA the strong arm of the violent end of the particular monopoly) and yes most certainly in regards to Weed. The violent monopoly has a definite profit motive here and has the resources to pull it off (which is acquired through force by those ruled). The state makes Weed illegal thus creating an illicit and greatly reduced supply, but there is still a large demand for Weed, thus the price skyrockets. The state knowing this decides to both sell the drug while it arrests competition, these arrests are covered up of course as street gangs and organized crime and the solution (like the education problem) is to throw more money at it! So now the state has two forms of revenue, the first is selling that which it outlawed, bringing in massive sums of money because of the high illicit demand and low illicit supply and the second taking by force even more tax money to arrest its competitors, thus being able to set a price that it wants, not a price to compete, just like the violent monopoly that government is. Ironically, it is the white market who suffers this because they too are taxed heavily, taking even more money away from the private sector of the economy.

The black market drug boss who sells Weed for example, uses violence to protect his turf largely because they cannot be a white market businessmen who can compete through more respectable means of advertising and creating a better product, they do not have the benefits of large farmlands to grow Weed (where it is outlawed), they use covert and hidden means to do their business and because of that it cost more money as well. However, this is not his fault that he needs to use violence to stay in business; it’s the governments fault because they are the ones making him a criminal for selling a product that people still want regardless of the decrees of this violent monopoly. This is why the black market businessman is still a few notches higher on the respectability scale than even the government itself. Even looking at this from the point of view of a contract, the drug dealer will sell you his product in exchange for money and that would be a voluntary contract you entered into, yet the violence of government would arrest this seller and buyer for entering into a voluntary contract that really has no victim to it. This is the irony of course, because the only victims here are those who lose their lives to gang and drug wars, but they only lose their lives because the product they sell is made illegal by the state, a criminal is only a criminal after doing wrong to someone and this someone is the called the victim, and the state is making victims because of the decrees it has violently upheld. Of course, do not think that I am calling black market bosses saints, for killing and taking away life by force (save self-defense) is still wrong to me, ‘legal’ or not.

But what about unorganized criminals that burglarize or loot from people their property, surely the government must be better or more respectable than these people are, right (Property of course meaning anything from money to anything not money)? Actually these people are either equal to or just one notch higher than government. I will turn your attention to what I am trying to express from the writings of American Individualist Lysander Spooner who in his writing called “No Treason No. 6: The Constitution of No Authority” stated that,

“The fact is that the government, like a highwayman, says to a man: 'Your money or your life.' And many, if not most, taxes are paid under the compulsion of that threat. The government does

not, indeed, waylay a man in a lonely place, spring upon him from the roadside, and, holding a pistol to his head, proceed to rifle his pockets. But the robbery is none the less a robbery on that account; and it is far more dastardly and shameful. The highwayman takes solely upon himself the responsibility, danger, and crime of his own act. He does not pretend that he has any rightful claim to your money, or that he intends to use it for your own benefit. He does not pretend to be anything but a robber. He has not acquired impudence enough to profess to be merely a 'protector,' and that he takes men's money against their will, merely to enable him to 'protect' those infatuated travelers, who feel perfectly able to protect themselves, or do not appreciate his peculiar system of protection. He is too sensible a man to make such professions as these. Furthermore, having taken your money, he leaves you, as you wish him to do. He does not persist in following you on the road, against your will; assuming to be your rightful 'sovereign,' on account of the 'protection' he affords you. He does not keep 'protecting' you, by commanding you to bow down and serve him; by requiring you to do this, and forbidding you to do that; by robbing you of more money as often as he finds it for his interest or pleasure to do so; and by branding you as a rebel, a traitor, and an enemy to your country, and shooting you down without mercy, if you dispute his authority, or resist his demands. He is too much of a gentleman to be guilty of such impostures, and insults, and villainies as these. In short, he does not, in addition to robbing you, attempt to make you either his dupe or his slave.”

The essential difference here is that one has the law on their side the other does not, one you

can defend yourself from, the other will certainly get you killed and if this arbitrary monopoly has some mercy on you; you will be imprisoned for life, where you will be broken down and treated like

a slave for the rest of your life. I often laugh at the command the highwayman and government say

“Your Money or Your Life” either way, if you refuse he (the highwayman) will kill you and still get the money out of you somehow perhaps he (that violent monopoly called government) will arbitrarily decide to repossess your property instead of having the property handed down to your benefactor.

Most ‘highwaymen’ in the name of not having a witness will more often than not kill the person they stole from. Yet this violent monopoly does this in broad daylight and its “okay.”

7. Government is Corruption

Let it be known than the immense amount of corruption and evil that this violent monopoly called the government has the potential to realize. I want to focus on three issues here, the first is

the evil of the state to tie its well-being to those it rules, I speak of a type of socialism or welfare that

is very common in our so-called “free nation.” After this, I want to talk about the contemporary

issue of “crony capitalism” and how we can keep the benefits of a free market without that market being tied to the state. Finally, I wish to conclude with a humorous “play-on words,” concerning the people in government and who they supposedly represent. It is important to make this argument largely because we can see here the downright evil that can be founded in this violent monopoly that we call government.

So the first issue that I wanted to bring up was the evils of tying people to the state itself. Whether we call it welfare or socialism it does not matter. If the government offers arguments for