Why are those Americans Destroying America?

Posted by Buck68 on July 29th, 2010 filed in Uncategorized

by Buck68™, July 29th 2010
©2010 by Buck68™, all rites re-served. Each use whatsoever requires prior written permission from the author [email: abuck68@yahoo.com]

I think Newt Gingrich’s article for Human Events, “No Mosque at Ground Zero” [see URL ref], is a clear and simple illustration of our American crisis. I will suggest why by using each of his first three paragraphs.
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=38282

1-One of our biggest mistakes in the aftermath of 9/11 was naming our response to the attacks “the war on terror” instead of accurately identifying radical Islamists (and the underlying ideology of radical Islamism) as the target of our campaign. This mistake has led to endless confusion about the nature of the ideological and material threat facing the civilized world and the scale of the response that is appropriate.

Newt’s naming ["radical Islam"] is but 1 of what WE THE PEOPLE are doing DAILY to destroy our Independence and Constitution, and thus our Republic. WE are “naming our responses” to “attacks” … “instead of accurately identifying” and REDEDICATING ourselves to our standards and measures. The first thing “naming our responses” does…is de-legitimize whatever standards we profess and/or represent. EACH time we do NOT ‘walk our talk’ …we destroy what we say we stand for.

Here are some other basic “naming our responses” you hear: fright and outrage, fight back, fair share, profiling, racist, extremist, the best we can, everybody deserves, level playing field.

“Naming our responses” fits where in the problem-solving process? Rationally, a “response” is an action based on conclusions. Now ‘we all know’ conclusions are the last problem-solving step, not the first. Now who always ‘responds’ at ‘the beginning’? Why…all the animals do. Remember “stimulus – response” from school? And don’t our scientists say “reason” is why we humans are…superior? Newt’s simple sentence just puts our natural, instinctive animal responses …into words for us superior beings. Newt is only illustrating how quickly and pandemically our bias and self-interest … bypass humanity for our animal instincts.

Consider what ‘happens naturally’ …instantly …whenever we ‘name’ … ‘it’ as our first response, instead of “accurately identifying” the problem. Newt says it beautifully: we make what we have “named” as “the target of our campaign”.

Is this not what is going on [WIGO] in our country today? Do we not see and hear via media, Tellers labeling he/she/it/them to “target” for Tellers’ “campaigns” of Blame, Fright & Outrage, and Redistributing whatever?

Where else do we see this naming, targeting, and campaigning going on? Well what happens in between and during all the media ‘programs’? Yes…’commericals’. Here’s marketing talk for ‘commericals’: “enticing by imaging to condition into brand loyalty and associatively transfer that loyalty to …whatever you want people to ‘need’ and ‘love’ ”

So what is the source for all this superior human “response naming” – to do what the inferior animals do? Newt’s second paragraph quoted next, suggests a human nature answer.

2-Radical Islamism is more than simply a religious belief. It is a comprehensive political, economic, and religious movement that seeks to impose sharia—Islamic law—upon all aspects of global society.

Why do we “response name” first…instead of problem solve? Because of our “belief”. And what is that “belief” – common to all human beings? Science to the rescue again with the individual term, “self-preservation”. In the group scientific term, “survival of the fittest”. In Newt’s group term, “a comprehensive [the popular term here is 'whatever'] movement that seeks to impose….” What does this “movement” seek to impose? It seeks to impose…whatever it can… on whoever it can…whenever it can. Does any of this natural stuff ’stop’? Nope.

So, what are the signs and consequences of this natural animal response [name it whatever you feel] to impose whatever you feel…on others; and/or join groups that want to impose on others? Newt’s third paragraph provides basic human answers.

3-Many Muslims see sharia as simply a reference point for their personal code of conduct. They recognize the distinction between their personal beliefs and the laws that govern all people of all faiths.

Newt suggests how we “recognize”: we “see”. Omitted here is the rational distinction between ’sight’ [sense] and ‘reality’. Naturally, meanwhile, we instinctively feel whatever we see is real. Synonyms you might have heard: perception is reality, I really feel. Our instincts and perceptions are our natural “reference point”. This is also known as “it happens”. Then Newt provides the Missing LINK to explaining human motivations. What is “the personal code of conduct” for a person who feels “right in his own mind”? The shortest, clearest answer I’ve found is “whatever pleases him at the moment”. The rational description of the Whatever I Feel is Right Code of Conduct, is some combination of my perceptions, my instincts, and whatever “rationalizing” I feel like doing. Rationalizing is the art of perverting whatever into My Thinking is Right by a wonderful array of ironically termed ‘logical fallacies’. What is THEE “distinction” here…the bottom line…the distinction that always counts? Simply – by whatever means…I justify me…over you. AKA… “I’m right…you’re wrong”. AKA “I’m better than you, so you must feel, say, think, and do as I Tell you….”

So, my fellow Americans… human beings… animals: all we are ’seeing’ and ‘feeling’ here today in our “Exceptional” country … is what you can see going on in any barnyard any day any place.

Our problem is that nicer, superior human beings [any of us, at any time] feel justified in imposing as they please on others … because, whenever I feel right…it’s right for my ends to justify my means.

Now our founding fathers… merely tried to declare and establish a means to “experiment” with the freedoms and liberty our Creator always keeps giving EACH person.

And to do that, our founders put two basic rational limits on government. First, they denied ALL powers to government except those EXPRESSLY listed. Second, they enabled each branch and level of government to counter others. The Founders knew no law would restrain superior people right in their own mind – but it might show unaturally ordinary people equitable ways to counter superior imposers as they keep trying to seize more power.

And obviously, the One that IS SUPERIOR, permits this. If our Creator imposed on human beings, like superior humans keep trying to do… then you and I and all of us would be kneeling and worshipping and singing 24/7/365 EXACTLY as God willed. God being…God.

But we’re not, are we? So each one and any combination of us, continually PROVE that our Creator is not an imposer … and … that we, each in our own way … naturally tend to impose.

The net effect, Lincoln [et al] described: “a house divided against itself cannot stand”. Man naturally divides to conquer. God…keeps giving liberty and opportunity to this day…as long as He pleases.

So, what does the unaturally human person do in his moments of ‘coming to his senses’? Well, secularly, we have inherited a Decalration of Independence and Constitution… and millions of imperfect deviations since for all the natural, impositional desires. Here’s a short list of basic ‘what to do’s’:

1-Keep exploring who you are…in Truth. It takes will-power to explore. It takes nothing, to be an animal.
2-On what Authority is ‘honesty’, ‘right’? Upon your answer rests… every human relation and concept.
3-Do you feel whatever you feel? Do you do whatever you can? So then, Who gave you these continuing powers and opportunities; and who tries to limit or remove them? Upon this distinction rests principles of law to “establish justice”.
4- If a human didn’t follow the first rule; if Chosen People kept on breaking 10 Commandments despite many chances; then,
…how will WE THE PEOPLE follow evermore conflicting tens of thousands of laws; reforms that always need… reform; and mountains of transparent whatevering? ”

Yes, I SAID I would give a “short list of basic ‘what to do’s’ “. Did I?

I tried to apply what I just re-learned over again: start at the beginning of the Problem Solving process … not where I naturally do. Feels weird, huh? ;-{)}