A Blog of politically "incorrect" opinion and commentary on culture, politics and spirituality by a woman who challenges the traditional feminist ideals with bold curiosity and refreshing insight.
What does evil mean to you? When you perceive evil what are your next motivations? Is it possible to root out evil? If so, what then?
Evil is essentially the opposite of good. One requires the other in order to exist and have meaning. For instance, if human kind were able to transform our existence on earth to always be good, would human kind have rooted out all evil?OF COURSE NOT! There would always be an example of evil in order to define what is good. Otherwise good is simply that which IS.
As I read social media threads in response to political posts it is obvious to me that liberal contributors to these threads are more hostile to the conservative or moderate contributors. Why is this? Doesn’t it stand to reason that provoking anger from the opposition could lead to more hostility? Isn’t hostility a form of evil? Isn’t provoking someone evil? If one person provokes another, isn’t the natural human reaction to fight back? Therefore isn’t fighting back an evil action?
I hope you can see where I’m going with this…
If tomorrow we all agreed that those who govern us are doing good work to run the country and the world, then we would probably also all agree that our lives are equal and fair. Total and complete agreement requires no decent. Isn’t no decent a good thing? But that’s not the world that humans live in. Remember that God had to expel Adam and Eve from Eden because they didn’t obey His order. Even if you don’t believe in God or what is written in the Bible, Eden is a perfect example of a utopian system that could not really exist. Unless humanity removes the reality of our free will, our existence is always good vs evil, one vs the other, yes vs no, right vs wrong.
We must not allow ourselves to label any political party in the USA as evil or good. Political parties exist to organize as a platform of ideas that represent the free thought and beliefs of some people. When there is more than one political party then there are many ideas. When there is free debate and questioning of the ideas then the best ideas generally win, but only if a free press reports on the ideas in a bipartisan manner. It is not a crime to have an idea or belief.
Politicized evil is rooted in controlled messaging whether this narrative is put out by the press, social media platforms, partisan politicians or woke churches. We know that large sums of money often accompany the controlled messaging in some way. The only way to root out politicized evil is by uncovering the truth which can only be arrived at by questioning the narrative. When questions are shut down, ignored, diverted or dismissed then there is immaturity and complicity to the evil.
It takes courage and maturity to fight back and question the narrative…This is good for our Republic! I care about other’s ideas and beliefs which is why I will always ask questions about their ideas and beliefs. I would expect the same in return. And just like that, evil is neutralized 😉
We all do this…Put an idea (policy or theory) out to people around us to gage the response and then take a new action accordingly. Those new actions can have a variety of intentions affecting culture, race, politics, history or anything really. They can even affect an individual’s life.
When an idea isn’t well received this doesn’t necessarily mean that it fails. In fact, hubris can actually cause an unfettered attachment to it, especially if the idea hasn’t been thoroughly tested for positives and negatives. People in positions of power can often display this type of hubris, making them assert their rejected idea more forcefully. Also, they might even “leak” bogus information to media platforms in order to distract from their efforts or inject soft science in order to bolster agreement among under-educated advocates.
Positive and negative feedback can come in many forms: polls, surveys, votes, debates, public comments, letters to the editor, social media posts, etc. But what happens when an idea (policy or theory) is pushed without any thought to the feedback? What happens when an idea has been developed to the point of its implementation and its negative consequences are allowed to run amuck?
Enter the whistle blower. These people typically are those who have first hand knowledge of the people implementing the idea because they are either working with them or for them. Because of their insider knowledge and their job being on the line, many whistle blowers are not protected from retribution. Sometimes whistle blower information will reach the public too late and few people might believe the information to be true…An investigation, usually by trusted reporters, is then critical.
But whom do you trust with investigative power? There is no easy answer to this especially if you haven’t been practicing your own discernment skills. Discernment and intuition are God given attributes meant to offset an overzealous trust. Otherwise you can be easily lead down a path of harm physically, economically and/or psychologically. Vulnerable people are often the victims of a power hungry person or group and the ideas that they profess. This is why it’s important to have a logical test for the substance of an idea.
Know the history!
The following are a few current ideas that I believe needed testing for substance before being enacted…Spend trillions of taxpayer dollars to “end” inflation; Allow children to choose their gender; Curb fossil fuel production before green energy alternatives are fool proof and ready for mass use; Feed a war machine against Putin rather than encouraging diplomacy. Each of these ideas has the capability of harming thousands of people.
Here is my test for substance:
1) Remove personalities and name calling from the equation. This allows you to focus on the idea.
2) What are the sources of the idea’s information? Gathering the hard data and original source articles can be instrumental for getting to a logical conclusion.
3) Is there any history of past examples? If so, what were the outcomes? History often repeats itself.
4) Do the values of the idea align with the welfare of each individual involved with the outcome? “Inclusive” can sometimes be exclusive. Seldom does an idea that is designed for a group benefit all the individuals involved. If this is the case, can the idea be remedied to be more beneficial?
5) Is there sufficient debate and compromise happening in the process? Diversity of opinion is more important than tunnel vision.
6) Remove the politics and lobbying. The correct decision should not be heavily influenced by outside pressures.
7) Is there a way to correct any negative effects after the idea has been implemented? Make sure this corrective process is in writing and easily available.
8) Trust your intuition and stop the process if you believe that any of the above steps have been compromised. Ask relevant questions to draw out the deceptive practices of others.
These are your powers. Use them, hone them and teach them. Truth is available, but only if you test for substance. Don’t allow yourself to be told what to believe or that your testing has no merit. God has blessed you to do this work.
Our government seems to be conditioning its citizens into believing that those who were elected to represent them are actually working on their behalf. I’m not talking about how the government “gets things done”. Those “things” are probably not at all needed by the citizens of a Liberty-minded nation. Every one of those “things” must be measured within the context of the Constitution and existing law…Capitol Hill’s charter. I’m talking about how the government enriches itself by using its power to manipulate legislation according to the demands of the corporate donor class.
Think about this, President Trump was very successful growing the economy and building workable treaties and agreements with and among nations. Most of his actions were challenged in the courts and this was fine…It’s one method of checks and balance in our system. When the economy grew, jobs were available, innovation was allowed to thrive, the tax base expanded and our CO2 emissions actually went down. https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/greenhouse-gas-emissions-continue-decline-american-economy-flourishes-under-trump-0 … And, try as hard as they might, Congress was unable to remove a President that understood the underbelly of the corporate donor class. Trump was elected by we the people to represent middle class America and the entrepreneurial spirit.
Well, what does an elected ruling class like Congress do when their perceived power is interrupted by a successful President? Everything in their power of course. We saw this play out in almost every format available to these corporate brown nosers when mainstream media colluded by disseminating misinformation, social media canceled opposing opinions and a multitude of “crises” overwhelmed traditional systems.
Representative influence…One heaping pile 💩
Build Back Better is nothing but a Biden Administration term for corporate cronyism. His decades of time spent on Capitol Hill makes him a certified corporate brown noser. His track record of helping credit card companies over consumers’ best interests shows how compassionate he is to corporate banks which now under the global economy will impose ESG scores on businesses that don’t comply with new global “norms”… https://www.alva-group.com/blog/what-is-an-esg-score-and-how-is-it-calculated/ Free markets will be demolished.
It’s time for voters to take a serious and honest look at how their representatives (Nationally and locally) have used their power, understand that both political parties have abused their power, look closely at their records and listen to how they answer tough questions. What do they consider a real crisis and how do they plan to fix it? Does the plan focus on actionable measures with clearly defined results? Is there precedence to learn from before enacting such measures? Voters must focus on policies and not personalities…Anyone can seem like a nice person or be rough around the edges, but what are their results?
A government that isn’t willing to self reflect on their own abuses is not a government of, by and for the people. The commander in chief must hold their justice department accountable to those who are not in power and investigate the federal agencies; agencies that spend more and more taxpayer dollars to undermine taxpayer rights.
I’m waiting patiently for Congress to get a grip on themselves. This will only come when we the people elect representation that respects the rights of the individual and the entrepreneur. Anything else is cronyism and self serving.
In one of my previous blogs, https://shrewview.com/2021/04/17/critical-race-nonsense/, I wrote about how Critical Race Theory (CRT) was affecting the culture in the USA. Critical theory argues that societal structures and cultural assumptions influence social problems rather than individual and psychological effects. In the blog I point out among other things that CRT has no scientific research and evidentiary discovery behind it, instead the discovery is purely philosophical similar to a religious practice like Buddhism…beliefs and ideals describing behavior and thought. If this is the case, then shouldn’t it follow that teaching the deconstruction of the Constitution and cultural norms of the USA (as CRT does) would lead to a vacuum of serious thought (aka critical thinking) among our students and employers who are being fed this crap? And, once this vacuum is presented what then fills it? Tyranny of course.
No country other than the USA possesses a Constitution with a very thoughtful framework for governance intended to be by and for its citizens. Though far from perfect, our Constitution sets the table to uphold individual Liberty by a checks and balances system. Also, each state is allowed to possess its own constitution. I contend that what matters most is the local government experience which is typically the best barometer of Liberty’s success…Holding elected officials accountable is best done locally.
Now consider that the USA has the most ethnically diverse population of any other country. Granted, not all communities have a large amount of ethnic diversity, but those that do not will still have population diversity of another type be it socioeconomic, religious or even seasonal…There are numerous “melting pots “. Yet there is one thing that holds us all together, and that is our desire to understand our roots and educate each other about all the hard fought freedoms which were gained by extraordinary people in order to pass true Liberty on to each new generation no matter the race, creed or color of the people.
Critical Theory seeks to deconstruct systems without lighting a way toward unity. There can be no “United” States under this philosophy. Instead the action is toward chaos (aka disunity). For instance, the white supremacy mantra is a dog whistle used to create this chaos. We see it’s influence in some of our major cities that defund policing and push CRT in school curricula. But what is white supremacy? The term is used by Democrat leadership yet the definition is lacking. Does it mean a KKK style resurgence, a saturation of Caucasian culture or perhaps it means tyrannical behavior from the opposition political party? I believe that white supremacy is meant to mean whatever the person who hears it thinks it means to them, and the intention is to cause feelings of shame for some and feelings of anger for others. The intent is for driving destructive emotions, keeping some form of “Democrat” labeled political party in power, bringing solutions that only the federal government should administer, and reducing our great diversity to simple minded cogs in a wheel of slavery to the elite class.
I have faith that our diverse population will ultimately see through the CRT re-education ruse and teach an honest education of history with all its flaws and accomplishments. We must start locally where the rescue effort is most effective. The BIG LIE is CRT. The BIG TRUTH is to love your neighbor, stay Liberty minded and keep the next generation FREE!
Wicked, adjective – evil or morally wrong; intended to or capable of harming someone or something (Google dictionary)
Do you really want to know why certain people seem to be melting down over perceived differences as a nation?
I watch all news channels, listen to podcasts and radio programs from various sources, and read news clips and books from all authors on both sides of an issue. I like doing this because my questioning takes on a much deeper meaning…not everyone is right and not everyone is wrong, and, in point of fact, much material can seem to be simply glossed over or blatantly left out.
I’ve been following the chaos that has been developing since before the 2017 general election. I try to make sure that my research and sources have a very broad scope because I like to keep in mind my friends, family and acquaintances who are all very different people with diverse thoughts, ethnicities and group affiliations. I feel blessed to have come from a type of background which placed me in diverse situations when I was growing up because not everyone gets to see and experience what our large, complex, multi-ethnic, culturally diverse country has to offer, and, quite frankly, it is not until you are past the age of 50 can you appreciate the exposure.
“Wickedness was like food: once you got started it was hard to stop; the gut expanded to take in more and more.” – John Updike, The Witches of Eastwick
I believe the “wicked food” Updike is referring to is connected our egos as individuals. Lately we have been digesting this food at an alarming rate. We must make an effort to look outside ourselves and take smaller bites, chew the information a few more times and rinse it down with a heavy dose of calm reason. It is our ability to reason that will connect our mind to our heart and drive a wedge between wickedness and our ego.
Consider the wickedness of the Socialist/Marxist movement that’s been brewing. It does not believe in the individual’s capacity to succeed in a free market system, yet this movement does believe that a small group of elites have the capacity to tell each person what they can do, think, and be…
The harmful wickedness fed to people of all races by an elite few in America today is unquestionable. I present to you a few examples:
1) The rewriting of history (As in the 1916 Project) instead of adding more information that is fact based to improve upon its richness.
2) The removal of historic statues and plaques by force without considering their context and significance for a teachable moment.
3) Banning certain types of free speech no matter who might be either offended or positively inspired.
4) Condoning mob rule when such behavior infringes on the rights of others.
5) Reworking social interactions in order to remove the possibility of proper civil discourse.
6) Changing the meaning of words to abuse cultural norms instead of creating new words that might reflect better our human progression.
7) Segregating differences as a way to cause chaos instead of promoting our human capacity to allow for differences as a means to grow spiritually and intellectually.
You might be able to think of a few more examples.
Consider these solemn words from Jane Austin:
“When I look out on such a night as this, I feel as if there could be neither wickedness nor sorrow in the world; and there certainly would be less of both if the sublimity of Nature were more attended to, and people were carried more out of themselves by contemplating such a scene.”
All of us have the capacity to be individual ambassadors of good will in our pursuit of happiness in this land of liberty which is grounded in Judeo-Christian principles. Put the politics aside! Let wickedness reign no more…
My last blog post “Progress vs Progressivism” attempted to explain that progress is a condition of our U.S. Constitution and Progressivism is a construct that hinders such progress. I used examples from the Civil War and Reconstruction era to show the difference.
The Civil Rights Movement of the 1960’s was also an important time of progress in our history. Not all activists of the 60’s can be considered hero’s for the changes they wished to achieve. I am currently reading Great Society by Amity Shlaes. I would like to relate to you why the details in this book have affirmed my conclusions about why our society’s current focus on Progressivism lead by a “Social Democrat Party” is bad for our culture…But first some historical context:
Since about 1880 Jim Crow Laws were enacted in the southern states by white Democrat-dominated state legislatures. The Supreme Court decision Plessey vs Ferguson (1892) upheld the constitutionality of racial segregation under the “separate but equal” doctrine. Jim Crow Laws were Progressive actions that resulted in commonplace separate public accommodations based on race (see my blog Progress vs Progressivism for definitions). Today we look back on such laws as absurd, but the governmental leadership at the time and throughout the seven or eight decades since were allowing powerful Democrat political forces to dictate cultural norms. Republican insistence on States’ Rights made this no better…Civil Rights as it pertained to individuals and races were just beginning to be understood.
Timeline of these decades:
1870 to 1914…2nd Industrial Revolution leap forward in technology and society (people lead actions)
1914 to 1918…World War 1 (government lead action)
1920…Congress passes the 19th Amendment – Women’s right to vote (people lead action)
1920 to 1929…The Roaring Twenties time of prosperity (people lead action)
1929 to1933…The Great Depression (spurred on by government greed in the twenties)
1933 to 1939…The New Deal (government intervention)
1939 to 1945…World War 2 (government lead action)
1945 to 1989…Post war economic expansion (people lead action)
1961 to 1975…Vietnam War draft era (government lead action)
What we notice in this timeline is that during the 2nd Industrial Revolution the formation of groups such as the American Federation of Labor (AFL) and the Suffragettes were instrumental in obtaining crucial reforms to working conditions and the women’s right to vote. These reforms needed to be lead by the critical mass of non-political people lead actions in order for hearts and minds to change and common sense to prevail in Congress. This was progress!
Wars and the Depression however were instigated by government lead actions. The timeline shows an interesting back and forth between non-political action (changes made by people) and political action (initiatives made by governments). By the time of the Post World War 2 economic expansion, the U.S. was ready for another critical mass of non-political people lead activity, namely the Civil Rights Movement. It was helpful that this movement aligned with the Vietnam anti-war people lead activism. Individuals would not be “used” by their government’s activities any longer!
It was Reverend Martin Luther King JR who lead the people toward necessary civil rights changes. Society needed the common place Jim Crow laws to be eliminated, and this could only happen with a ground-swell of people power. Under this pressure, President Johnson signed the 1964 Civil Rights act that eliminated Jim Crow laws and the 1965 Voting Rights Act that prohibits racial discrimination in voting. Ending our involvement in the Vietnam War would prove to be more difficult.
In Great Society we learn that during the late 50’s and early 60’s companies like General Electric and Ford Motor Company were employing, expanding, and creating with great speed. The AFL which had now become the AFL-CIO (Congress of Industrial Organizations) along with progressive leaders like Walter Reuther (United Auto Workers) and anti war political activists like Tom Hayden were working their powerful influence on government systems to help President Lyndon Bains Johnson (LBJ) form his anti-poverty programs…After the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963, LBJ as the new President, began to implement a plan with Reuther and Hayden to end poverty in America. His “Great Society” vision was the center of his 1965 election bid. What I found most interesting about LBJ during this bid for election was that in order to obtain the African American vote he promised them that they could caucus at the Democratic National Convention (DNC) so that they would have delegates appointed for the election process. This did not happen because the (racist) DNC would not allow it. LBJ was courting the African American voters with programs and promises aka “Progressivism”. LBJ managed to retain their votes anyway and won the 1965 Presidency in a landslide.
By this time it was apparent to the Democrat majority that more government programs were the way to maintain leadership power. With the help of Union Leaders and Progressive Activist Leaders the federal government worked to replace the authority of mayors and local leaders…Federal funds flowed to jobs program oriented organizations. Locally elected leaders were instructed to add community activists to these organizational boards. These activists liked to stir up tension on city streets. Eventually the mayors and local leaders caved to federal pressures and ever since then the federal government has procured more authority over social benefit programs at State and Municipal levels.
For example; Federal “experts” redefined eminent domain laws to remove entire neighborhoods where low income families lived and worked in comfort, condemning these areas as “blighted”. The new wisdom was that federally built high rise low income housing projects would be more beneficial. However, there were consequences to these actions, mainly that whites decided to move to the suburbs thus leaving the struggling black population to remain…Struggling because there were few jobs available for black men in these cities due to union bias. Federal welfare programs during this time discouraged fathers to remain in these government subsidized housing projects…Fathers needed to be out of state in order for mothers and children to qualify. We now know the consequences of these “Great Society” actions. This begs the question of why weren’t the Great Society jobs programs helping. Well, they weren’t helping because these funds were pocketed by greedy, prejudiced, progressive union lead program officials…Progress for African American workers and families was stunted by these government actions.
In short, I believe that progress happens best when affected people unite through first understanding how government inspired systems shrink their civil liberties, then changing hearts and minds in the process, and ultimately solving problems in fair and sensible ways. Progressivism lead by government “experts” and corporate or union cronies is infused with unintended consequences…Or are they unintended? My next blog post will focus on this question.
Yes my friends, it was a game show. You, the viewing audience have been allowed to witness a game for which truth still leaves many questions as actual facts are manipulated for a ridiculously consequential outcome.
Before “Beulah the Buzzer” sounded (in this case Beulah was the vote to acquit President Trump on two articles of impeachment) each contestant (in this case 100 Senators) had to answer to the viewers (in this case the American people) three questions. What were the three questions?
Here is my take:
1) Did the House enter into legitimate impeachment inquiry proceedings?
2) What did the “High Misdemeanor” accomplish?
3) Can a Senator keep their seat if he or she didn’t impeach President Trump?
Here are my answers:
1) There was no whole House vote to enter into the impeachment inquiry, but just because there is a House majority of Democrats, the majority should be careful to not enter into a partisan process as they did. To force a one sided Democratically called witness review which was done in partial secrecy was wrong, and to leak some of this secret testimony to the press for speculative and sensationalist review was compromising to the process. Even though beginning the inquiry was done legitimately, its implementation was ultimately problematic to their case.
2) The “High Misdemeanor” of saying Joe Biden’s name in relation to a corrupt Ukrainian Company during a head of state phone call accomplished the Democrat’s mission to find a ruse for the impeachment of President Trump.
From the un-redacted transcript of President Trump’s phone conversation with Ukrainian President Zelensky, President Trump says, “…There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it…It sounds horrible to me.” President Trump never said, “…so if you could get the Attorney General to investigate Biden’s involvement with the corrupt company (AKA Burisma Holdings), this would be a great help to my campaign.” But that is exactly what the Democrats would want you to believe. Instead, President Trump who is the chief law enforcement officer of the USA wants to know on behalf of a lot of people (AKA taxpayers) if Burisma would ever be investigated for corruption. Interestingly, Biden’s action of holding back United States taxpayer funds to the Ukraine government in 2014 for six hours while he forced the firing of a Ukrainian investigator who was looking into Burisma corruption does appear to be a quid pro quo by Biden and was never brought up as being a wrong action even though he is on camera bragging about it in 2018.
Also from the transcript, “…Since we have won the absolute majority in our Parliament, the next prosecutor general will be 100% my person, my candidate, who will be approved by the Parliament in September. He or she will look into the situation, specifically to the company that you mentioned in this issue…” President Zelensky said that his intention was to investigate the company known as Burisma Holdings, not a person and specifically not the aforementioned Biden.
And, as far as United States funds being held back, has anyone considered that President Trump could have been waiting for the new prosecutor general to be actually approved by the Parliament into the position first? Ukraine’s government and the new President Zelensky should have their actions vetted carefully before the United States has trust in their future good intentions. With his own distrust of US federal employees working within and among his executive branch, President Trump likely wanted to do this inquiry himself, an action which is not illegal nor unprecedented.
3) Each Senator has their seat for six years. Any Senator who has three or more years left for their term and who voted to impeach knows it will have almost zero effect on their next campaign. Any Senator who has less than three years left for their term and who voted to acquit had to think twice about this vote because of the message it sends to their constituents, essentially a message of support for President Trump. Hopefully their individual votes were done based upon constitutional principles instead of party loyalty…You decide.
But here is the consequence, our Constitution hangs in the balance. From the start, the lack of a whole House vote to investigate an allegation from the very beginning brought on a partisan process. Even the majority vote to acquit in the Senate adds credence to the partisan misbehavior by the House. What we had was an abuse of power on behalf of the House of Representatives. Oh well…for now Beulah says, “Case dismissed!!”
How many of us get our news from social media snippets and/or “friendly” network broadcasters? Are they and their sources reliable? Are the fact checkers that give us the Pinocchio’s really digging deep enough in their fact checking? Are we being presented the whole story? Unless we are willing to give up our day jobs (or even get off the couch) and become an investigative reporter, we probably rarely if ever do the reading and research necessary to have a truly informed opinion.
In the mean time the majority of us are typically left to our biases. Having a bias is not a bad thing…It is an absolutely human thing. It gives you a basis from which to start your exploration of a topic and to be tested when faced with an opposing view; in other words, the ability to have an open mind from which to use to reason.
If you hold strongly onto your bias, then you have the inability to find justice. Potential jurors are scrutinized for bias before they are allowed to serve on a jury. This is a very important part of a society based on law and justice.
Social justice is justice in terms of the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges within a society. Can a liberty minded society be “cleansed” of biases? Of course not! Liberty is the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views (Oxford Dictionary). The opposite of this is Fascism. Social justice must impose Fascism in order to control the distribution of wealth, opportunities, and privileges. In the USA each person would necessarily need to give up their liberty in order for the implementation of a true social justice agenda. By what biased authority would we want this agenda implemented? The answer to this question leads to our great awakening…
Liberty entails the responsible use of freedom under the rule of law without depriving anyone else of their freedom. This sounds like a just society to me 🙂
We are already USA Strong!
Your property and care of it is your wealth, your informed curiosity leads to your opportunity, and your positive relationships reinforce many of your privileges. These are guaranteed to you in the U.S. Constitution.
To plan for worldly perfection is a web of deceit and the spider who sets this trap believes himself to be like a god.
A web of deceit has been inadvertently spun since our founding which I will date as June 21,1788 when our Constitution was ratified. At that time there were 13 states. Only nine states needed to be on board for ratification…Ammendments to the document continued for several years after the ratification, for instance the Bill of Rights was not ratified until December, 1791.
During ratification the first political parties formed, the Federalists and the Anti-Federalists. Anti-Federalists saw the constitution as a potential threat to personal liberties and opposed its ratification wanting only each state to have sole power. However, there were more Federalists than Anti-Federalists so the Constitution was ultimately ratified. This is not to say that the Anti-Federalists didn’t get some of what they wanted…The Constitution did put in place checks and balances to help prevent central government corruption and tyrannical rule as well as incorporate explicit protections for individual rights.
In today’s polarized political climate we must all remember that perception is only part of the path to truth. Facts still remain. – The Shrew
The Anti-Federalists soon became the Democratic-Republican Party. Founding Fathers such as Patrick Henry, Samuel Adams and Thomas Jefferson were among them. In the early 1800’s this party split into the Republican Party and the Democratic Party (Federalists such as George Washington, John Adams and Alexander Hamilton ultimately became members of the Democratic Party). Essentially Republicans at this time wanted to reserve more power to state governments unlike the Federalists (later the Democrats) who dominated national government early in our founding and passed laws which taxed land owners to pay for war preparations against the French, increased residency requirements for U.S. Citizenship, deported all male citizens of enemy nations, and limited free speech rights. By 1830 the Federalists had been completely reformed into the Democratic Party which supported slavery and opposed civil rights reforms. You can see the trend early on that neither party was perfect with their understanding of Liberty.
In the mid 1900’s the Democratic Party underwent a dramatic ideological realignment by supporting organized labor, civil rights of minorities and progressive reform. During this time there were a number of other political parties with their own particular ideologies that came and went, many of which had elected representation in Congress, but they would not prove the test of time. Today’s Democratic and Republican Parties bear almost no relationship to their original counterparts.
Through the decades of party representation in the presidential and congressional roles it seems that any time the dominant party was too aggressive with its messaging it left an opening for the opposing party to take control. This “duel” made it more difficult for progressive ideas to cement, but laws and programs which began under the New Deal and civil rights reforms were enacted when both parties were more amenable.
When I compare the ins and outs, ups and downs of our federal system to our state and local governance systems the picture is the same. Any time an extreme example of controlling power is displayed, another election happens to check this power and bring a modicum of balance to controlling forces. Governing systems don’t just create themselves, it is people working together who bring them to being. Ours is the only system which allows for ideas to be tested, thrown out and reinvented. This is what a free republic does. And if the people of this republic are free to also imagine and be inspired by the invisible hand of God at work in their personal lives, then the ups and downs of our system give emotional maturity for the individual to persevere when their wants are not able to balance their needs. We do ourselves a great disservice when we believe that whole populations and desired outcomes can be forcibly perfected. These are the ways of tyrants.
Our Earth and the cosmos are ever changing, and as we know, people are limited when they try to improve upon these changes. To plan for worldly perfection is a web of deceit and the spider who sets this trap believes himself to be like a god. We must not worship at the alter of perfectibility lest we divert our inherent worth to a false master.
The Shrew 