Politics are constantly changing, but the themes are universal. It frequently borrows from what came before. Continuity and change become partners in a living tradition. Don’t we then change along with the times? Or is that the times change with the want of something new?
Didn’t the needs of the people stand to different principles in say third millennia Egypt, as opposed to 20th century United States? The obvious answer would be yes. The real answer is no. Why?
Principles don’t change – the manner in which they are conducted, does.
When Confucius set about the ethical groundwork for modern politics, he had one view in mind – lead by virtue of being human. What does that mean?
When politics come down to one-upping with what one perceives is the hole in the opposing campaign, virtue is lost. The number of votes at the behest of perceived weakness is weakness of human virtue. We cease being human, and start controlling instead of helping. We help no one with attacks on character and intelligence.
Is it socialist, moderate, centrist views that want betterment as a whole so that there is no more violence, or less of; equality in being able to afford to take care of health, living, and energy matters? It seems it would be easier to weed out the weeds, and grow into better people. Why is that so wrong? Because there’s no controlling share of money involved?
I find it humorous that the big political platform now is doing away with earmark spending, when the simple fact is that earmarks make up one percent of the national debt – a debt that has doubled under the Bush administration (conservative platforms) since Clinton left office. The Medicare/Medicaid, Social Security, and the war budgets make up twenty percent of the national debt (Concord Coalition). Which means the remaining budget has fallen into disarray on the part of those that concentrated their money into one project, neglecting the true needs of the people – and I DON’T have the need to kill, thank you very much. And let’s not forget that the Republicans now are plastering the public about how liberal the Democrats are with spending – spending, that is, on everything except war tirades.
Spending $40billion dollars a week on sustaining a killing venture isn’t liberal spending? That price tag is neglecting, I might add, national infrastructure, effectively brokering our economy overseas while the middle and lower classes (the working classes) suffer for it. Yet, the Republicans cry fowl in my home state (CO) that $1billion dollars of our state surplus was spent on education – the highest amount EVER ALOTTED in state history. Let’s not forget that Republicans now want less government control, even though the Constitution and Bill of Rights are government documents on regulating a free-state of people – regulated BY THE PEOPLE that vote in politicians that amend those documents to fit the bill of whomever is in office.
Had the Democrats been more conservative, the staving off of the pine beetle infestation could have been stopped years ago by casting a fire in certain areas of the Canadian Rocky Mountain range. This would have created a buffer between how the beetles would have progressed. The tree-huggers cried fowl that the trees and wildlife should not have been destroyed, but now have destroyed the mountains where my family is buried – subsequently mountain floura and fauna will cease in 50 years. Allan Carroll of the Canadian Forest Service has stated that less than one percent of the fires needed to have burned a beetle blockade, burns today, right now, in fires that the forest industry has (spent enormous amounts of money on) tried to prevent. The Clean Air Act, co-written by (D-Virginia) Nick Rahall stalled in the senate – by four opposed Democrats – Rahall one of them.
These are just a couple of examples, but politics in government should not be filled with such inconsistencies. We place our human livelihood in people that have been sworn to protect it. When it fails, it is our job as citizens within the government to uphold our tacit-consent on political birthright, (given again by the Constitution), to voice concern and do something about it. Voting is not it. According to Thomas Paine, revolution is.
I spoke earlier of moral indignation against one another. This is resulting in disharmony in social well-being. When that happens, change in something other than government needs to take place. We need to look at everything that has a controlling effect on how we go about our daily lives with what makes the majority of the people unhappy, instead of how a small percentage wants to control everything, with everyone in it.
Taking matters out of context also fits with wanting more and helping less. So, let’s all wipe the lipstick off the pigs and get back to respecting morals, ethics, and civility. You can’t sugar coat a turd and call it donut, any more than you can piss down my back and tell me that it’s raining. It’s a metaphor, people – wake up! Let's start acting human again!
Respect is taken, when respect is given ...
Namaste and Slainte