The communist obsession

The thing about America is that it gets obsessed with things that it really doesn’t need to concern itself about, such as communism.  The bottom line with communism, which was created by the active minds of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels all the way back in 1848, is the fact that there are plenty of books and articles written about all sorts of different forms of government, which may or may not have some good ideas, and typically don’t really have a lot of influence upon anything of merit when it comes to the implementation of actual meaningful governmental change, anywhere.

 As much as some people desire to believe that the Soviet Union was communist, and that China today is communist, the truth of the matter is that there has never been a communist nation. Additionally, it doesn’t appear to be likely that they ever will be, because in actuality, a society in which everything is own collectively and consists of a classless people just doesn’t seem plausible because it really isn’t in human nature that this would ever come about, not really because people are inherently selfish and greedy, though some are, but rather more to do with the fact that people are driven by personal motives which basically necessitate that their individual expenditure of effort results in some sort of fair reward, and when that is lacking the ensuing result is going to be disappointing, because those that have skin the game, are much more inclined to work hard and sacrifice as compared to those that do not.

 So too, what a given foreign country does or does not do within its borders would seem to be its business and should, to a very large extent, not be a concern of America.  Additionally, in a free country, people should be entitled to have their own viewpoints and to express themselves as to what they do or don’t desire or wish for, which would include things such as communism or socialism. 

 To believe, somehow, that the pursuit of communism is a true threat to the American way of life, seems to misunderstand that a government of, for, and by the people is entitled to go after what their desires entail, and further to the point, capitalism is not a word that even appears in the Constitution.  Private property, though, is indeed protected through the Constitution, which makes eminent sense because those who are unable to have or obtain private property seem to be the same who are vulnerable to being under the thumb of their governance, which thereby infringes upon their liberty and freedom.

 In reality, the obsession that America has displayed time and time again, about communism, is the very thing that has necessitated an inordinate amount of monies spent on armaments and the military, along with persecutions against fellow Americans for apparently not being seen as being loyal enough to America, simply because they believe in communism, which would seem to be their right, and not subject to sanctions.  Indeed, the whole point of what this country was founded upon was that we have been gifted by our Creator with certain unalienable rights, and that the purpose of this government should primarily be to see to it that we keep those rights, above all.

Learn to empathize

One of the main reasons why disagreements get worse is that one or both parties are absolutely convinced that they need to “win” the argument, and in a case in which only one side can win, this is going to result in a resolution that will probably not be satisfactory to both parties.  A better idea when we disagree, even when what appears to be a serious dispute between one to the other, is to take the time to understand where the other person is coming from.  In other words, try to empathize with them, and thereby let the other know that we want to better understand them, and to thereby see things from their perspective.  After all, we know our own perspective, or certainly ought to, so it would behoove us when we are looking for a practical solution to be willing to see and to feel how things look from the other side and thereby, by doing so, create common ground in which there is a better chance of a successful resolution which is satisfactory and of lasting value to both parties.

 There are plenty of people who are good at the talking, but are rather poor at the listening, especially when what they are hearing is not something that they desire to hear. Nevertheless, in actuality, we need to do a better job at listening, because everybody has a story, and oftentimes it means a lot to them that they be respectfully heard.  After all, just because we listen to the other, doesn’t necessarily mean that we agree with what they are saying, but we owe them the respect of trying to understand their position, and in order to demonstrate that we have heard them correctly, we should be able to sum up what they have been expressing and then repeat that to them, to verify that we are now on the same page.

 Indeed, everyone deserves and is entitled to have their own voice, and whenever we decide that such a voice which annoys us or that we don’t agree with, doesn’t deserve a fair and respectful audience we are going to find that the problem isn’t going to have a successful resolution forthcoming, because there isn’t a foundation being formulated and encouraged that will enable that to happen.  This is why we need to be more empathetic, because if we are unwilling to do our good part to understand the other, than we shouldn’t expect them to do the same for us, and ultimately what happens in a dispute is that the party in the stronger position will often get what they think that they want, but by doing so they have failed to comprehend, that there may well be some sort of blowback for dismissing the other as some sort of irrelevancy.

 In sum, those who do not believe that it is necessary to understand the position and the perspective of the other, or have the audacity to believe that they already know these things without a true investigation have put themselves into the position of simply believing that the only thing that really matters is their own perspective and by ignoring empathy and by being unwilling to listen or give time to the other, have created a construct which will not fairly solve the issue at hand, but will probably exacerbate it, even if it appears to have been resolved.

The Zimmermann telegram

Those who are astute and pay attention to world affairs understand well that today’s America is an empire, with bases, armaments, and personnel all over the world, of which it seems like there isn’t a war or rumor of war that America is not involved in directly or indirectly.  That is the way it is now, but it certainly was not the way it was back then.  In fact, in 1916, not only was America not directly involved in what became known as World War I, but the re-election campaign of Woodrow Wilson utilized the slogan “he kept us out of the war.”

 However, on January 17, 1917, a coded message was sent to the German ambassador to Mexico, essentially indicating that Germany intended to pursue submarine warfare against America and desired an alliance with Mexico.  While today’s Mexico is surely a shadow of its former self, back in 1917, it did have, relative to America, a degree of power.  So then, to impress upon Mexico that Germany would aid them in the pursuit of recovering lost territories, which had become Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico, this seemed to be an alliance that might well persuade Mexico to align itself with Germany and thus be a thorn in the side of America.  Further to the point, by engaging Mexico in a war with America, this would necessitate America having to take care of defending its homeland first and foremost, and therefore those military armaments that were currently being discreetly exported to the Allied cause would be considerably reduced, which might well help the German side to win that war.

 The upshot of the Zimmermann telegram being intercepted is that the United States thus knew the intentions of Germany, and because of this telegram, soon declared war upon Germany, which was certainly something that Germany did not want to encourage in any way, form, or manner.  Additionally, Mexico remained neutral in that conflict, so that the United States was able to exert all of its manpower and armaments in defending the allies and thus turned the tide of war in favor of those allies.

 For a certainty, wars involve calculated risks, in which, had this telegram not been intercepted, perhaps the result for Germany would have been different, as the American public, for the most part, decided that they did not want to get involved in a foreign entanglement, in which, there didn’t appear to be any real reason why America should be involved, one way or another, even though American governance was clearly favoring the Allied cause.  So then, this telegram simply made the call to warfare all that much more compelling to the American public and, therefore, was detrimental to Germany, which ended up being defeated in World War I.

 When it comes to warfare and thus making the argument for such to the public, history tells us that there have been many instances of deceit and lies, egging a given country to that war, initiated to a great extent by those who favor such a war.  In the case of the Zimmermann telegram, this, in essence, made it no longer necessary for America to pretend to be neutral and uninvolved, and thus may well have changed the outcome of that war.

USA age 65 life expectancy v. comparable nations

We read at healthsystemtracker.org that when we compare the life expectancy at age 65 in the USA, against the comparable countries of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland, and the U.K. that the United States, despite spending more per capita on healthcare then any of these other countries, and in some cases, spending more than twice the amount per capita, that somehow the United States life expectancy from age 65 falls well short of these comparable countries, in which the comparable countries in aggregate from age 65, have, as noted at healthsystemtracker.org we find thereby a life expectancy of 7.2% greater for woman than the United States, and 6.0% greater for men than the United States. 

 For those that live in the United States, they should be disturbed first on the level of the fact that more and more money dedicated to healthcare doesn’t seem to push the needle all that far or even to matter, and quite obviously leaves the United States looking like a country that needs to seriously consider changing its healthcare system from top to bottom, because the results for those that are our senior citizens, is incredibly disappointing, as most people when reaching their retirement years, would expect and would desire that those sunset years be not only long but also years of satisfaction and joy, but the results indicate that American senior citizens will die sooner, which is the second fact, which is deeply distressing for not just those senior citizens, but for all of us, that expect and desire to live long and healthy lives, and to fairly enjoy the fruits of our labor.

 While there are probably a fair number of Americans who understand that not all is well, the proof that their intuition is correct is demonstrated by the fact that life expectancy for our senior citizens trails comparable nations by a meaningful amount and this doesn’t seem to make sense when we take into consideration that America is not only known as the breadbasket of the world, but is also, in aggregate, the richest nation in the world, with supposedly the freest people in the world, and the best governance in the world.  All of this would presuppose that not all is right within America because its health isn’t near where it needs to be, and if America were a true leader, it would lead all other comparable nations in the good health of its citizens, but it does not, and it also doesn’t appear that this will change anytime soon.

 What the United States should or should not prioritize, is something that this governance needs to reevaluate because when the quality of our health does not seem to be something that this governance believes is its responsibility to constructively do something of merit to make it to become the best in all the world, then what is the point of having all the money that America has, if at the end of our days, we aren’t even here to enjoy such truly?

Foreign investment or is it exploitation?

There are nearly 200 nations in this world, of which the vast majority of these countries are relatively small and thus not in a very good position relative to the most dominant nations and institutions in this world. Indeed, there are mega corporations that have more in revenue than many smaller nations do, which is indicative of the difference in size and power between small sovereign nations as compared to the biggest and most powerful nations in the world, in conjunction with their powerful banking institutions, as well as their corporate players. In short, we find that those who have the size and the money have the opportunity to have an undue influence upon small nations when it comes to their “development.”

 When it comes to investment of just about any type, those who have the money are in a prime position to stipulate the rules, in which we find that small nations are susceptible to making deals that are not very beneficial to the country, at large, and especially to their citizens.  Nevertheless, these deals are still agreed to, mainly because those that are doing the investing are quite adept at influencing the highest echelons of the governance of these small nations, of the benefit, that will ensue, which often seems in actuality to be one of personal enrichment for the elite of these small nations, which signifies that the deal so going down is not going to be truly in the best interests of that nation.

 Undeniably, whenever all the biggest and most important decisions that places a small nation in debt to a much more powerful one is agreed to, what often occurs, is that these sovereign small nations have essentially ceded control of what that country will or will not do in the sense of national economic development as well as other pertinent things and, in essence, places such in the hands of outside interests, who pretty much dictate what the overall national budget will be for that small nation and where the monies so budgeted will first be allocated, which typically means paying back those that have lent their money, first, over and above what that country owes its own citizens.

 Therefore, what we find to a very large extent, is though it might not be described as colonization by any of the parties, it essentially is colonization, because the control of the biggest decisions so made by that small nation isn’t really in their domain anymore, but rather they must march to the beat of what those that have invested and thereby are developing on behalf of that small nation, have agreed to.  In short, the small nation, in a lot of these cases, is going to get the short end of the stick, which isn’t good for the people of that nation, nor for its stability, either, and pretty much indicates, mineral wealth or not, strategic position or not, that at the end of the day, the biggest beneficiary of what has transpired, is going to be the entity that has the money and the power, and that is the type of construct which isn’t going to change, anytime soon, if ever.

Voodoo trickle-down economics

Look, it has to be said, that President Grover Cleveland in 1888, stated, “He mocks the people who proposes that the Government shall protect the rich and that they in turn will care for the laboring poor." The bottom line is that the rich already have everything, in the sense of power, position, connections, and favoritism, and to believe somehow that through the generosity of their respective hearts, they will do their fair part to help the poor and disadvantaged is to believe in the improbable, nay, the impossible.  In fact, the rich have the strongest belief that what they have is theirs to own and that they thereby owe nothing to anyone else, including their governance which helped create the foundation for their success, and further to the point, if they are going to dole out any of their money, it has a strong tendency to go to places in which they will receive appropriate approbation, from, for instance, a university, a hospital, or a museum.

 The very point of having a strong central government that is structured of, for, and by the people is for that government to responsibly do right by its citizens, which begins first with lifting up those that need the most lifting, because the measure of a good and fair government, should not ever be how rich the rich are, but rather should be how poor the poor are, and thereby what that government is doing to rectify and to alleviate such for the overall beneficence and stability of the people within that nation which is meant to be structured to serve the people, in whole..

 To the point, there are plenty of people that labor hard, that are diligent and responsible in their work, of which, we find that this government does not feel it to be a priority that those that labor for forty hours or even more in a week, are entitled to receive a living wage, which doesn’t even make sense, because whatever that these underpaid laborers are not receiving in wages, the government is going to in one form or another, have to backstop, which essentially means that those that are profiting most from an underpaid workforce, are able to profit more at the expense of those laborers, without correspondingly paying their fare share in taxes to the government.

 The objective of any good and responsible governance is to not only level the playing field, but also to see that through our progressive tax system and through governmental oversight, that those who are the biggest earners and the richest, personal as well as corporate, do their fair part, to pay what they owe to this government, and do so on the up and up, as opposed to hiding behind all sorts of tax dodges, and game playing, which subverts them from having to pay what they ought to pay, because those that don’t do their fair part are cheating the system, cheating the government, and cheating the people, which isn’t right and isn’t patriotic.

Our Social Security numbers need far more protection

In this modern world, we find that again and again, there are data breaches that expose our Social Security numbers, which essentially represent our own personal identification number to those who thereby use it for their own nefarious purposes. The first thing to recognize is that our Social Security number was issued to us, not for identification purposes, but rather as our unique number specifically earmarked for the Social Security administration so that we could appropriately receive our Social Security benefits, but has regrettably devolved into becoming essentially our identification number, unique to our person, and therefore quite valuable, for it is this number that we provide for employment purposes, for credit cards, and for assorted other things, merited or not.

 So then, there really ought to be some serious thought by the governance of this nation as to what to do about the data breaches regarding our Social Security number and the sure recognition that the more places in which our Social Security number is provided and thereby stored, the more pathways that those who desire that number have to obtain that very thing, which obviously is the seminal problem with the way things are conducted presently. 

 One would think that because data breaches are so damaging not just to the individual but also to the government and businesses in the sense of all the fraud so accomplished through this breach, which probably amounts to billions upon billions of dollars, that therefore our government would make it a very high priority to protect those numbers and to come up with a robust program to accomplish that very thing, because it certainly seems that these breaches are a rather common occurrence and will continue to be a common occurrence mainly because too many places, pretty much demand our Social Security number, or at a minimum, the last four numbers of our Social Security number, as if providing just the last four numbers, somehow still provides us with enough protection of our identity, when it definitely does not.

 The thing about criminals or those who are up to no good is that when they know that the avenue to make some “easy money” is access to another person’s Social Security number and of which there are a multitude of ways to get that Social Security number, mainly because the security to protect such, is functionally weak, they are going to do exactly that, because America is the richest nation in the world, which means that there is plenty of money to go after, and further to the point, since this nation isn’t doing a damn meaningful thing about changing how we are identified through a rethink of our Social Security numbers, these thieves are hellbent to keep on doing what they are doing. After all, it is lucrative to do so, as there are plenty of dark web buyers willing to buy this information, because of its high value, which seemingly isn’t something that this governance desires to see stop, because it doesn’t do what it needs to do to stop it.

Stupid America

The U.S. Department of Education states that “about 130 million American adults (54% of those aged 16-74) read below a 6th-grade level.”  The fact that this is true is a reflection that America is not now, and never has been, the greatest nation in the world, and most definitely is not on track to become the greatest nation in the world.  What could be said is that America is the richest nation in the world, but the wealth of America clearly favors the elite and disfavors those who are typically ill-educated and live in enclaves of poverty and lack of opportunity.

 The fact that so many Americans are functionally illiterate is a great disappointment to many but nevertheless is a true reflection that rather than putting forth the necessary effort to see that those that are the most impoverished are provided with good opportunities, so created from attending schools of superior education and teachers that are motivated to see their students succeed, has instead decided to leave that alone, which begs the question, as to why?

 The reason why so many Americans are ill-educated really comes down to the fact that in this capitalistic society and the government that runs this nation, they actually prefer to have an underclass of underperforming people, because those that are relatively ignorant, are the very same that are easier to trick, to manage, and to exploit, because their lack of intelligence and foresight preordains them to have to kowtow to those in authority so as to get important things such as their food stamps, medical benefits, Section 8 housing, Earned Income Credit and so on.  In other words, the governance of this nation, as well as many of its most powerful and connected mega corporations, prefers an ignorant population because it allows them to exploit such for their own exclusive benefit.

 So too, in consideration that America acts and behaves like an empire, it is critical for the success of the same, that there be sacrificial cannon fodder readily available in case World War III, occurs, and the best people to sacrifice are those that have no position in the governance of this nation because they are essentially voiceless and powerless, and thus the loss of their lives, will not hurt those that are the elites of this nation, who will appreciate their blood sacrifice so that they themselves can continue to acquire more wealth and more power.

 If this nation truly wanted to be great, it would intuitively recognize that the more educated and more knowledgeable its population was, in whole, the better it would be for the nation, because it is knowledge, along with some necessary moral guidelines, that permits nations to prosper in a way that the population, collectively, benefits from all the accouterments developed and thus obtained.  On the other hand, those at the highest echelons of power have a strong desire to keep exploiting those that are ignorant because it puts more money directly into their pocket, and also permits the governance of this nation to assert itself against the underclass so as to keep them in line, which signifies to those of the middle class and just above, that they need be on their best behavior or else what they have and the position that they are in, would be next to be taken away.

"Show me the man, and I'll show you the crime”

The above quotation is generally attributed to Stalin’s secret police chief, Lavrently Beria, who was relentless in carrying out his duty to eradicate those who stood in the way or were considered to be troubling or worse to Stalin  The implication therefore of what this saying means is as chilling as it so appears, because it basically says that anyone so targeted can be found to have committed some sort of crime, and while we might think that is the way it was back in the Soviet Union’s heyday, therefore we need not worry because it obviously doesn’t apply to democratic Western nations, but this isn’t necessarily so.  Indeed, the truth of the matter is, that we are currently in a construct in which this does appear to be the case even in Western nations, and certainly is the case for those that are annoying to the political power brokers of the age, who because these targeted people typically have minimal connections of their own, are thereby definitely susceptible to being arrested for a manufactured crime.

 That is to say, those who are an annoyance to those in high positions of power, are not only easily targeted for retribution but the type of retribution that can be effected against them, ranges from shaming them through social media, or adversely affecting their employment by exerting pressure on their employer to do exactly that, or have the IRS or a similar type department investigate them thoroughly,  or simply arresting them under trumped-up charges, such as disturbing the peace, obstruction, trespassing, tax evasion, or any other charge that fits the bill.

 The thing about being arrested is that those who have little or no power or no real say in their governance are susceptible to being arrested, because they aren’t backed up by any other institution that could conceivably serve to protect them, which makes them vulnerable.  As for those that have connections or are powerful in their own right, they too are susceptible to being arrested, of which, the main course of action to accomplish this is for those that are the true power brokers of the policing arm of the state, first doing their due diligence in order to find something that is suspect or could be considered to be suspect which will thereby serve the purpose of pinning a crime on that person.

 To believe that all of us are safe, and that there is a true rule of law, which is faithfully followed by our judicial system and thereby is no respecter of persons, is to ignore the fact that far too many Western governments have devolved into becoming oppressors of those that they feel are in opposition to them, and have decided that the best way to deal with the problem, at hand, is to silence their detractors, through placing them under arrest.  Indeed, this is an age in which the government, in conjunction with powerful corporations have a wealth of information about our everyday activities, and those who have that power are well able to dig deep and to thereby find something that is suspect, and this thus allows them to pin a crime on just about anyone, which suits their purpose exceedingly well.

The other side of gossip

We find that it is human nature for a significant portion of us to engage in gossip from time to time, and the gossip so spoken is almost invariably not about how good and gracious somebody else is, but rather has a lot to do with their foibles and faults, instead.  The reason why we have a strong tendency to gossip and why bad news seems to spread a heck of a lot faster than good news, is that we as flawed human beings, feel the need, to pick on the faults of another, in order to say to ourselves that as bad and as stupid as we might appear to be, that what we are and what we have done is not nearly as bad and as stupid as this other person and thus this helps not only to justify ourselves in our own eyes, but plainly makes us to feel better that we aren’t all that bad or stupid, after all.

 The thing about gossip is that most people that do gossip do not desire that what they have said which is disparaging or embarrassing to the other person, would ever come back to them as the person so speaking of such, not just because this can create a rather awkward moment but also because the point of gossiping isn’t really for the other person to learn or know about such, but rather it’s to have someone else to kick about and to make fun of essentially, and is thus mainly done for our own amusement, though there are times when it is done in a more vindictive manner.

 The one thing that people need to be more cognizant of when gossiping, is the fact that most of us probably would not appreciate being gossiped about in an especially negative and belittling way, and whenever that is the case, we ought to remember that discretion is the better part of valor and therefore not to engage therefore in saying things that we would first of all, never say to the person we were gossiping about to their face, and further to the point, we would be shamed if they were to find out that we said it, not so much because we are ugly people but mainly because we would feel guilty about saying what we said, when we could have just kept our mouth quiet.

 So too, for those that would rather hear less negative things about the faults of others, the best way to reduce such is to simply not be a part of such gossip, by either not listening to such or being a party to such, but also by making it our principle that when we talk about others, we do so in a format as if the person so being talked about, was actually there, which obviously cuts down on negative gossip, considerably, as when it comes to gossip, it takes at least two to play the game, and if the other person isn’t interested, then the game, in essence, ends.

 The other side of gossip is the recognition that the “cheap shots” that we take at others are probably not the type of cheap shots that we would like taken against ourselves.  In other words, we shouldn’t engage in activities that we would not appreciate if they were turned about and played against us, and while we might think or know some character flaws of the other, or areas in which they could improve, we ought to make up our mind to do our fair part to aid and to help the other, rather than participate in that which doesn’t reflect upon us as being a person of integrity and good.

The selfishness of the superrich and the privileged

Far too many people desire to give the credit for their success or their positive circumstances in their lives as being of their own design and none other.  While we can certainly admire people that have applied themselves diligently to the job at hand, it has to be recognized that all those that truly believe that it was solely their own effort that brought them such renowned – that they are badly mistaken for thinking that, because what America does so well, is to create the infrastructure that allows for such success, and further to the point, because of its capitalistic system, permits those that are successful in their endeavors to truly personally benefit from such.

 The thing is that those who have reaped enormous success need to always be cognizant that to get to that place, it necessitated not just the right connections but also necessitated important organizations within this country that permitted them to take their talents and to ride them to a resounding success.  This means, at the end of the day, we as individuals should not see ourselves ever as being islands unto ourselves, or if we do, then the benefits that we gain as an island unto itself should be wholly contained within that island and nowhere else.  Rather, it is imperative to recognize that we are part of a greater whole and thus we are obligated to do our good part to pay our fair share to this nation, whether that be through taxation or through attributes such as our wisdom, so that we have paid proper homage to that which laid the foundation for such success to be built upon.

 So then, as much as those who have a multitude of wealth want to believe it was all their effort, that just was never the actual case, and never could be the case, because wealth necessitates a buy-in from the general public and/or its governance, as well.  So too, it has to be acknowledged that our governance needs appropriate contributions from its citizenry, and those who have more should thereby be not just obligated to contribute more, but should understand that they need to do so, and to do so as their tribute and their patriotic duty to the nation which permitted them to have such access to that success.

 Indeed, all those who desire to live in exclusive enclaves of prosperity and to thereby as much as possible ignore those who are in need have done so to their own discredit, because the object of the exercise is to see that this nation is a bastion of opportunity for all, and not just an opportunity for the few and well-positioned.  This means that those who use all the angles and tricks and subterfuges to not pay their fair share back to the country that provided them with the opportunity to become great, aren’t just selfish, but they also are, in their own way, the same that are inimical to what this nation stands for in its foundational principles, and ought therefore to be shamed for their disrespect, greed, and hypocrisy,

America was once a colony

Here’s the thing, America was once a colony of Great Britain, so that we need to acknowledge that because American bravely fought for its freedom and its liberty from Great Britain, that for America to ever take the position and to have the attitude that it’s just fine for America to colonize other countries nearby to them or even far away, is definitely the wrong position to take, because sovereign nations deserve to be free to write their own destiny and thereby should not be exploited by other nations, especially in a way in which the people within that country are basically subjects to America, and hence are not free within their own land.

 What we need to remember about Europe is that the Americas were considered to be “discovered” by European nations, and the purpose of such a discovery was to enrich and strengthen their respective homelands through that discovery.  Therefore, when examining the great European powers of old, it is essential to acknowledge that Spain colonized Mexico, Peru, Florida, and California.  Portugal colonized Brazil, and France colonized a significant portion of Canada as well as the Louisiana territory.  Great Britain colonized a portion of Canada, along with basically being the original colonizer of the thirteen colonies, which subsequently fought for their independence and won it from Great Britain.

 All of this leads to the general point that America made the right decision at the time of its governance formation, determining that it was wise not to form permanent alliances with foreign nations, particularly with European countries.  Further to the point, the United States recognized the need to see that Europe was in one form or another, removed from our orbit in the Americas, so that America would not be forced to spend an inordinate amount of monies to not only to defend its own territory from encroachment from European nations, but also because it would be better for America, to be surrounded by sovereign nations that were friendly with America and thus good for trade and other considerations.

 So too, the issue with European empires having a footprint in America, was the fact that to protect the sovereignty of America would necessitate not only a stronger central government, and thus preempting State rights, but also that a significant portion of the federal budget would have to be devoted to military forces, which would in its effect serve to diminish civil liberties and the necessary welfare of its citizens, because whenever such a military force found little to do around and about the United States, proper, it would have a strong tendency in order to justify those expenditures of monies on armaments and the like by seeking out other lands to essentially colonize or to exploit such, which would in its own way, make America to become what it had fought against, which was fundamentally thereby to follow in the footsteps of what that British empire had been in its heyday.

 In sum, it's necessary to remember the very purpose of our Declaration of Independence as well as our Constitution, and to recognize that the principle behind the establishment of this nation was to stand for liberty, justice, and the pursuit of happiness, which should be America’s guiding light, forever, and none other.

“No justice, no peace”

It could be said, and it ought to be known, that there are no truer words than “no justice, no peace.”  In the skeins of time, it is an absolute certainty that there will be justice, for without that justice reigning throughout the entirety of conscious existence, then it is not conceivable that there will be lasting peace, because true peace necessitates truth, consideration, fairness, harmony, and justice.

 To believe, somehow, that through the sword, there will come lasting and harmonious peace, is to believe that through violence we will have a satisfactory peace, which has never been true and never will be true.  While there may well be a time when force is required, that force, in order to be justified, must be exercised within appropriate constraints and must also fully answer to universal ethics, or else that force will contribute to injustice and not to peace.

 There are far too many people that believe that peace without justice is fine, because the object of the exercise, for these misguided and unenlightened people as well as their government, is to silence or to eradicate what is disturbing that peace -- but just as the mythical phoenix will continually rise from the ashes, so thought to be dead and buried, that phoenix will come back again and again, until such a time as there is justice, for all, which has been lastingly established.

 Each of us has been created for a purpose. That purpose is to do our fair part to uphold the attributes of our immaculate Creator, which signifies that where there is no justice, we need to diligently apply ourselves -- for what needs to be resolved for the betterment of all has yet to be resolved, so then it is our collective duty to see that it is resolved. That resolution necessitates fair justice, which will thus bring peace and harmony for all.

 The test then for all those who have incarnated here, is whether or not we are on the right side of history, which signifies that those that are driven by selfishness, lies, ego, lust, and greed are the same that have clearly lost their way, for they are in continual conflict with those that are caring, truthful, sacrificial, charitable, and determined to do their good part to make society better for their valued contribution to it, which begins with seeing that justice is equally applied to all, and where there is no justice, that they will do their part to tirelessly rectify such, step by step.

 In truth, this world is our proving ground, in which we have the responsibility to think and to thereby act in a way that is consistent with good attributes such as fairness and justice one to another, and when we are unfair and unjust, we need to not just to recognize our error but we also need to amend such, for that is the only way that we will faithfully progress to the only destination that matters in which that destination is peaceful, serene, and eternally loving because it is just.

Procedural fairness

Look, part of the promise of the United States is the fact that we are led to believe that there is equality under the law, and if this was true, this nation would be in a lot better place and would truly represent not only a blessed sanctuary for those that immigrate here, but would be a bastion of fairness for all those who are citizens of this nation.

 It is one thing when there is a distinct and obvious trendline that brings us ever closer to equal justice and equality for all, as contrasted to a trendline that is moving in the opposite direction or is stagnant. That said, it has to be acknowledged that in a lot of respects, the United States is a more inclusive nation than it has historically been known for.  Still, that said, it is the last mile that is the most difficult mile, of which it doesn’t seem that presently the United States is making progress where it needs to make progress, and that is disappointing especially to all those who believe in our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution, as our founding documents that should not just represent our guiding light, but also critically, the spirit of such, must be adhered to.

 In truth, we understand our true status in life by how we are treated, fairly or unfairly, of which that treatment ought to be about fairness for all, as opposed to some being favored and others being clearly unfavored.  The way that we determine whether there is procedural fairness is not just whether it is consistent day by day, but whether that fairness consists of the appropriate respect and consideration that we owe one to another, of which the state should be the epitome of how best to conduct our relationships by conducting itself in a manner that demonstrates equality and fairness for all, and thereby is no respecter of persons.

 The fact is that our eyes do not deceive us, and further to the point, those who suffer from procedural unfairness know that they thereby are not respected equally within their community, and because their standing within that community is inferior to others, that reflects that they aren’t fully benefiting from the laws of the land, because they receive less consideration than other people do, which is unfair.

 The least that this country owes its citizenry, is to be fair to all, and to thereby do what that nation does based upon the merits of a particular situation, as opposed to prejudging others, or purposely making it essentially public policy that some who have certain physical characteristics, or have a wealth of money, or are well connected, thus hold over all others and are thereby treated with the upmost respect and consideration.

 Of course, many of us do desire favoritism, for the obvious reason that the corresponding result for us is going to be more favorable, but that isn’t fair and that isn’t right, which means that it is the governmental responsibility to step in and do its part to treat all with the same degree of respect, or else that government has betrayed its good purpose by failing to uphold our unalienable rights and failing to acknowledge that all are created equal, without exception.

This is why OxyContin became so huge

Painkilling drugs such as OxyContin were originally prescribed for patients who were at the end of their lives, such as those with terminal cancer.   The obvious problem for a pharmaceutical company that provides a painkilling drug to those who have a terminal condition is that these are the very same patients who, by definition, aren’t going to be around in this world for very much longer, which signifies that the drugs so sold aren’t going to represent any sort of growth market.

 We fairly think that pharmaceutical companies have an obligation to provide drugs that are beneficial for patients or will serve a true need for them, such as in reducing their discomfort and pain of which, providing that service should be seen as something that has its place. That said, it seems in this capitalistic system that making a profit in a market that doesn’t experience any meaningful growth is not the place for an ambitious pharmaceutical company to be, and because of that, those seeking an avenue for more profit and more revenue took OxyContin to the next level, rightly or wrongly.

 There are indeed a fair number of Americans who suffer pain, who believe that the pain they are suffering is chronic, and thus have an abiding interest in seeing that their pain is relieved.  This doesn’t seem like an unreasonable request by those suffering such pain, and in acknowledgment that chronic pain is something that should be addressed, the makers of OxyContin believed that they could successfully address such, which, in truth, they efficaciously did, because OxyContin does indeed relieve pain for patients, and does it exceedingly well.  However, the fair-minded question would then need to be asked: at what cost?

 The thing about the treatment of pain through the usage of a drug such as OxyContin is that the relief is only temporary, and further to the point, the drug does little or nothing to constructively resolve the pain that the patient is experiencing, so that therefore the patient is going to have to continually take that drug in which there could well be negative consequences for the repeated usage of OxyContin, which indeed there were. 

 The most meaningful problem with OxyContin is that it is highly addictive, in which patients not only build up a tolerance to that drug, but find that they can not function without it, thereby signifying for the makers of OxyContin that the prescription of OxyContin for those claiming to be suffering from chronic pain provided them with a massive market, because not only is the experience of pain somewhat subjective, but there are also numerous Americans that suffer from pain for one reason or another, and to have a drug that was marketed as not being addictive seemed to be a godsend for everyone.

 Yet, at the end of the day, the fact is that OxyContin is quite addictive and can, through constant use, create cardiac and respiratory issues, along with the very serious addiction issue itself, and of which there were a multitude of Americans who had no business being prescribed OxyContin in the first place but desired such, because of the euphoric feelings they received, all pretty much done under the misimpression that OxyContin was not addictive and was considered to be safe, even though we now know that the usage and misusage of OxyContin lead to many thousands of deaths.

The real significance of a multinational corporation

The United States is the richest nation in the world.  However, when we look at the world, the amount of business and population outside the United States is far larger than the amount of business that can be conducted exclusively within the borders of the United States.  This signifies that for the largest and most aggressive companies in this nation, that they aren’t really interested in just being a great national company, but they desire to do business all over the world, as a multinational corporation, with their headquarters and origin residing in the United States.  So then, it is very important for these multinational companies that as many nations as possible are open for their business, and even more importantly, once open for business that none of these countries have the temerity to preclude or to eliminate such business continuing, which is one of the main reasons why the United States devotes so much time and money to its armed forces, because quite frankly, they aren’t really there to make the world safer, but rather our military forces are there to make sure that other nations that are not currently fully aligned with the United States are obedient to its corporate dictates, because apparently what is good for these multinational corporations, is in theory, good for the United States.

 There is no doubt that trade is extremely important for nations for their continued resiliency and power.  Not to mention that once a domestic market has essentially been conquered, there isn’t going to be a whole lot of room to impressively increase revenues and profits, when domestically that nation has already been pretty much saturated with such, and because stockholders and the executive offices of corporations typically have the same desire, which is ever more profit and ever more revenue, then corporations are pretty much mandated to make this happen by doing business overseas, which should not only keep the growth curve looking quite healthy, but also will require years upon years, or many decades, before the entire world can be completely saturated with their respective business footprint, thus signifying that the outlook of future projections of profit and revenue will appear to be robustly strong.

 So too, businesses are not interested in laws being contemplated that would take away any of their avenues for revenue and profit, which signifies that to preclude this very thing, necessitates an understanding at the highest levels of governance that a government that governs best, is that government that works hand-in-glove with the biggest and most important domestic corporations for the collective perceived benefit of nation and corporations -- though truth be told, it is the population in whole that ends up suffering whenever the governance of this nation turns it back from doing something constructive about pollution, environmental destruction, special tax benefits and favoritism earmarked for corporations, and the government backstopping of certain multinational corporations that have come upon rough times at the overall expense of all those that lack that same sort of power and connections.

 To be a multinational corporation is to be in the position of power that, at its best, for those multinational corporations signifies that the laws and legislation so written are in conformance with the multinational corporation's desires, and that business overseas is faithfully supported by the big stick that America is wont to use, as influenced by those same multinational corporations.

Black police officers who became mayors

We find that there are some very big cities in which black police officers were duly elected mayor, of which two of those cities, Los Angeles and New York City, are two of the biggest and most important cities in America, where Tom Brady was mayor of Los Angeles, and Eric Adams was mayor of New York City.  Similarly, there are other black police officers who have become mayors, such as Nathaniel Trives of Santa Monica, as well as Reginald Burgess of North Charleston.

 The thing about policing is that policing is built around law and order, so that those that were formerly police officers, typically, are the very same that were part and parcel of imposing that law and order, which to a large extent, is something that those that are prominent within cities in the sense of not only power and influence, but also businesses and the like, are prone to favor those that implement policies that serve to protect well their assets and property, which signifies that they don’t care for a whole lot of protest, nonsense, or anything that will cause havoc within the city.

 This signifies that because optics counts, it makes sense, therefore, to be seen as being a progressive city by having the major of such, be a person of color, which seems to suggest that prejudices and racism within that city are not a real issue, mainly because the person so democratically elected is a person of color.  However, just because a person of color is the mayor of a given city, it needs to be acknowledged that to get to that position, or even be considered for that position, often necessitates that the nominee be in harmony with those that are the true power brokers of that city, which means, that the most salient reason why some cities elect black mayors that come from a policing background, has a lot to do with those mayors previously proving in action that they are able to toe the law and order line, as their sworn duty, which dovetails well with those that are the elites of cities, because their objective is to not only maintain what they already have, but also to enhance such, and riots, chaos, protests, and the like are typically not good for business or the image of a city.

 While former black police officers who have subsequently been elected mayor are probably for the most part good and decent people, it needs to be acknowledged that as a former police officer, they understand authority and further to the point, they understand the supposed need for the citizenry of that community to adhere to that authority and because that is so, those in the know, are going to support such for mayor, because the optics look good, as in the perception that the community is progressive and fair, while also understanding well that where order needs to be imposed, that these former police officers will likely impose that order, all for the supposed good of the community and community safety.

The Twenty Negro Law

The thing about war is that in every era and in every age, it always seems to be a poor man’s fight and a rich man’s war.  This was certainly true of the Southern rebellion of our Civil War, in which the Confederates enacted a law that stipulated that the white plantation owner would be exempt from military service if his plantation had at least twenty enslaved people, under the theory that the white man needed to be on a given plantation so as to maintain law and order upon it. Indeed, to a certain degree, this policy made sense because somebody in authority needed to still be on the plantation, especially during a Civil War and a possible slave rebellion. That said, it doesn’t seem to take into account that the same important personages who insisted that secession was necessary had provided themselves a law that would keep them safe from the fight to come.

 So too, there were plenty of white people in the South, who were not plantation owners, and owned little or nothing of their own, who were obviously not exempt from having to serve the Confederate cause, because those whites that volunteered were not enough men so needed for the Southern armed forces, and thus conscription became the law of the land, signifying that unless a white male of fighting age could find some sort of legal excuse, they were subject to that draft and to a fight that they may or may not have wanted to make, especially in consideration, that for the South, the fight was about defending the institution of slavery and the value of those slaves so held, of which, those that didn’t own slaves, weren’t going to gain much of anything, no matter how the battle turned out.

 Indeed, in any war, no matter the results thereof, there are going to be winners, and there are going to be losers, of which those who ended up dead or maimed would obviously be on the losing side. In contrast, those who benefited would not only be those who maintained their status but would also be those who were still alive and well.  This indicates that the least that those who advocated for rebellion, secession, and the like needed to do was to put their own lives at risk, and not have had hidden behind laws that permitted them not to fight, such as the Twenty Negro Law, which shouldn’t even have been needed to have been passed, if those that who were so hellbent on the protection of and the need of enslaving people, actually risk their own lives, and spilled their own blood, when insisting that secession was the right thing to do, come hell or high water.

 The thing about war is that it is hell, but those who really experience that hell are the ones who are putting something tangible on the line, such as their very lives; whereas, those who rant and rave about the need to fight, but don’t place themselves in a personal position of jeopardy, are fair-weather instigators that ought to have aligned their true intentions with their fighting words.

The illicit drug business in America is enormous

When it comes to illicit drugs in America, we find that the most popular drugs of choice are marijuana, cocaine, methamphetamine, heroin, and oxycodone.  Regarding marijuana, we read at cannabis.lacity.gov that “…legal sales in the U.S. totaled $30.1 billion in 2024,” and we know for a certainty that the black market sales of marijuana far exceeded that total.  So, it then makes sense when we read at therecovergyvillage.com that illegal drugs are estimated to be a $200-$750 billion a year market in America, which really does seem conceivable.  Whether or not we take the low estimate of $200 billion or something even higher, it needs to be acknowledged that $200 billion which is approximately the amount of sales that Chevron had in 2024, represents an absolutely massive amount of revenue, and thereby we need to understand that just like a regular corporation, those that are in illicit drug business need accountants, banks, transportation, insurance, buildings, employees, logistics, executives, managers, security, armaments, and an overall structure that makes these entities to be efficient and effective at what they do.

 This thus indicates with an absolute certainty that there would not even be close to the amount of illicit drugs in America if those in that business did not have firm alliances with certain police officers, immigration officers, politicians, banking officers, real estate firms, and other important personages. because this is way too much money and way too much drug flow for this not to be the case.  This means that the reason why the so-called “war on drugs” has essentially been an unmitigated failure has an awful lot to do with the fact that those who are most benefiting from the illicit drug business are the very same who are not going to give up easily what empowers them and puts bucketloads of money into their pockets, come what may.

 To believe, somehow that there is an actual war between drug traffickers against the policing arm of the state in which year after year, America comes up short on seriously interdicting illicit drugs signifies that there are powerful players intimately involved in the business, of which because of their connections and the usage of their power, this not only protects the illicit drug business but enhances such, in which, despite the original plan that the illicit drug market was supposed to be directed exclusively to the underclass of America, they have not only lost control of that, but at this juncture, they don’t seem to really care, because lots of money is pretty much the only thing that matters to them.

 So then, all the dog and pony shows, demonstrating the interdiction of this illicit drug and that illicit drug really doesn’t count for all that much, because each year, more and more illicit drug business is accomplished in America and this will continue to be the way that it is, until such a time as this nation, redirects its purpose to takedown the top players of these illicit drug organizations, in conjunction with those that are the enablers of such, of which, until this is done with a determined purpose behind such, we will find that the illicit drug business in America not only is not going to go away anytime soon, but will continue on the same destructive course that it has been on, for over fifty years, because money and power trumps empty words and lackluster efforts.

…To whomever much is given, of him will much be required…”

We read in Holy Scripture the following: …To whomever much is given, of him will much be required; and to whom much was entrusted, of him more will be asked. (Luke 12: 48)  Indeed, to believe that we all start at the same place when we incarnate onto earth is to believe in an obvious misread.  The bottom line is that some of us are born into very favorable circumstances, including good parents, quality education, strong connections, and a wealth of opportunities.  Then there are those that are born into very difficult and imposing circumstances, and thereby to believe that those born into privilege should be adjudged the same as contrasted to those that have been born into rather dire circumstances is to suffer from not recognizing that which is clearly evident.

 Those who are gifted with opportunity have an incumbent duty to do something of substance with the advantages that have come their way. When they, despite their advantages, end up failing, they should not just suffer the opprobrium of their contemporaries, but also need to be cognizant of their personal failure. This signifies that they should be adjudged harshly for their failure to uphold the advantages that they were privileged to be granted, so structured for the expressed purpose of achieving something of merit, meant for not only their personal betterment but also that of the society that they represent.  After all, when those that have been given much, that have not done what they ought to have done to make their community a better place for their good participation in it, this signifies that not only have they let their own self down, but they have let their community down, because when gifted with the talent to do great and good things, they did not.

 So too, those that are placed in positions of great power and are entrusted with doing right by the people -- thereby have an innate responsibility to do exactly that, for those that are entrusted to do good things for the people have an inherent obligation to make good on that.  In truth, those who have been entrusted to do good deeds but don’t end up doing anything of that kind have made the people to suffer, and should be held accountable for that, because it was their responsibility and their duty to do right, and they have instead done wrong.

 Each of us will be judged, and judged according not just to what we have done, but also what we could and ought to have done, and have thus failed to do.  Those who have great talents and have had grand opportunities bestowed upon them also have an incumbent obligation to do right by these gifts, because not everyone has these gifts, and when these are misused, misapplied, or simply never activated, then society as a whole is the domain that suffers the most.

 So then, to those who have been given much, we find that they are required to do much with their given talents, for these are the very same that have been tasked with doing great things on behalf of the society in which they are an active member, for the greater good, and for the necessary progress of humanity.