The North’s failure to destroy the planter aristocracy

The South made the cardinal error of bringing war upon the North, without taking into full consideration that the elected President had made it abundantly clear that he did not believe that he had the Constitutional authority to eradicate slavery where slavery already existed.  To the South’s discredit, they either did not believe that Lincoln’s words were true or, perhaps looking forward, they believed that it was only a matter of time, that the more populous North, containing the majority of the electoral votes, would put the sword to the institution of slavery; and thus, the South ended up rebelling.

 When it came to the Southern rebellion, it needs to be recognized, that the general population did not make this decision, but rather it was made by the upper echelons of the respective Southern State governments, which typically consisted of men that were themselves members of the planter aristocracy and thereby dependent upon slave labor, along with those that were associated with such, because of the benefits that they were able to incur, by kowtowing, submitting, or just plain joining up with that planter aristocracy. 

 The thing about war is that, as hellish as it typically is, at the end of the day, oftentimes there will be a winner, and to the winner go the spoils.  This thus meant that when the South was defeated, that the time was right to put a permanent end to the planter aristocracy, once and for all, and of which there were definitely legislators that were all for this, but they were regrettably outnumbered by those that believed that Amendments and other important actions, such as reconstruction and Northern troops would be good enough to get those that formerly were part of this Union of States, to get back in conformance with such.

 The thing about power is that power seldom willingly gives up what it has, in addition to the salient fact that those who have the connections that formerly helped secure that power are going to avail themselves of that very thing so as to get back in control of what was previously in their control.  So that, while the planter aristocracy was badly hurt, and seemingly defeated by that civil war, they were not, in virtually all cases, hanged as traitors, nor banned from this nation, and were not punished by having to vacate land property that was owned by them.  This thus signified that the planter aristocracy though humbled, was not eradicated, and because of this failure to eradicate that planter aristocracy, they over a period of time, were right back in the saddle of power again, and because the South became equal members of the United States again, it thus meant on a national level, that legislation so being contemplated and subsequently ratified, would have to have the approval of Southern representatives, which in many respects were those that had been part of the planter aristocracy or if not, were their progeny.

 All of this basically meant that while it is true that not only were the slaves freed, and that they theoretically had the ballot and thus were part and parcel of democracy, that the upshot was because the planter aristocracy weren’t banished from this nation in one form or another, and thereby their assets were not nationalized by these United States, that the freed black man was not all that better off than they were before, which is to the great shame of this nation and its history.

Welfare capitalism

The very system of capitalism, by definition, entails risk.  Therefore, whenever a so-called capitalist is in a situation in which they are being deliberately backstopped by the government, then they aren’t a true capitalist at all, but rather they are experiencing welfare capitalism.  This thus signifies that though the vast majority of corporations sink or swim based upon their merits and business conditions, that there are certain corporations, that are big enough, or considered to be important enough, that when they get things all wrong, and therefore should be subject to going out of business or being insolvent, or perhaps being bought out or nationalized, that instead for certain particular favored corporations, they are bailed out.

 Bailing out a given corporation is not only anathema to what capitalism stands for, but it is also quite frankly unfair to all those other companies that are not eligible for such bailouts.  Indeed, for this government to put its thumb on the scale, so that a select few are subsidized, protected, and valued, whereas the vast majority receives none of this favoritism, is just plain wrong.  In actuality, any company coming to the government, hat in hand, requesting favorable terms or to be bailed out for whatever reason, should either be put to the sword, or they should become nationalized.  There should be no exceptions to this rule, because this government should not be in the business of which there are those “special” corporations that are coddled and saved, no matter the structure of the deal, so ultimately done. After all, at the end of the day, that isn’t capitalism.

 Whenever we read that there are specific corporations that are “too big to fail”, we need to comprehend that if this is true, then this government should have never gotten to the stage in which it permitted that any one company became so big or so important, that the failure of such a company would be devastating to this nation and its people.  Rather, it is the governmental responsibility to see that corporations must not only compete, but that monopolies or duopolies and the like, need to be reduced to an absolute minimum, and that whenever there is a business of which it makes practical sense that they have a monopoly, such as in utilities like water or electrical, then these need to be regulated by the government, in exchange for this natural monopoly being legislated into existence.

 A free-market economy demands competition, of which that competition thereby helps to bring innovation and improvements to the general public. Indeed, it has to be admitted that without competition, then companies are going to have a strong tendency to concentrate their efforts on maximizing their profit in conjunction with lowering their risk, because they don’t have any real incentive to take a chance since they are quite satisfied with the way that things are and therefore their main concern is to see that this is the way that they remain now and into the future.

 In sum, welfare capitalism is inherently unfair because it serves to save some while letting others fail, signifying that the government plays favorites, as opposed to its duty to see that the rules are equally applied to all.

“…the communism of combined wealth and capital…”

The great thing about political speeches by Presidents is that they are recorded for posterity, so that, as good and informed citizens of this nation, we have the opportunity to look at and examine what Presidents have said and determine what these words meant to our nation, back then and today.  In 1888, President Grover Cleveland stated, “Communism is a hateful thing and a menace to peace and organized government; but the communism of combined wealth and capital, the outgrowth of overweening cupidity and selfishness, which insidiously undermines the justice and integrity of free institutions, is not less dangerous than the communism of oppressed poverty and toil…”  In other words, what President Cleveland was saying is that concentrated wealth is a danger to this nation and is not only inimical to such, but that the very freedoms so granted to us by our Constitution will not long stand when up against concentrated wealth, which undermines opportunity as well as equal and fair justice under the law, by favoring the elite over the people.

 Indeed, when a significant portion of the people find that they have little or no security in their employment, and are inundated with debts of all sorts, then they aren’t really free, because their options are quite limited and the upside for them seems rather bleak.  So too, when the wealth of this nation is garnered into ever fewer hands, then the laws of this nation and the principles of this nation have taken a backseat to those that care not for anything other than to accumulate even more wealth and thereby more influence and control of this government, by making sure that the henhouse is guarded by the fox, so that the people essentially have an illusion of a government of, for, and by the people, when in actuality that government has been captured by concentrated capital and the legislators that populate that government answer not to the people, but to that wealth.

 The bottom line is that America is a nation that is dividing itself into two separate and distinct groups, of which one is those who have it all, and the other is those who have nothing at all.  This stark division is the proximate reason why there is that clarion call for more law and order, for when those who are oppressed and therefore are not getting a fair deal, yet live in the richest nation that the world has ever known, are for a certainty not going to go down quietly, even when they are provided with plenty of bread and circuses, because at the end of the day, it doesn’t sit well within their soul, especially when they realize that as bad as it is for them presently, it isn’t going to get any better for the progeny, and because they see no good future, they will therefore not go down without a fight.

 The America of today is not a level playing field and never has been, but the greatest crime being perpetrated against the people is the fact that the present government, has essentially ceded all its power and authority to the elites of America, which means that the trendline is thus heading inexorably in the direction of even more disparity and therein lies the rub -- because the people recognize that not only are things not getting better, but they are never going to get better, because no positive change is on the agenda. So then, there will be a reckoning as to whether this government belongs to the people, in whole, or whether it has degenerated into merely being a façade and thus a betrayal of what our country was founded upon.

Practice mindfulness

It definitely matters what we think and contemplate upon, for those who direct their thoughts in the general direction of mindless domains or simply let their thoughts roam about without any real purpose behind them aren’t going to be the type of people that are going to progress and make society a better place for their participation in it, but will for a certainty, find themselves having aimed their sights upon something that is way too low and of little purpose.  In fact, each of us has been gifted with a free will mind to think the thoughts that we are totally sovereign of, and those who recognize that great power are the very same who are well positioned to do something of merit in their life for themselves as well as for others.

 We need to be mindful because so many of us can get distracted through the everyday things that are going on around us, or simply are people that prefer to let themselves go with the flow, without understanding correctly that the purpose of life is to fight against that which is worth fighting against, while also understanding the time and place to uphold that which is worth upholding and in order to do that, we need to be mindful and thus lead lives of purpose or else we will not get to the destination that we need to get to.

 In this modern world, there are a multitude of things and activities that can easily get us off track, of which, for those who are thinking we need to recognize that not everything that comes to our mind is something that we need to dwell on or address.  That is to say, those who are mindful are able to push aside that which would serve to take their eye off the prize, and therefore to concentrate on that which is worth concentrating upon, and thereby to get done those necessary things, as opposed to getting done what really isn’t necessary or important at all.

 In truth, since we can’t think about everything, we ought therefore not to permit our consciousness to wander about without good direction, for when we do, we find that we are no longer making progress, but are at best, merely cycling through the same darn things, again and again, ultimately to not get much beyond the starting line.

 It isn’t so much that we are what we think, but that what we think and ponder upon creates the domain that we operate within. So then, it is definitely true that what is foremost in our mind and what we therefore concentrate our greatest efforts on, defines what we are all about, and those who waste such in the pursuit of that which isn’t worth pursuing, or mindlessly wander about without any rhyme or reason, are the same that desperately need mindfulness, because at the end of the day, those that are not mindful and thereby purpose-driven are the same that are lost, and need mindfulness to have any realistic hope to get back on the only path that will bring them both peace as well as enlightenment.

Paying employees in arrears should necessitate an interest payment to the employee

While there are those jobs, which typically consist of gig jobs or cash jobs in which the person so doing the work does gets paid the same day, that isn’t the way that it is for most regular employees, of which very few of those get paid same day’s wages for same day’s work. Rather, they are on a schedule to be paid, which, depending on the company, might be weekly, bi-weekly, semi-monthly, or monthly, and the pay is made after the labor has been accomplished.  In other words, for those who are paid weekly, they are typically receiving their paycheck for the previous workweek and not the current workweek, which means that their pay is in arrears.  This, in itself, is not illegal; it simply is the way that business is conducted in America.

 Nevertheless, we read in Holy Scripture, “‘The wages of a hired servant shall not remain with you all night until the morning.” (Leviticus 19:13)  It would seem that back in biblical times servants were paid their wages at the completion of their day’s work, and so it does seem like we have regressed where employees have to wait days or even weeks to be paid their wages, as if American corporations can’t figure out how to pay what they owe to their employees promptly, or perhaps it’s this way because it’s been this way for so long, that they don’t even give any thought to it.

 When it comes to money, it has to be recognized that plenty of institutions make it their business to take money that is in their hands and to invest it in things such as equities, bonds, CDs, and the like.  The bottom line is that corporations have an abiding drive to take the money that they have on hand and do something constructive with it, so that the cash is effectively put to work, in order to make additional money, by, for instance, interest payments on short-term CDs or via money market funds.  This so indicates that there is a reason why companies prefer to pay employees in arrears, which is as straightforward as the fact that money makes money.  So too, it has to be recognized that in the era of inflation, money of today is worth more than money in two weeks' time. In short, employees, in aggregate, are getting the short end of the stick whenever they aren’t paid at the completion of a day’s work, or very soon thereafter.  The fair solution to such would seem to be something in which wages in arrears are entitled to interest being paid, because in a sense, the employee is loaning their labor pay to the employer and ought to be compensated for so doing.

 A fair structure, therefore, would be for a company of one hundred employees or more, being mandated by law that those employees be entitled to an interest payment for the monies so held in arrears for their labor, of which that interest rate would be calculated based upon the prevailing Federal Funds rate or something similar to such.  This then would be fair and appreciated by those who have done their part and should therefore be fully compensated for such.

The new serfdom

In aggregate, America is the wealthiest nation in the world, and it believes that its capitalistic system is integral to the success that it has achieved.  But at what cost?  Because America is the same nation, in which those who desire to investigate or to spend even a modicum of time actually visiting areas of neglect and examining their entire community, they will quickly realize that not all is well within America.

 Today’s America, despite its vast wealth, has an incredible amount of fellow Americans that live paycheck to paycheck, of which the general consensus is that around 50% of Americans are in that most vulnerable of positions, representing for most of them, that they do not have stable employment, nor is their employment wage a living wage, and they are often inundated with debts that they service but aren’t able to ever pay off.

 This is the real America, the America that those who are the elites of America push to the side, and try to negate by ignoring such in the conversations of the age.  Nevertheless, it shouldn’t be ignored, because if America is as great as it claims to be, than what about all those that are not experiencing such greatness, but rather are living troubled lives, often filled with disappointment and misery, made even worse by the fact that they know that there is an incredible amount of wealth in this nation, but such alas is concentrated in the hands of the superrich, as well as mega-corporations of which this government is effectively captured by that elite, which thereby makes it their point to not tax sufficiently those that could easily pay their appropriate share and thus be of material help to those that need such aid.

 So too, those who seek employment often do so in a construct in which their rights to fair employment have been eviscerated, and thus they are subject to being terminated, laid off, or fired at the sole discretion of the company that employs them.  The question then must be asked is how anyone who has no job security can somehow maintain some decent standing in society when they no longer are assured that they can pay the bills and deal successfully with other obligations that they must attend to?

 There was a time when this nation under a great President, made it a point, to see that a “new deal” was structured and because this new deal was well-reasoned and implemented with common sense, Americans, in whole, were benefited, because the superrich were taxed, and many laborers had the protection and the strength of labor unions to back them up so that they could receive a decent wage for a fair day’s work.  Those days are long passed, and instead far too many workers are vulnerable to all the vicissitudes of life, of which while the government does its part to provide aid and service to them, it’s all done with that same government running huge deficits, year after year, as opposed to taxing those that have the money and can well pay for what they should and ought to pay.

 Indeed, a people cannot be free when they have little or no agency and especially when that government of, for, and by the people is, in fact, nothing of the sort.

The concentrated wealth of Bitcoin owners

Whether or not a given individual has or has not at some time “invested” in bitcoin or some other cryptocurrency, the bottom line is that bitcoin, as well as the other cryptocurrencies, is in the news most every day, and therefore a significant portion of the population is familiar with cryptocurrencies.  We find, however, as reported by the wsj.com, which examined a study by the National Bureau of Economic Research, that “The study showed that the top 10,000 bitcoin accounts hold 5 million bitcoins,” and since there is around 20 million bitcoins in circulation, of which, it is estimated that there is about 100 million bitcoin owners, this signifies that the top .01% of bitcoin holders, control 25% of bitcoin itself, which is a staggering wealth disparity and demonstrative that bitcoin is not close to being evenly distributed and never will be. In fact, the percentage of bitcoin holders at the very top is so concentrated that it is nearly double the percentage of wealth collectively held by the top .01% in the United States, and it could be conceivably much more, because of the relative anonymity being one of the attributes of bitcoin.  In other words, cryptocurrency is not something that is held by millions of people all over the world in somewhat equal amounts, but rather it is controlled, perhaps manipulated, or held by a small elite of bitcoin holders, who, in all likelihood, are the very same that are highly influential upon the narrative of bitcoin, in general.

 All of the above seems to strongly suggest that bitcoin as well as all other cryptocurrencies are the new mania of the day, of which, because of its extreme concentration amongst just a few owners of such, is indicative that when those that control such a huge amount of bitcoin decide that the better part of valor is to sell what they have, and thereby make extraordinary profits, that the general public will thus be left holding the bag, much to their dismay, and to the loss of their “investment.”

 To believe, somehow, that bitcoin will become something akin to traditional currencies such as the dollar is to believe something that will never happen.  Rather, cryptocurrencies aren’t really currency, at all, and never will be currency, of which bitcoin is not presently used as currency by virtually anyone under any circumstances, because businesses as well as individuals desire something more stable to be the medium of their financial transactions, along also with whatever currency so being used must be universally accepted and bitcoin does not fit that bill well, at all. Rather, bitcoin should be seen as speculative, and those who believe the hype are the very same who will get burned by that hype, especially considering that the risk of holding bitcoin is extreme, for nothing goes up forever.

 Perhaps those who have been on the right side of the bitcoin phenomenon will continue to be right, for the rise of bitcoin is something that appears to have never happened before in the history of the financial world, and thereby, bitcoin is unique among all other investments and all other times.  This, though, doesn’t take into account the very few that control so much of bitcoin, and when their confidence abates, the carnage will be massive.

Masked law enforcement

Judge William G. Young stated in a court ruling of September 2025, "In all our history, we have never tolerated an armed masked secret police.” Indeed, it needs to be acknowledged that we currently live in a construct in which never have the citizens of this nation been more surveilled and monitored then they are at the present time, all done under the aegis that it is for their safety when the reality is that is the pretext, but it is not the reason; whereas, we find that when it comes to certain aspects of law enforcement, with the prime example being the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) that these agents of the government are permitted to mask themselves and behave in a manner in which though they are supposed to be upholding the laws of this land they seem to be in far too many cases, imposing themselves upon the population in an intimidating and extrajudicial manner.  The fact of the matter is that whenever law enforcement is permitted or allowed to hide their identity, then the upshot is this law enforcement is clearly trending in the direction of taking on the aura of other outlaw organizations that perpetrated crimes upon the people, such as the notorious Ku Klux Klan, who in their cowardice, wore costumes that hid their faces and their bodies.

 It is ironic and misguided that agents of law enforcement need to hide their identity for agent safety and so that they won’t be “doxed”.  The bottom line is that those that do not feel comfortable in performing their lawful duties without obscuring their identity are the very same that should be relieved of all their duties, and those that adhere to the position that law enforcement officers ought to be permitted to disguise themselves so that they are not easily identified or held accountable, are the very same that should be seen as un-American and thereby a clear and present danger to the Constitution, which is the highest law of this land.

 The revolutionary fight waged by the heroic colonists of America was undertaken with the express purpose of freeing the residents of America from the tyranny imposed upon them by Great Britain.  This signifies that those that are part of law enforcement, must recognized that their duty first and foremost is to serve the people of this nation, by conducting themselves in a way and manner that is consistent with that Constitution, and the wearing of masks to obscure an identity takes away the accountability that is a necessary feature that law enforcement owes to the general public and thus that lack of transparency is at loggerheads with what America was founded upon.

 Indeed, no government of, for, and by the people will tolerate a law enforcement arm that is not accountable to that people and thus behaves in a manner of which those that are exercising their civil rights are unjustly exposed to being arrested, hurt, or even killed, by those that claim to be law enforcement but have not the courage to identify themselves and to be held fully accountable to the people, and whenever this is the case, as it is so today, it is fair to label such as a police state, which, in essence, negates the freedom and liberty that are our birthright.

The superrich do rule us all

We read at the guardian.com, that “Fewer than 60,000 people – 0.001% of the world’s population – control three times as much wealth as the entire bottom half of humanity,” which is an astonishing statistic, and which seems to say, when we look around the world, that no matter which country a given citizen is a denizen of, the wealth disparity between those at the very top as compared to a significant portion of the population at the bottom is massive.  This strongly suggests that though the terms have changed, and the politics have appeared to change, that we are in many respects and in many countries, living something akin to that of a feudal society, in which, the superrich have their vassals that provide them with the infrastructure to not only maintain what they have but to continue to augment such, in exchange for those vassals having a decent and fairly fulfilling life, all built in an extreme hierarchical structure in which those that are at the bottom of the pyramid are ruthlessly exploited, directly or indirectly for the betterment of those at the very tippity top.

 The fact that this is the case in country upon country reflects that our political leaders are not independent from those that have very deep pockets but rather have effectively been captured or compromised by such, to serve not the people, in whole, but rather to serve those that help them to be in a position in which they personally benefit and are accorded a degree of power which thereby suits and satisfies them.

 It would be one thing if the trendline was in the direction of more equality of wealth, or at least some sort of direction in which the middle class remained resilient and had their say, but in reality, the superrich have gamed the system to such an extent, that they are not only gaining ground but the security of their wealth and position is getting ever stronger.  Indeed, to a certain extent, we can put a significant amount of the blame on why this is so on those who essentially serve the superrich, who are themselves compensated at a fairly generous rate; that thus provides the infrastructure and muscle to protect those who have helped to make them quite satisfied with their lot, all though at the expense of the masses which are, in essence, voiceless and powerless.

 It really doesn’t matter what alleged form of government is supposedly in charge, for every form of government worldwide appears presently to be controlled, hidden or not, by those that are the superrich and the well-positioned, of which, we know this by simply drilling down as to who does or does not benefit the most, of which we find that the laws of the land and the legislation so passed, doesn’t appear to be typically relevant, because nothing much changes for those that are the commoners of society, who are constantly exploited so that their blood, sweat, and tears can continue to fill through their labor the coffers of those that have it all and care not to put themselves in the position that what they have can ever be taken from them.

“Your papers, please”

If there is one thing that people don’t want to have to deal with, it is having to prove to whatever authority and under whatever circumstances that they are who they are, especially when there isn’t any good or necessary reason that this must be done, and oftentimes those who have to provide such proof appear clearly to have been discriminated against and specifically targeted.  To live in any nation in which certain people because of their look or apparent class, or basically their surface characteristics which are thus in conformance to what that nation appears strongly to favor, who consequently are left to go about their business as per their inclination, in which we find that in that very same nation there are a multitude of those that do not fit into those orthodox surface characteristics are thus being subject to being stopped and having to identify themselves, represents a clear and obvious difference between these two types of people, which thus favors one while discriminating against the other.

 There are very few people who welcome an interaction with the policing arm of the state, especially when their person is at a reasonable risk that they will be detained or arrested under either a pretense or for some other dubious reason.  Additionally, most people desire to be able to go about their business and do not appreciate being stopped, frisked, or made to unduly identify themselves not only because of the inconvenience and the humiliation, so of, but also because it makes them to feel lesser than all those others that don’t have to go through this inconvenience, and some of those people so stopped, end up having to suffer something far worse.

 So too, with the state getting more and more into facial recognition, monitoring, and the like, we find that those that are stopped are not typically being stopped at random, but rather they have been targeted to be stopped, which may well be because they have been misidentified -- and when this occurs again and again, this clearly is a violation of their basic civil rights.  Indeed, in absence of compelling proof that all denizens of this nation are always treated in the same way, subject to the same application of the laws, and done so fairly, we have a situation in which some are treated differently than others, and just about everyone in that type of circumstance, wants to be treated favorably because they want to be able to be free to be about their business.

 The fact that the United States seems to be devolving into a state in which those that are unfavored, targeted, or just in the wrong place at the wrong time, are basically being compelled by law to identify themselves just makes for what is essentially a police state, in which some are privileged -- whereas others are not privileged, which is at odds to what this nation is supposed to be about and therefore should be seen for what it is, a concentrated assault upon our liberties and anathema to what our revolution of independence and freedom was all about.

Even in democracies, the wealthy rule the unwealthy

It’s pretty much a truism that those who have bucketloads of money are going to be able to get what they want, far more times than not, than those who clearly outnumber them but have not the resources or the connections to have their fair say.  When we look at today’s modern democracies, it has to be admitted that definitely the richer are getting ever richer, and because this is true, it thus signifies that those who could use the money or who need the money have far less money that is going to come their way.  Further to the point, most people can’t get their heads around what a billion dollars is, let alone billions upon billions of dollars, so that those who overly concentrate on personal wealth and its ability to get its way, without taking into consideration the even more massive sums of corporate wealth, do not truly know what they are up against, because combined they rule the roost.

 In politics it has to be recognized that most politicians in order to be competitive need both money as well as connections, and because of that, no matter how elegant and charismatic that a given politician might be, they are in the vast majority of cases, compromised by the fact that those that are supported by concentrated money along with the necessary connections, must first pay back those that have put them in that position of power, so that, in actuality, those that are our public leaders have a debt that first must be paid back and that they must answer to, which is why, the changes that so many citizens desire, aspire for, and should have, never appears to occur, and when it does occur, it happens many years later, and only because those that rule, recognize that civic unrest isn’t healthy for countries or their stability, so of.

 One would think that one person, one vote, which is what democracies represent, would clearly mean that the people would not only elect those who would best serve their purposes, but also would mean that the legislation so being discussed and subsequently passed would be in conformance with the people’s wishes.  Yet, this isn’t true, and even when it appears to be true, behind the scenes of that legislation so having been passed, will oftentimes be found to have been compromised by those that are supposed to regulate and oversee such, but have been effectively “captured” by corporate behemoths, and/or the judicial decisions which have subsequently been rendered that consistently favor the positions of those that have that money power.

 It has got to be remembered that those that have money, personal as well as corporate, are the very same that are not only extremely reluctant to give up any of that money without a corresponding benefit, but rather have what appears to them to be a duty to get even more of it, which means, fair or foul, they are going to get things done, and those of the general public are subsequently left thereof with nothing much more than the proverbial crumbs from their master’s table.

The favored race will not go quietly

The history of America is written in a way that it is always about the white man, and the tales so told are typically from the perspective of the white man to thus give the overall impression that this is the white man’s land.  While it is true that what we know as America was essentially brought into being by the white man’s ingenuity and effort, this was, though accomplished through the help of and upon the backs of those who were enslaved, oppressed, or ultimately reduced to living upon reservations. 

 We do live in a modern age in which there is more room to maneuver and be successful for those who have not been born of the favored race, which is good for those who express the belief that America represents a melting pot and is fairly open and accommodating to all those of various creeds, national origins, and different backgrounds.  This is all to the credit of America, and for the most part, the trendline seems to be heading in the more inclusive type of direction in which all those who are its citizens are fairly accorded respect based upon the content of their character and not therefore on just their surface characteristics, which obviously would represent unfairness and injustice.

 Yet, the one thing that needs to be recognized is that there is a significant part of the favored race which simply wants to not just turn the clock back, but believes wholeheartedly that things were better back then, when the white man need not respect the rights of any other race or those of the wrong religion, thereby signifying that by their whiteness, they were, by definition, superior to anyone else outside that domain, which thus brought comfort especially to those that were white but had little or nothing of merit to show for it and their inherent advantages.

 Indeed, it has to be admitted that in any society in which a significant portion of such, insists upon comparing themselves to others, and thereby feel that it is their inherent right to be superior to all those that they believe were meant to be inferior to them, thereby signifies that they will not go quietly into the good night, because they will not accept this unacceptable changing of the guard.  These are the type of people that halt progress because they just won’t let it go, since they feel a need to not just desire that those not of their race be put in their place, but also can’t stand to see any of them that are superior to them exist in comfort and respect.

 Look, the bottom line is that all those that are expected to be better because of their birthright but somehow are not better have a very strong tendency to resent the success of those that haven’t been born with the same favoritism, because this reflects poorly on them, and makes them deeply resentful anytime that they see success outside of their race, which makes them to feel that they are a failure, which leads them to drink and drugs and all sorts of other ill behaviors because they cannot accept what they cannot accept.

The law as it is

There are certain people who are firmly on the side of the need for ever more law and order.  The question to ask, though, is how many of these people are people who are struggling, or oppressed, or disadvantaged, or ill-educated, and thus treated as second-class citizens, at best?  The bottom line is that those who declaim the loudest that we need ever more laws and ever more order are the very same who have something of real worth in their lives, whether that is their home, their person, their savings, or their good place in the hierarchy of society.  These are the very same that want laws that, for all practical purposes, protect them and are of use against those that they fear or that annoy them.

 While it could be said that there are also people that have fairly modest lives that also believe that we need more law and order, but we find though that these people come typically from a different perspective, which is that they are fearful within their own community that some of those that are its congregants are bad people that are causing trouble to the community, and reflect poorly upon that community, and what they want is more peace and quiet, so that they can live fairly decent lives. At the same time, what they are not asking for is some sort of quasi police occupation that puts the hammer down upon those people without really ascertaining where the problems actually lie, and of which that policing arm apparently doesn’t seem to care who they wrongly affect or harm unduly in their actions.

 So too, those who cry the loudest for more law are the very same who want that law selectively applied.  That is to say, should they or their children do something that clearly is unlawful, they want to be treated with kid gloves, because at their heart, their perception is that they are good people, that may have made a mistake but it is the type of mistake that can be dealt with as a family matter that does not need the long arm of the law to apply itself; and when it does, to take into full consideration that because they are successful taxpaying citizens that they should be treated differently and ultimately should be free to be about their business with just a warning and nothing much more.

 So then, the real reason why there are so many laws, of which the general population is never fully informed or knowledgeable about all of these laws, is never about justice or doing the right thing by the people, but is in fact a structure created to arrest just about anyone at just about any time under just about any circumstances in which some portion of some law can be applied.  In other words, the law as implemented by the policing arm of the state, is the tool of the powerful and connected, structured to keep those that need to be put in their place, in their place, and is never meant to be used against those of that privileged milieu that effectively runs the show, unless it becomes necessary as an example to put them in their place, as not only as a bone to the people, in general, but to sell the illusion that the law is equally applied to all, and no respecter of persons, even though it clearly is not.

Last names and the print media

When we are having a conversation with someone, we seldom address that person just by their last name; rather, we use their first name, nickname, or Title, such as Sir or Miss, and so on.  That is to say, when we address somebody strictly by their last name, it typically is in a situation in which the superior person, such as a  Sergeant or a Teacher of some sort, addresses everyone that way, pretty much as a demonstration of their authority over the other person.  Therefore, it is rather surprising that when we examine any form of print media, whether in actual print or online through various social forums and the like, the industry standard is often just the last name, with seldom anything else included.

 Perhaps this doesn’t bother most people, because they are used to it, but then again, the people that aren’t bothered are typically the readers, but not the person, so being involved, because that person hasn’t been directly asked.  So too, perhaps the person that is being written about isn’t bothered because they are used to it, or inured to it, but it has to be admitted that for most of those people being written about, just being addressed by their last name is not how they are dealt with in the real world and therein lies the rub -- for the bottom line is that there surely should be some sort of compromise that can be obtained which satisfies all parties, and that would seem to be something as simple as adding that person’s first initial, or the initials of their first and middle name, so that what you have, for example, with a person such as James David Smith, is instead of writing Smith, it’s J Smith or JD Smith, which not only flows just fine, but is also going to be more satisfactory to James David Smith, as well.

 At the end of the day, it just makes sense when writing about people to write in a manner which is consistent or at least in harmony with how we might address them in person, and adding an initial or two doesn’t seem to be all that daunting for those that are utilizing the written word, because most people desire to be dealt with in a respectful manner and just the last name without the first name or initials with it, could be seen as disrespectful by some, and therefore should be subject to being changed.  After all, there are plenty of things that have been standard practice back in the day, but have ended up being changed, because it was seen as being beneficial in making that change, of which, an adjustment to just utilizing the last name of the person so being written about just seems to be one of those things that should be changed, and therefore ought to be changed, and the sooner that this occurs, the better that it will be.

Compensatory consumption

The thing about America is it is, by definition, filled with ad after ad that sell the story that this particular good or item will make someone’s life to be appreciably better. In addition to the perceived fact that they will also be admired for having obtained it.  This is seconded by today’s social media influencers who, because they are often perceived to be somebody that we can identify with, sell the very same sort of story, of which the good that they are pitching and praising will bring status upon the recipient if only they would purchase such.

 Logically, we know that status symbols, especially when bought to achieve that status, really don’t change who and what we are at our core.  Yet, that siren song seems to appeal to many a person and in particular appeals to those that feel that they aren’t where they want to be or ought to be, and therefore need surface like things and labels to sell their story that they are successful, and that they are to be a person to be admired, so signified by the fact that they have the right prestigious accouterments that typically they make quite visible to friends and associates, as well as to the population, at large.

 Not too surprisingly, companies that sell goods are quite cognizant that some of their buyers, if not the majority, so of, are people that are eager to purchase those goods that will make them to believe that their status will be embellished, and they play upon that urge by focusing on that consumer base, by basically telling their customers, that indeed they will after they have purchased that item, be now respected, be now recognized, and be now envied.  Whether such is literally true or not, doesn’t matter so much as long as the person making that purchase believes it, themselves.

 So too, those items that have taken on the aura of being something that enhances one’s image are the very same that stores are able to charge consumers for at a higher price, by virtue of providing the access and therefore the privilege of helping the consumer upgrade their image, which ends up being quite good for the seller’s bottom line.  So then, those that are in that business are only too happy to have customers that perceive the need to purchase what they are selling, so as to make themselves feel better about who and what they are – though beneath the surface it would be fair to assert, that these purchases are often being done as a perceived needed compensation to make up for the fact that many of these clients are either not of the favored race, or have not come from the most favorable circumstances, in which these visible items represent proof positive that they should now be accepted as being successful and of visible merit, which seems to say that they are in their own way now on the same level as those that were fortunate enough to be born with the proverbial silver spoon in their mouths.

“The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those that speak it”

The above quotation is typically attributed to the great George Orwell, but in fact, although it is consistent with his beliefs, it is not contained within his known writings.  That said, the profundity of what this statement means is apropos of what we see in the society of today, which expends far too much time and effort creating a narrative that oftentimes isn’t close to the truth, and those that propagate these lies are the very same that know the truth but dare not speak it, because to do so would take from them their power and authority.  Indeed, we live in a time in which more and more we find that the government that is supposed to be of, for, and by the people, in addition to providing beneficence to the people, has instead its own agenda that predominates its narrative, which is to control and to manipulate the people for the greater benefit of those that are the power brokers of this nation.

 When truth dies, so does the society that we are members of, because those who live in lies are the same who have forsaken truth for that which is the anathema of truth.  So too, not only will those that lie to us, desire to hunt down those that would distribute the truth, as well as to hate those truth-seekers and truth speakers, but they will make it their principle interest to see that those that stand up for truth that contradicts the lies that they are spinning day and night, are shunned, silenced or compromised as much as they are able to do.

 To live within a construct in which lies are king is to live in a type of hell, because those who are subservient to lies are the same who have done so to the disgrace of their good character and are therefore harmful to the society which they are a member of.   To live for truth is to live for goodness, to live for justice, and to live for what is right, and those who will not break and run when faced with the troubling winds of lies are those who are the epitome of what it means to be a noble and true soul.

 To testify to truth, especially when those that are in power are full of lies and deceit is not an easy thing, but it needs to be done because the only way to take down those that lie to us, is to stand arm in arm with truth, because not only is that the right thing to do, but it is the necessary thing to do, for when good people, sell out the qualities that humankind need in order to build successful and vibrant communities, they have done so to not only their own personal destruction but also to the destruction of that which we were meant to uphold, as our highest duty, for those that are true, are those that have run their race well and proper, and are the same that we should faithfully follow to the only finish line that matters.

Concentrated power is never good for freedom

Look, it has to be admitted that concentrated power is the type of power that, while it may well do some good, seems to be outweighed by the distinct tendency for those who have that concentrated power to take care of what they desire and want first, and perhaps if they are generous and somewhat fair-minded, to subsequently provide some sort of benefit or aid to those that they have power over.  This, in the scheme of things, in any form of government that is by Constitutional decree, of, for, and by the people, is clearly at loggerheads with what a democracy should represent, for a democracy should have a diffusion of power, with appropriate checks and balances in play, so that no one particular entity or department can lord it over all others.  While it could be said, because of this diffusion of powers, perhaps getting things done or achieved will be more difficult to accomplish, whether true or not though it has be taken into fair account that the most important thing is that the people have their fair say, for it is the people that governments are supposed to be created for and for whom they serve.

 Regrettably, in the United States, we find that mega corporations that have profits year in and year out, of billions upon billions of dollars, and of which, the competition with other mega corporations of a similar ilk seems to be on a steep decline, this thus indicates that what these mega corporations want they are often going to get, because not only does money talk, but also because those that could influence mega corporation policies, are in way too many cases, the same type of representatives that have been “captured” by those mega corporations and are thus in place to take care of mega corporations desires.

 So too, the more power in the hands of opaque governmental operatives, which track and monitor more and more of what Americans are doing in their lives, presents to these operatives the power to compromise or to manipulate the people, so that their various freedoms of speech, and of assembly, are constrained by the government, in one way or another, thereby signifying that the people are more and more having to cede their freedom to the government, for their alleged safety, or homeland security, or just about anything that seems to make sense.

 Those then that want to remain free, need to have the power to be free, and when mega corporations have seemingly all of the power, then those that are the employed, which are the laborers of this nation, but without a powerful union to back them up, are at the mercy of mega corporations when it comes to their pay, their benefits, and the security of their employment.  Additionally, those who trade freedom for supposed security from elements that could harm them or take away what they have, are the very same who have played into the hands of concentrated power, because concentrated power wants, above all, obedience, and cares not a whit about freedom, but rather believes that freedom needs to have in place appropriate restraints, so determined by those with the power, and none other.

Matthew 5:16

We read in Holy Scripture “Even so, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 5:16).  This type of sentiment is something that more people that profess to being Christian, and a good Christian at that, need to pay very close attention to and be mindful of, because those that claim that they love Christ, should be able to prove that by their good deeds, for faith without works isn’t much of a faith, at all.

 Indeed, those that have ever gotten in trouble with the law and therefore have had to face a judge to pronounce judgment upon them, are almost invariably the same that admit to their regret and remorse, of which, the bottom line for those that are sincere in what they have just said, is thus demonstrated by how they subsequently perform in their interactions with others, wherever that may be, because sincerity starts with doing the right thing, and especially doing so, when there is something of merit on the line.

 To be a fair-weather Christian is to be the sort of person who means well, or means to do well, but never seems to get to the actual business of doing good for others, and additionally never seems to involve them engaging in any sort of self-sacrifice for the greater good.  Those who love Christ are the ones who, when faced with a challenge or a dilemma, are able to rise up and to do what needs to be done, because only when that is occurring does the rubber truly meet the road.

 In life, we are given the fair opportunity to demonstrate our character, again and again, of which those that step up and do the right thing, are demonstrating good character; whereas, those that don’t step up and cannot be counted upon when it really matters are the same that nobody should consider to be of a good Christian character, because they do not have the corresponding works that demonstrates this very thing.

 Look, while we cannot control what does or does not happen to us, or the interactions that we are involved in, what we can control is how we react and what we do about those things that are of most importance to us.  So then, those who stop and make the extra effort to be kind and of service to others are Christian, which is what we should aspire to be, because the greatest amongst us are those who serve, so as to make society a better place for their valued participation in it.

 So too, there are plenty of people that don’t tremble when they think of judgment day, but these typically are made up of those that have an ego that has deceived who and what they really are because they don’t really desire to know that -- but having made this fateful decision they will rue that day when they are called to account for those that lack good deeds are the same which won’t find the only destination that really matters being available for them.

Oftentimes, traffic tickets are way too expensive, and they are always regressive

The way that our income tax system works is that it is progressive, which essentially means that those who earn more pay more, which is fair, because there is a need for the redistribution of income so that those who are most needy are provided with the necessary funds and aid so that they can have a decent life.  Indeed, those who are wealthy are the very same who can afford to pay more in taxes, which is why the tax structure of this country is progressive in nature, and why taxes that are regressive in nature should be minimized as much as they can be.

 When it comes to traffic tickets, a traffic ticket and its associated fees as well as possible punishment for failure to pay that ticket, or failure to appear in court, and so on, are structured so that those being issued such a ticket, no matter their income or lack thereof, pay the same amount, which thus signifies that these are regressive taxes, which in and out itself, might be tolerable, if the traffic tickets were actually commensurate with what the traffic violation was all about.  In other words, someone that is exceeding the speed limit or has run a stop sign when there literally is no other traffic about, appears to be unfair, when the fine for such is excessively high; whereas, those that are speeding on the highway and darting from lane to lane in traffic which is fairly heavy, should definitely have to pay a serious fine, because their bad driving could well cause an accident. 

 Yet, we find that except for driving without a seatbelt, that just about every traffic ticket nowadays has a fairly hefty penalty to it, in addition to the fact that traffic tickets increase the insurance that the driver has to pay, signifying that getting a traffic ticket while never being welcomed, can be especially problematic for those that are just struggling to get by, of which, in the United States, there are a multitude of people that are just scrapping by to begin with.  All this becomes even more troublesome for those who have received a traffic ticket when they aren’t able to make an on-time payment or work out some sort of payment schedule, if so available, which leads these unfortunate people to be on the pathway in which their license could well be suspended, and they could even at some point, have to suffer jail time.

 All of the above would not be necessary if traffic tickets were structured so that for the most part the fines were significantly lower than they are presently, especially for those things which don’t represent a real hazard, all things considered; but in actuality, the price of tickets is something that seems to increase yearly and definitely exceeds the inflation rate, signifying that those that determine the amount of these fines simply are doing so because they want that money and seemingly don’t care how much of a burden this may or may not represent for those that have been ticketed, under the distorted belief, that people should not commit the traffic violation, if they are unwilling to pay the fine.

 In actuality, this really comes down to fairness, and regressive taxation which doesn’t take into account what people can actually afford to pay, or take into account, how certain areas of a given community are going to have more tickets issued not because the drivers are worse, but simply because there is more police presence isn’t fair at all, especially when those police officers have an implied quota of tickets that they need to issue, day by day.  In sum, traffic tickets for offenses that are minor should not be overly punitive.

Bank fees for handling cash transactions

One might be excused for believing that banks are in the business of specifically handling cash transactions, as well as checks and electronic transactions of all types, and that pretty much everything is therefore fairly covered as a feature provided to customers' accounts with said bank.  In actuality, for some reason, major banking institutions don’t seem to like businesses that have what they claim to be an excessive amount of cash transactions, which might only be at a monthly limit of just $20,000 or even much less, and thereupon mandate that a fee be imposed for cash transactions above that monthly limit, which is applicable each month.  The reason for the fee seems to be that cash transactions involve more personal labor than transactions of an electronic nature or what a check would represent.

 While to some people this type of reasoning might seem to make sense, it has to be acknowledged that all forms of electronic or checking-type transactions are essentially representations of cash.  That is to say, a check of $1000 is the representation of cash, and is therefore if so cashed, that entity would receive $1000 in cash – so that it would seem to make sense that all those businesses that bring in cash, shouldn’t have to pay a fee for having what checks and electronic forms of such represent, because ultimately cash is the real deal.

 When it comes to banks we find that part of their policy appears to be to find a way to nickel and dime the consumer or business, so that the fees associated with an ATM, or having a banking account, or overdraft protection, and so on are structured to be the type of nuisance so that while people and businesses might not like it, they won’t though take their business elsewhere.  This, in a nutshell, is why cash transactions that exceed a certain amount are presently having to pay an additional fee -- as this isn’t something that existed from the beginning, but rather was no doubt tested, and when not enough pushback was received, subsequently implemented by those banks.

 Another way, though, of looking at the fees involving cash transactions is that we know for a certainty that big businesses aren’t going to have to pay that fee, because their size and the business that they bring protects them from having to pay those nuisance fees.  Rather, it is the smaller businesses that have to pay the piper, which is quite unfortunate, because they are the very same that they don’t have enough power or influence that thus permits them typically to get a better deal, and since they have to pay that fee, it only makes sense that they pass that fee onto their customer base as the cost of doing business, which means that small businesses and the consumers of such, pay a bit more, in which the big banks earn a little more, all at the expense of those that deserve a fair deal.