To find the most important answer, you need to ask the most important question

Mankind fails so often in actually taking the time and exerting their mind to think through the most important questions in life, but rather, typically exists day-do-day without examining in detail, or making the effort to find the source and raison d'être of mankind's existence.  If, mankind will not ask the question, then surely mankind will not know the answer and in not asking the most important questions, such as why we are here to begin with, and therefore what should our objective be in being here, mankind creates the construct in which mankind lives, which often times is an existence that is unjust, cruel, cold, uncaring and inharmonious.

Though mankind has made great technological progress over the last two centuries, and has considerably increased the human lifespan as well as good health, along with a corresponding great improvement in literacy rates, in addition to the creation of a vibrant middle class and hence a more egalitarian society;  it has typically not resolved the continuing gross inequalities throughout life, along with the mindless violence, wars, and the oppressiveness  utilized by so many governments and people, so that mankind rather than living lives of liberty and pursuing happiness are too often, constrained in their actions, and fundamentally unhappy and dissatisfied.

So many of these troubles can be laid at the feet of all those that do not question not only the natural order of things as they currently are, but do not question the purpose of life; but rather get involved in asking questions and seeking answers to things that are at best, a distraction, and at worse are inimical for a good life.  One possible reason as to why mankind, shrinks from wanting to know the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, is that in that knowing, mankind will know for a certainty that they have failed in their behavior and in their deeds, and therefore their fault lies not in the stars, but in their own selves.

Unfortunately, ignorance is never going to be a legitimate excuse as why anyone is justified in their failing to accomplish the activities that they need to address in a given life, for each of us is gifted with a good mind, and a free will, of which, the greatest test that anyone can give another, is to allow that person to freely choose what they will or will not do, and those decisions, define the person as they really are.  So that, those that will not question the order of things, and will not bother to examine their own life, are essentially running their lives on autopilot in which if they are fortunate they still can accomplish even great things of good and worth, simply by being forthright and sincere in all that they do.  However, happenstance, good fortune, and being with the right people, can only take a given person so far, for ultimately, those that will not ask the most important questions and thereby learn and apply the most important answers, are forever stuck in an endless cycle that they will not have the exit velocity to escape from, for they know not and seek not, for that which answers all.

Dehumanization and wars

The art of war really is a dark art, for to kill other human beings is not the natural order of things, and can only be willingly done by those that are either a sociopath or psychopath in personality, because those personality disorders have effectively killed off their conscience; or by those that have been indoctrinated to kill the enemy, of which  that killing is justified as an act of self-defense or  of justified liberation, or as an act which is necessary because the enemy has been defined as something lesser than human, labeled consequently as a clear and present danger to the state, and therefore just as in killing of an animal, such is permitted and sanctified by the state.

In point of fact, look at any of the war propaganda produced in wars such as World War I and World War II and see the caricatures of the enemy, so prominently depicted as something demonic, evil, subhuman, racist, and primitive, so that the enemy is perceived as something that has to be eradicated, as in a virus, for the protection and virtue of that country which considers itself, alone, to be truly civilized.  To make matters even worse, those that do not facially look like the prevailing power structure and do not have the religious faith of that prevailing power structure, are far more easily able to be demonized, for the looks of that enemy as well at the beliefs of that enemy allows the state to more readily justify the killing of such, as sanctioned not only by the state, but often approved by God, especially if those people are seen as infidels and unbelievers with a corresponding look that does not match that prevailing power structure.

The more that any country dehumanizes another country, the more war that there will be, and the more that any country recognizes the innate dignity and humanity of another country, the less war there will be, because in the natural order of things, mankind does not kill its own, unless pushed to the brink or mesmerized into believing that what is human is actually not. 

Those that make it their business to dehumanize others, whether on an individual basis or on a state basis, are the provocateurs of hate.  Those that hate without good reason, or by hating lose their good reason, are a danger to other people as well as to the state.  Any country or society that encourages or abets the hate of others, especially when such is unjustifiable, unwarranted, and unnecessary, are clearly out of their minds, for hatred and dehumanization are the precursors of all sorts of violence and ill behavior.

Every human being, no matter where they are born, have innate human rights; those rights are unalienable as gifted to all of us by our Creator, and those that make it their point to take away those rights, without a full, complete and just accounting of why this is so, especially when having done so by the deliberate and premeditated dehumanization of those that are human, have committed a very grave offence, of which such shall and must be judged for what it is, so that in the end we will have: "… justice roll on like rivers…" (Amos 5:24).

Moral hazard and insurance

Most people believe that insurance is a very good thing, even necessary, and that overall, having insurance is beneficial because for a relatively small premium or co-payment, the insured is covered for catastrophic or unexpected losses.  Dictionary.com defines moral hazard as "the risk that an individual or organization will act irresponsibly or recklessly if protected or exempt from the consequences of an action."  That is to say, moral hazard, is exactly the problem with any organization or institution which is "too big to fail," and consequently gets bailed out by the government.  So too, moral hazard is a potential problem for all corporate officers that are able to avail themselves of excessively leveraged or ill-advised risks, knowing that they will not personally suffer the consequences of any corporate failings, which includes bankruptcy or receivership, if such risks fail.  Additionally, moral hazard is the issue for people that will behave differently and hence more irresponsibly if their belief is that whatever that they do, will be covered fully by their insurance

One of the most inane sayings of all time, which purports to be inspirational, is the question, "If you knew you couldn't fail what you do?"  Incredibly, the amount of credulous people that buy into this so-called profound nonsense, indicates that they are completely clueless when they actually bother to respond to this question by coming up with all sorts of ideas and things that they would actually do.  Clearly, the only correct answer, takes but a moment of reflection, which is, that a motivated person would do exactly nothing, because when it is not possible to fail, then the assignment so given is far too simple to perform, and therefore one needs instead to push on to something that actually requires effort, challenge, and the actual fear of failure.

Unfortunately, because of moral hazard, there are far too many institutions, corporations, and individuals that treat what should be seen as suspect, as something that is a certainty, and consequently go ahead and treat such as if they could not possibly fail, not because they actually believe it, though, some do, but mainly because of their own selfish self-interest.  Nor is this limited to just institutions, corporations, and individuals, for often governments behave in exactly the same way, especially when those governments take it upon themselves to act egregiously wrong internally or externally to the national interests, by ill-advised foreign escapades, or the taking on of too much national debt, and so on, of which, because there doesn't appear to be any one person that "the buck stops with," it is essentially moral hazard, run amok.

It is well known that counterfeit money drives out good money; so too, moral hazard, will, if not dealt with at its source, essentially take something as sound in concept as insurance, and effectively eviscerate it, so that, a government that will not service its debt, may well abandon that currency with dire consequences for its population; a government that continually abuses the sovereignty of other nations, will eventually suffer such abuse in return; a  behemoth corporation that over leverages itself in risky investments will lead to not only its collapse but even possible national economic collapse; and an individual that takes unnecessarily dangerous risks when they should not, may suffer unto death.

Fight or flight or…

There are all sorts of false dichotomies put out there that purport to be true and profound, of which, some of them most definitely are not.  When it comes to the fear factor, in regards to confrontation of all sorts, we are told that our two most basic choices, perhaps, our only choices are to either fight the threat or to take flight from it.  But the reality of it is life itself, and the experiences that most people have had, indicate that this isn't close to being the whole truth.  For instance, many people have stood around to watch a school fight of which, a significant amount of those "fights" often involve a lot of talking, boasting, posturing, feinting, but no actually fighting that ever takes place.  This, in a nutshell, proves the point that confrontations are not just limited to fighting or fleeing.  In fact, confrontations can call upon a multitude of responses, including negotiation with the other party, so as to prevent a fight, or to appease the other party and so on.

The real reason why there are so many other options besides fighting or fleeing is because, for instance, fighting involves real risk to all parties involved and hence isn't ideal because of that risk; whereas fleeing while perhaps remaining true to the proverb of "living to fight another day," doesn't actually resolve the problem, but merely postpones it until another day.  So too, people are prone to all sorts of posturing, in regards to their body language or their voice, not so much because they are trying to "psych" themselves up to actually fight, but rather it is often the very opposite of that, which is to take on the aura of someone that is willing to do battle, so as to get the other person to take notice that there may well be real and legitimate reasons that have provoked such a response, that need to be dealt with.

To really believe that life only has "either, or" consequences is to simplify way too much what human life is all about.  In actuality, human confrontations, often present a myriad of options, of which mankind would not have evolved as far as it has, it those choices merely came down to fighting or fleeing, for if that was the case, there would be a heck of a lot more fighting in this world, than there already is.  We should be grateful for all the posturing that is done instead of fighting or fleeing, which allows each party to thereby maintain their honor and dignity, while also allowing cooler heads to prevail over a period of time, for many things that generate fearful situations, dissipate if no fuel is added to that fire.

It can be said that the more that people fight, the more fights that there will be, for might does not make right.  So too, the more fleeing that people do, the greater the delay in getting to the issues at hand, for running away from something that must be faced, only serves to delay that which must be faced.  On the other hand, those that posture and negotiate understand that it is these dances, so to speak, that help to make a better and more accommodating civilization.

The premeditated killing of a human is murder, except…

For every hard and fast rule there seems to be an exception, of which some of those exceptions, may have validity, whereas many of them, definitely do not; though the defenders of those exceptions will provide all sorts of reasons, as to why such and such should be an exception to that rule.   When it comes to targeting killing, there are countries, of which the most notable example is the United States, that somehow are able to make what they believe to be a legitimate argument as to why these targeted killings should not be branded as crimes against humanity, and therefore why the United States is not the haven thereof of war criminals.

The targeted killing of another is really just the rebranding of assassination, and therefore targeted killing is essentially as stated by Wikipedia.org the killing: "….of an individual by a state organization or institution outside a judicial procedure or a battlefield," which clearly is exactly what the United States has been doing in their undeclared wars against foreign nations such as Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria.  In addition, this is the same action taken against nebulous organizations such as Taliban and Al Qaeda.  The given reason why the United States engages in targeted killing is to basically kill the "bad guys," as conveniently defined by the United States.

It would be one thing if the United States, before it conducts its targeted killing, was to go forth before the United Nations, and actually make its case within a public forum, and therefore have a judgment rendered as to whether, first of all, the use of killing force is justified against that perceived enemy, and further whether the use of targeted killing, and the conditions of that targeted killing, are thereby conducted in a manner consistent with such a judgment, if the use of force was approved to begin with.

Instead, the United States, simply does whatever that it so desires to do in regards to targeted killings, and has dubious position papers written that supposedly supports their interpretation of the legitimacy of these targeted killings, that the United States so wants.  If the United States truly believes that international law and that the United Nation rulings does not apply to the United States, when the United States believes that such a ruling would be unfavorable or inconvenient to them, then why should any other country abide by that rule of law, if the sole superpower of the world, believes it is above such laws, when it suits its purposes to be so?

When any country takes it upon itself to simply kill what that country believes is in their best interests to kill, of which such actions include targeted killings and assassinations of which these premeditated killings are done deliberately in a non-transparent, deceptive, and extrajudicial manner, then the legitimacy of their cause must be called into question, for those that believe that the ends justify the means, are never beacons of liberty, justice, and freedom but instead actually represent oppression, injustice, and suppression by any means, necessary. 

Knowledge and omniscience

Children go to school from a very early age in order to learn, and some of these children learn so well, that later after much additional postsecondary education, they become experts in advance sciences such as astrophysics, thermodynamics, and so many other various subjects.  Some of these experts are geniuses in their field, and some are quite impressive in their application of that knowledge, of which from these people as well as so many others, mankind has advanced in its technological knowledge as well as being able to increasingly master this world for the betterment of mankind.

Yet, as knowledgeable as some people are, as brilliant as some people are, and as perceptive as some people are, there is not one person on earth that is able to absorb all that has been written, or all that has been spoken, or all that has been taught, so that they truly are the master of every field known to mankind at the present age, as well as knowledgeable of all that which is beyond mankind's perception at the present time.  That is to say, the knowledge that any particular person can comprehend and thereby utilize effectively is often quite limited.

While there is a lot to be said about book knowledge, or experience knowledge, as well as all those that see things as they currently are, and are thereby curious enough to want to understand how and why these things operate as they do; that though impressive, is still far short of mastering all knowledge. In short, though mankind has knowledge, too often that knowledge is either limited or incorrect in some way.  Yet, there is a being that knows everything that is to know and everything that could ever be known, which is God.

This would surely signify that the greatest knowledge that any mortal could obtain here on earth, is held not in the books of the realm, or the words of mere mortals, or in the experiences that each of us has, but rather that knowledge is contained within God and is of God, of which that knowledge is universally available to all, if only we would make it our point to search diligently for such. 

The surest path to knowledge is a straight line, and that line leads directly to God, for all other paths are mere tributaries at best, or rivers, or streams, but God is that One ocean of complete and unerring knowledge, unfathomable to most, but readily available to all who will not settle for poor substitutes or pale reflections of that one great and illuminating Light. 

Those that have a yearning to learn, learn best by learning from the Best.It is critical that such learning not be dogmatic or restrictive or corrupted by those that claim that their religion is the one true orthodox religion, for God stands apart from all sectarian strife, doctrinarian error, and false dogma.For all those that sincerely seek for that knowledge, need first to quiet their mind, as well as to free themselves of the illusion that they are just the material body, and instead begin to unravel the knotted strands of wisdom that are meant to unite us with God, and thereby through that newfound clarity listen for that still, small voice within, which knows everything, and errs not

Just before you go to bed…

Each night, each one of us, lay ourselves down to go to sleep. Some of us have nightly prayers, or a nightly wind down, or a nightly routine, as well as there being some people that just get into bed and are done with it.  Before each of us goes to bed each night, that should be best seen as a wonderful time as well as the opportunity to actually take a few minutes to review how that particular day went.  The reason that we should want to do this, is because each day, in ways large and small, we are not the exact, same person that we were at the beginning of the day, so that, this sort of review should reflect back to us, as to whether our trend line is something that we are satisfy with or whether it is something that needs to be adjusted.

The thing about not reviewing our day, as well as not bothering to spend some time in introspection is that those that do not do those things are often going to find that they have inexorably veered off of the path, that they actually desire to be on in this life.  An honest review of anybody's day, should be seen as the moment to see whether we are doing the things that we should and ought to be doing, and therefore such a review becomes a validation that we are on the right path; or rather if we have fallen away from the pathway that we need to be on, such a review then allows us the chance to reinvigorate ourselves and to thereby refocus ourselves onto accomplishing what we should and ought to be accomplishing, instead.

While many of us do lie to others, from time-to-time for various reasons, we should when we reflect about our own life, be honest, and from that honesty, make a determination as to whether we are who we really want to be, and further whether our actions day-by-day are consistent with what we are trying to actually be.  If they are not, then such a nightly review is the opportunity to make the change in our own lives that we need to make in order to manifest that change in our life.

The road from good to bad, or from bad to good, is a road that is almost never built overnight, but instead is a road that is built step by step and brick by brick, by our thoughts, by our actions, and by our deeds.  This means that those that take the time to reflect upon who and what they really are, or further, that receive feedback about those things from someone that is their mentor or well respected -- is in reality, building the foundation that will create the opportunity to be positive and constructive in their life.

Those that look into the mirror and want that mirror to lie to them, are leading a life of deception, of which, in the end, they are the ones that will suffer most for that deceit.  Instead, look into the mirror and accept what the mirror accurately reflects back to you, and from that reflection renew that determination to be the best person that you can be, of that, no more can be asked.

Individual accountability and anonymous behavior

There are plenty of people that love costume parties, such as one would wear at a Halloween party or any party allowing the participants to dress up in a manner that obscures who they are.  The reason that so many people enjoy putting on a disguise is that they are able to believe, rightly or wrongly, that because they are disguised, that they are no longer as directly accountable for their behavior.  That is to say, people that deliberately wear costumes for events, often spend an inordinate amount of time deciding what costume to wear, and believe that by becoming something that they are not, are therefore able to behave in a manner that most people would not identify them as, or hold them accountable to in real life.

The thing about anonymity in regards to the internet or other places of interest, and in the utilization of pseudonyms and so forth, is that those that do so believe that they have added a layer of protection from being identified, therefore meaning that they are no longer seen as an individual person but are instead, simply anonymous.  On the positive side, believing that one is anonymous, allows that person to express themselves more freely, which some people believe is necessary, especially when they are involved in their normal life with individuals and organizations that are narrow-minded and too restrictive, thereby precluding them from freely expressing themselves. The downside of that anonymity is that those that feel that they will not be exposed or ever personally identified, can buy into the attitude, that they therefore can be especially scathing and uncivil in what they say and how they behave, because they believe, that since they cannot be identified, that they are therefore personally safe from any retribution or consequences.

This signifies that some of those that are anonymous in their online persona or elsewhere view themselves as no longer having individual accountability as to what they are saying, and who they are saying this to.  This type of attitude, has a strong tendency to create situations in which anonymous people can be especially ugly and hurtful towards others, of which, the only sure way to mitigate such, is to thereby have exposed the true identity of that anonymous person, for once that anonymous person is exposed, they are therefore subject to their opponents having a fair chance to retaliate in what has been an unfair fight.

This means that in any group situation or online forum populated with anonymous people, the very best way to address a situation that has become toxic, is to identify that person or persons as to who they really are, which thereby creates a situation in which that formerly anonymous identity is now exposed, and therefore that person will in the natural course of events quickly find that they are subsequently taking on the personal cloak of responsibility for their actions and are no longer able to hide behind an identity that has now been successfully compromised.

While there is something positive to be said about costumes, anonymity, and pseudonyms; there is also something wholesome and refreshing to be said about the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

That damnable slaveholder aristocracy

When it comes to the civil war, different people are going to give different opinions, about why such a war was fought of which some of those opinions would consist of: the freeing and hence the liberation of all slaves, the re-unification of the union, the invalidity of those that lose at a legitimate democratic election taking up arms, and so on.  Each of these is absolutely valid but there is one additional very salient reason why those in the north were so set upon subjugating those in the south and that was for the elimination and annihilation of the southern aristocracy.

Before the civil war commenced, quite obviously all of the States of the union were in the continental United States, but there clearly was a division of economy as well as infrastructure between those located in the north and those located in the south.  The north was far more educated, was far more industrialized, had far more railroads as well as canals, had far more cities, along with far more recent European immigrants, and a far higher population than the south.  The south was a plantation society, and in particular, a plantation society owned, operated, and controlled by the largest plantation owners, of which, those that were enslaved as well as poor whites were all under the domain of that dominance.  The north was a far more egalitarian society and south was one that foundationally was built upon the exploitation of slaves, as well as an underclass of poor illiterate landless whites.

One might think that because the south was made up of one-third of those enslaved, as well as having a massive amount of non-land owning whites, that to even contemplate rebellion against the union, would be absolutely futile along with being quite delusional in the belief of any possible success.  However, those wily southern plantation owners in conjunction with their obedient political leaders were able to make the case to their landless white citizens, that the election of Lincoln, would lead to equality between all races, and therefore even the lowly illiterate whites would lose their caste status over blacks, and further that whites would lose their economic edge over blacks by now having to compete against blacks for free labor; in addition to the fear that blacks would run rampart over the honor of white people by raping and violating white women, with absolute impunity. 

So many of those that fought so nobly on behalf of the north, looked upon the fight against the south, as the need to tear apart and eradicate once and for all this southern aristocracy, and thereby the elimination of any semblance of that privileged plantation white class from making their living in the reaping of their benefits by the sweat of those so enslaved and those so exploited.  This meant that the war of north and south truly was a war to remove the yoke not only from the black man's neck but also from those seen as poor white trash.

In that fight, the north initially appeared successful in accomplishing just that, until the southern aristocracy was able to within a few short years after the civil war, rise again, and pretty much get back to business as usual, leaving blacks and landless whites, pretty much where they were, enslaved by another name, and exploited just the same.

Your papers, please

There are plenty of people that believe that all of the papers that we are required to have such as a birth certificate, driver's license, and social security number are a very good thing.  Further, they believe that such documentation that shows where we live and our age is necessary for the functioning of any modern society.  Perhaps this is true, but such documentation, in the hands of the state, allows that state, to not only fully identify us; but further allows that state the opportunity to create rules that only those that properly identify themselves and are subsequently fully vetted, are permitted to get goods such as food benefits, or housing benefits, or medical benefits, or school benefits or tax benefits, and so on, which typically means that only people that fall within the construct that the state finds to be acceptable, are eligible for those benefits.

Additionally, once the state knows exactly who, what, and where a given person is at, the state, at its discretion, can change the rules of the road, so that traveling domestically from one place to another, for instance, is restricted, because perhaps of some arbitrary security alert, and those that are traveling are thereupon required to have the proper papers to do so, and those that do not have those papers, are then subject to being held by the state policing agency for violation of the law. So too, having to identify oneself is something, as in most laws, which is often unfairly applied, so those that are above the law will not have to suffer the indignity of being restricted from travel or other such things, whereas all those that lack such status, will have to conform to the dictates of the state, so that the state can maintain their control over the masses.

Not only does the state want to know everything about us, but the state knows that having that information allows them to be the controlling party in regards to benefits, courtesies, and privileges so provided; so that the population as a whole is going to have to cooperate with the state or will surely suffer the consequences of their disobedience. That is to say, the government wants to know where to find everyone and further doesn't want to have to waste a lot of time discovering who and what a given individual is, but merely wants to confirm what it already knows, and further to confirm that all is in order.

All of this pretty much signifies that governments want to be able to herd their people in the direction of the choice so chosen by that apparatus, and in order to do so in a competent and efficient manner, that government needs to know its population, and there isn't any better way to do so, then knowing everybody's identification, their employment, their residence, their history, and pretty much having the population as a whole being transparent to the government, while the government, on the other hand, remains opaque.

A country that has the power to stop free employment, to stop free movement, to stop, frisk, and to identify its population with impunity, is tyranny.  That tyranny does not have to be overtly cruel, for often it need not be, but having reams of accurate individual information at the government's beck and call is a form of power, enabling such to crush all those that do not conform to its dictates.

This is God's world, but we have made a mess of it

Although it may well seem at times, as if God is not part of this world, God, by definition, is omnipresent, and therefore everything in this world, of this world, and by this world, is in one way or another, part of God.  This means that all the trouble that mankind goes through to deny God, or to misinterpret God, or to ignore God, does not somehow negate God.

Foundationally, the main problem with this world, is never going to be God, but the exact opposite of that; which means the absence of God, and thereby the replacement of God's perfect love as well as God's perfect justice, with mankind's often pathetic attempt to do better or to simply just ignore what should not be ignored. 

Of course, many will rightly point out that a lot of the problems and issues in this world can be laid down at the feet of certain religious people or certain religious institutions, and especially those fanatical zealots that harm, persecute, and kill those that do not believe in what they believe, and justify all that are doing by stating that such is "God's will."  That said, God's voice is actually a still, small voice, that errs not, and God is never the one to utilize a sword in order to somehow bring peace, for God knows that lasting peace can only come from a construct in which fairness, justice, sacrifice, and love reign supreme.

This world and the problems within this world, come primarily from the misuse of free will by human beings, as well as the purposeful ignorance or non-desire to conduct one's personal life in accordance with God's law.  While God's law can be stated in a multitude of ways, it distilled to its very essence means giving due respect and consideration to God; as well as being able to see all other people, without exception, as equally created children of God, and thereby to treat everyone with the consideration and concern that one would devote to someone that they dearly love.

The more that in our interactions and in our deeds, we live in accordance to God's law, the better our societies and our neighborhoods are; and the more we live in discordance to God's law, the worse our societies and our neighborhoods are.  It is important to recognize that in this world that all of the chaos, injustice, and hurt that we are and do experience as elements of this world, are not because God does not exist or not because God does not care, but because wrong decisions are made by mankind's free will that are inimical to the benefit of mankind, though such decisions may selfishly benefit a few at the expense of the many.

Those that do not want God to be in their lives, have already achieved that wish, for this is the world as it is, so reflected. Those that truly want God to be in their lives must ever keep that in their focus and make sure to keep their pathway straight for it is those people that will lead the lost into the world as it should be which will be God's world, actualized.

Be the light in other people's lives

The decisions and actions that we take on any given day, define who and what we really are; and while virtually all of us are going to have those bad days along with regretful decisions, the objective for anybody with a good purpose in their life, should be to help be a force of good, rather than being a force of trouble and hatred.  If more people made it their point to be of a more positive influence and thereby set a better example for others, then the world and society that we live in, would be a better place for more of us, for the reality is that this world reflects back to us truly the decisions and actions so made.

Additionally, the greatest benefit that anyone can provide to anyone else, is to be positive, as often as possible, in our interactions with one another, for to add to hatred, frustration and despair, isn't going to be of any real benefit to anyone; whereas to see other people, as being important enough to take the time to be patient, kind, and considerate to -- has a value that is well-nigh priceless, for to shine a light into the darkness that all have experienced, provides both the clarity and pathway to move onto and into a better place.

To speak in platitudes is relatively easy, whereas actually making a commitment to spend the time and resources in becoming an ever present help in a sea of sorrow to someone else, takes a person, that is dedicated to the proposition that we are indeed one another's brothers and sisters, and therefore gets beyond mere scriptural words into the doing of the activities that provide real aid to another.  

In far too many cases, a soul is lost, not because that person is so bad, but rather because that person was not helped by another at a critical juncture, that had that help occurred, would have placed them into a better situation and thereby a likely better outcome.  There are many that have been pushed to the brink, that are brought back, by acts of kindness and caring, of which, these acts serve to reinvigorate what has been depleted, and encourages those that were lost, to find their real selves again.

We live within a construct in which destruction is the easy road, for to destroy is to allow one's behavior to become unchecked and unconstrained, making it the ultimate act of selfishness.  On the other hand, to construct anything of value, takes knowledge, consistency, persistency, drive, and often the willingness to check one's behavior to conform to a vision that is larger than just one person, for many people working together, will typically make what is created, stronger than what it would be, alone.

Each of us has talent, some of us use it, exceedingly well, some of us have yet to discovered it, some of us have yet to develop it fully, and some of us are aware of it, but keep it hidden away.   That talent for all of us is our light, of which, the more that utilize their light, together, the more light that is seen, and those that help to increase the brightness of that light, diminish the darkness, and light without any corresponding darkness, is the epitome of paradise.

Behind every door is a human being

Behind every door is a human being, for houses, buildings, and other structures are ultimately created by human beings for the benefit of human beings.  This does mean that when bombs are dropped on buildings or missiles are shot at other ships or airplanes, and when a fusillade of bullets are shot at some target, that, in essence, these bombs and missiles and bullets are always being directed against human beings; and it is therefore disingenuous to believe or to attest to that bombs, missiles, and bullets are somehow just taking out buildings, ships, and targets, without on the very same hand, admitting the obvious, which is that they are harming and killing human beings.

Those that direct military affairs do not really wish to state the obvious, which is that wars, insurrections, and uprisings, that involve the military are affairs in which because military force is involved, people are going to die, and the side with the better and more sophisticated firepower is often going to be the side that does most of the killing, along with being far more efficient about it.  As much as the military uses semantics and all sorts of words that skirt around the issue, the military kills people that have been earmarked for death, because those people are on the wrong side of the dispute.

If, it was really true that the military took out other military installations, other military facilities, other military armaments, and simply was in the business of neutralizing the other side's capability to wage war, in some sort of calculated conceived mission, that would be one thing, but the fact of the matter is, no matter how surgical air strikes can be, or missile strikes can be, or gunfire can be, in point of fact, war is a very messy business which besides all of the terrible destruction that is occurring, has intended consequences, unintended consequences, and a whole lot of human beings, armed or not, that are in harm's way which will end up getting hurt or killed.

The American military punches very, very hard, and likes to believe that they take care of business in a professional manner, of which, the greater the physical distance is from those so targeted, as well as not wanting to really know who and what is behind the door, or inside the building, the easier it is to keep on keeping on.   As the weapons continue to get more and more sophisticated, and as the military gets even more skilled at accomplishing their missions, especially without having to risk unnecessary "boots on the ground," the easier it is to keep doing it, because as long as our military personnel aren't dying, then the apparent overall criticism from outsiders will remain fairly muted.

In point of fact, when the military diminishes the deaths of our enemies as well as their families and other innocent civilians, in addition to ignoring the devastating destruction so reigned upon those communities, there is absolutely never going to be a time when the American military will conceivably be satiated, because too many people within that military establishment, don't seem to consciously recognize that behind every door is a human being, and that further, every human being has value, friend or foe, like it or not.

European Tournament of Champions

The biggest sport by far in Europe, is football, better known as soccer to Americans, which is both well followed and well loved.  This is the sport that gets the biggest TV ratings as well as paying the biggest salaries, and while there are already tournaments galore in Europe, surrounding their football, there is almost certainly room for one more. 

In particular, European clubs often suffer from a lack of competition within their league or have competition from only a small subset within their league, mainly because the biggest clubs, by virtue of having the best players, almost always top the table.  These teams at the top are literally the best of the best, but the proving of how good they really are can only be tested in a format in which these great teams face off against other European juggernauts.  To a large degree, this is already done through what is known as the UEFA Champions League, but this tournament consists of thirty-two teams, and takes months upon months to determine a champion, of which many of the clubs competing, have no real legitimate chance of raising the trophy.

Additionally, the top teams are always dreaming of ways of drumming of additional revenue, of which, the biggest and best clubs, constantly saber rattle about setting up a separate competition, colloquially known as the European Super League, in which a new tournament would be created, of which only the best of the best European clubs would play against each other, for this is what the public wants, this is what the players want, and this is most certainly what those owners want.

However, it is possible, and even conceivable to come up with a reasonable alternative to the Super League, which is to take the winner of each of the respective top five European leagues, which are currently located in Spain, England, France, Italy, and Germany and then have those respective winners of that season face off against each other at the immediate conclusion of their regular season.  Further, the winners of each of the five respective leagues would be ranked, according to their respective league coefficient, as determined by an independent agency or UEFA, which currently would place these countries in the order of best to worse as Spain, England, Italy, Germany, and France.  Then the top team from Germany and France would play each other to earn a shot to take on the champion of Spain; whereas the champion of England would take on the champion of Italy.  Finally, in the championship game, the winners of the semi-finals would take on each other, and the winner of that game, would be the winner of the European Tournament of Champions.

If, such a competition was agreed upon, properly advertised and written about, along with being seen as a legitimate tournament of champions, then the ratings as well as the validity of such a competition would be embraced by the public at large.  The amount of time devoted to such a tournament in which each game would be single elimination would not necessitate more than ten days, for a total of only four games would be played.  Additionally, this would be the only competition in which only the winners of the top five European leagues would face off against each other, making it a very compelling contest, indeed.

Our new Confederate government

The Confederacy was defeated in the Civil War, but the South, even till this very day, never fully bought into that defeat, and did a remarkable job in essentially returning to their old order of business, by creating a new kind of slavery; and through the thorough exploitation of those that were formerly slaves, they were able to use the very same labor, so as to persist in the wringing of bread from the sweat of other men's faces, and in particular, by those former slaves and their progeny.   

At the present day, as reported by dqydj.com, as of 2016, the top .1% of all taxpayers has a yearly household income of $1,135,421.00, and the top .1% of all taxpayers has a net worth of a staggering $43,090,281.00.  Back in the antebellum days, as reported by lumenlearning.com, just .1% of the white class structure owned 100+ slaves, and it was the owners of these massive plantations, thoroughly dependent upon that slave labor, that were first and foremost the very people that ran the political institutions and power structures of their respective States, and it was these people that were able to make the argument when confronted by a democratic Presidential election that they lost, that in order to protect and to augment their business of slavery, that they would rebel against the Union, which they did.

While slavery no longer exists in America, the gross inequality of the distribution of income, as well as a tax system that rather than being progressive, soaks the middle class and the uninitiated, indicates that the very, very few have become very skilled at making their money from their exploitation of labor within the United States and even the borders beyond such, and are firmly and clearly in the driver's seat of all relevant policies that would affect their power, their money, and their livelihood.

We live in an age in which mergers between equals of behemoth corporations are routinely granted, so that business industry after business industry are now effectively monopolies, duopolies, are competitors in name, but not in actuality.  Quite obviously, the easiest path to insane riches is to milk the American public as well as the world for a few extra bucks from software, licenses, rents, loans, commodities, and other associated goods and apps, that people have an abiding desire for, in which all that extra money coming in, is by virtue of the fact that these corporations have effectively little or no competition, provides them with huge gross margins, in which, they are then able to well protect and even augment those assets in tax dodges of all stripes, which effectively drains from the people what is rightfully theirs and is given to a select few, instead.

The revolutionary war was fought to give the people of this great nation, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The civil war was fought so as to prove that all men are indeed created equally, as well as to maintain this magnificent union of the people, by the people, and for the people.  A fair view, though, indicates that all those that gave their lives for those causes, have seen that nobleness betrayed, and the unraveling of what once was the last best hope of mankind.

Posturing and illusion

It has been said that not all that glitters is gold, of which this is surely true, for there are many things that look like and even glitter like gold, but are not, in fact, gold.  So too, not everything that people say, or every body language so produced -- are the words that need worry us, or the body language that need unnecessarily scare us, for people will posture all sorts of actions that those people have little intention of following through on; in order to save face, in order to show they are not a pushover, in order to produce fear, and for all sorts of other reasons, legitimate or not.

This world is full of all sorts of exaggerations, of which, exaggerations often are resorted to, in order to get, for instance, a point across, or in order to get attention, or to just make for a better story.  So too, if every time that someone said that they were going to kill someone, in which, subsequently, they actually went ahead and did so; then this world, would have an absolute epidemic of murders -- for people use words just like that, all of the time, or posture those words, but in virtually all of the cases, those people actually had no intent to kill anyone, though, they may be legitimately upset about something, or thoroughly embarrassed about something, or just be in a really foul mood.

The main reason why there is so much posturing as opposed to a lot more actual physical aggression occurring is the fact that posturing allows people to "act the role" without actually doing something that would be harmful to another person.  That is to say, when someone hurls an insult against another, in which, this insult is purposely done in front of a lot of people, the person so insulted, is almost required to respond to that insult, or they will lose face in the eyes of their peers.  How and what that response is, depends upon the skill of the person so insulted, because the correct art of posturing is not to escalate something into actual blows, but to respond in a way that indicates that they won't permit someone to just walk all over them, or to be taken for a fool.

Then there are those that claim that they don't ever posture, but rather, that they keep it real, 100% of the time.  In point of fact, most people can't keep it real for even one day, let alone, all of the time, because social situations almost preclude giving answers and responses that don't take properly into account the other person, meaning that those that are being "brutally honest" with someone, are actually pretty much just being brutal. 

The very point of all this posturing is to demonstrate that one is self-respecting enough, that they will respond as necessary in a posturing mode to demonstrate to the other person that they are willing to do battle, though, with the hope that cooler heads ultimately will prevail; so that, just as in dueling back in day, which was all about honor and respect; the hope is that the posturing will safely discontinue on both ends, and therefore though neither side will win, more importantly, neither side will lose.

Super Bowl Saturday

As most people are well aware, the Super Bowl is always held on Sundays, which matches up with the fact that most NFL games are played on Sunday.  What seems to have been forgotten though is that the real reason that NFL games are scheduled for Sunday as compared to Saturday is that the NFL does not want to compete or to undercut collegiate football, and quite obviously it is better for both sporting events, that they are held on different days.  However, by the time the Super Bowl is played, collegiate football is over, and for anyone that is a fight fan, such as the MMA, UFC, and premier boxing events, they recognize that these marquee events are always held on Saturdays, of which Saturday is the obvious choice, since Sunday is considered to be a day of rest for most Americans.

The NFL is a fairly conservative organization that does not like to rock the boat, whatsoever, and with nine of the ten highest TV ratings of all time in America, being the Super Bowl, the Commissioner seems to be correct in believing that having the Super Bowl on Sunday is the right move, and points out somewhat disingenuously that Saturday TV ratings from major broadcasters are traditionally lower than those of Sunday evening.  However, that fact is mitigated by the understanding that the biggest movie night in America, is Saturday night, and that Saturday night is also the biggest night to go out, with the quite obvious exception, when a big event is planned for that Saturday night, in which case, most Americans plan around that big event.

Quite logically, more Super Bowl parties would be planned and of a longer duration, if the Super Bowl was on a Saturday as opposed to a Sunday.  Additionally, continental America is in three time zones, of which, the eastern time zone starts three hours later than the Pacific, so the actual beginning and ending of a Super Bowl makes a difference especially to those on the East Coast because Monday, is a work day, so that those people, would be somewhat conflicted about the Super Bowl, recognizing that they have work as well as family responsibilities which must be attended to.

The reality of the situation really is, that those that run the NFL, do not know, how well or how poorly moving the Super Bowl to a Saturday would be, and while how many people watching the game is somewhat dependent upon the teams playing, for the most part, the Super Bowl is an event, that people are going to participate in regardless of what teams are playing and where they are playing at.  So then, just as the NFL implements rule changes from time-to-time, the NFL should make it a point to at least vote upon moving the game to a Saturday, in which, if voted in the affirmative, then those TV ratings, as well as the feedback from the fan base, would probably prove the point as to whether Saturday is the best day for the Super Bowl or whether to keep it as it is, on Sunday. 

The bottom line is that revenues do matter to the NFL, and due diligence, alone, would demand that the NFL has a Super Bowl Saturday, of which, in all probability, it would initially be the most watched TV program in American history.

Be constructive, not destructive

Each of us is given choices each day, and within those choices, is the opportunity to be of aid to mankind, or to be harmful.  Quite obviously, most people would prefer to be of help to others, and many of those people believe that is exactly what they are doing, but in actuality, when we take a unvarnished look at the world as it is, we can see that more times than desired, mankind is destructive, self-serving, and harmful in ways big and small to others, and thereby our world, reflects this.

Those that clamor most for change, that is, change that will make society and the world better, have an absolute obligation to be that change, themselves.  That is to say, the most important person to change for the better is our own self, for in our own life, we have if not total control, at least, captaincy of our lives.  Then, to prove that we are consistent with our beliefs about being constructive and of aid to our fellow mankind, our lives must live up to that high standard, as often as we can achieve such.

In this world, far too many people, allow far too often, their ego and their selfish desires to get the better of them, so that, when provided with the opportunity to do right with another, those that lack appropriate self-discipline, maturity, and wisdom, will make decisions that are inimical to the other, while seems then to provide their own self with a short or even a long-term benefit. Those sorts of actions are not good, because anytime that in order for an individual to benefit, it is at the expense of another, then the world in whole, has gotten no better.  Rather, the primary objective should be to conduct our life in a manner in which we see ourselves in the other, and therefore we are fair minded, as opposed to being opportunistic at the other's expense.

If more of us lived under the motto that "first, we do no harm to the other," then for a certainty, this world would be better for having such a motto, followed.  So too, if more of us were transparent in our actions, as compared to being deceptive and two-faced, there would consequently be more openness and honesty in our interactions with other people.  In general, the world reflects like for like, so that if the world is perceived as a zero sum society, in which each has to get theirs at the expense of the other, then such a world, will never have and will never achieve a lasting peace, or justice, or fairness.

We are obligated to do no more than the best that we know how, but if our societal viewpoint is distorted or wrong to begin with, than our result will consist in part of confusion and harm.  In order to do better, we must make it our point and principle to be better ourselves, and thereby to strive to do right in all our interactions with others, and never to be the one that wrongly mistreats another, remembering well that we are gifted and blessed with a free will that definitively defines what we really are, in which our actions, right or wrong, are fully ours to own up to.

Join the military and learn how to kill people

The vast majority of those that sign up for service in any of the American military service branches are in the age bracket of 18-24, of which most of those recruits, are male, in which, history has repeatedly demonstrated that males are far more aggressive than females in regards to violence and taking violent action.  That said the respective military branches aren't looking for recruits that have previously been convicted of murder or manslaughter, for though that demonstrates their killing ability, those kills have been accomplished without appropriate state sanction. Still, no doubt, there probably are a very minute percentage of recruits that have actually killed another human being, but have done that in legitimate self-defense.  So then, it is fair to state, that those that join the military have in virtually every instance, never killed another human being, though there probably are a significant percentage of military recruits that have killed animals, such as in hunting activities or similar.

This does mean that military recruits are completely unfamiliar with the killing of human beings, before joining the military. Warfare, however, in and of itself, when looked at in its essence, is the government-sanctioned killing of other human beings, of which, those other human beings, are often demonized, re-branded as sub-human, defined as enemies, and seen as a clear and present danger to the state so that they must be killed. So too, the enemy is seldom regarded as actually being human and as being created equally by God, but rather are subject to semantic word changes, which designates them as targets, which should be engaged; when in reality it is really about the deliberate killing of other human beings, designated as the enemy.

Not too surprisingly, the average human being, does not have a natural affinity towards killing other human beings, especially when doing so, is not in the defense of their family, or their property, or their self, or has come about through "crimes of passion" or similar.  Those that run the military establishment are well aware of this, and further are well aware that the physical distance from an intended human target is highly relevant, in addition to the known fact that those under orders to an established authority are typically obedient to that authority, that therefore enables soldiers to circumvent whatever personal moral qualms that a given soldier may have when it comes to the killing.

So too, the military is very good about telling bombardiers as well as all those soldiers that are operating mortars, cannons, and other long range weaponry that they are specifically shooting at other ships, or bombing buildings, or destroying infrastructure, without bothering to discuss that within those ships, buildings, and infrastructures are actual human beings.  Additionally, the greater the distance between a soldier and the human being that has been targeted to be killed, the less visceral and real the feel is, especially if in order to accomplish the killing, this merely requires the pressing of a trigger or a button, in which, therefore the weapon provides the actual killing power, as opposed to the soldier actually having to physical penetrate another human being's body with a weapon such as a knife or saber.

The military does a lot of things, some beneficial and some not, but none should be surprised, that when you train a soldier to kill another human being, which is an unnatural act, that the returning solder ends up, so often, not being right in their head, for they know, at the end of day, the difference between wrong and right.

"Equal rights for all, special privileges for none"

While Thomas Jefferson is credited for the above quote, it was most notably used as the progressive Democratic platform slogan in 1908, by Williams Jennings Bryan, who was subsequently defeated by the Republican candidate Taft in that same year.  It is fair to say, that one hundred years after Jefferson, was the time of Bryan, and one hundred years after that, is the present age, so that, this noble search for equal rights for all, and special privileges for none, has been part and parcel of the great American experiment since the inception of this nation, and still has not been successfully resolved.

In point of fact, while there has been notable progress in equal rights, for those of color and of the sexes, this is still a nation that is clearly biased in the favor of white males, though what once use to be an institution, that was exclusively all white and all male, has evolved over the years to become more inclusive.  In regards to special privileges, it is difficult not to state that never have there been so few that have so much, at the expense of those that have so little; despite the fact, that the aggregate wealth on America dwarfs all other countries, with the notable exception of China, which is still far behind America in wealth, despite having a population that is four times greater than America.

It would be one thing if those that were superrich fairly earned their money, of which, no doubt, there probably are some that could be classified as such, but the fact that the superrich are able to not only to create that wealth, fairly or not, but to also set up dynastic wealth, that subsequently undermines democratic institutions is the reason why this is a country that may speak very eloquently of equality but provides, often behind closed doors, special privileges to special people as well as special institutions that allows those people and institutions to unfairly increase their wealth, influence, and power at the expense of the people.

The Constitution is the highest law of this land, but mere words on a piece of paper, no matter how sacred or important, mean nothing, if those very laws and principals can be circumvented, overturned, ignored, or become irrelevant.  The United States political mouthpieces too often profess to believe that the opportunity to make money, the making of money, the business of money, and business itself, is somehow the be-all and end-all of American existence, and that therefore a rising tide lifts all boats.  This is the same tired rhetoric that has been used since time immemorial, and simply isn't true, and is less true today than in the previous two generations.

America is clearly a nation that has an elite upper class, of so much wealth and power, that the three richest individuals in America collectively hold more wealth than the bottom 50% of that same population, so to honestly believe that somehow that wealth came to those three individuals without them personally receiving or the corporations that they are a part of receiving special privileges in order to get that wealth is to also believe that Santa Claus really does exist. 

If America, truly lived the credo of equal rights for all, and special privileges for none, and really was a country of equal opportunity and meritocracy, the end result would not be an elite few having all of the wealth and power, but rather a far more equal distribution of wealth, liberty, fairness, justice, and happiness.