Back when the United States was founded, people in this country used to identify themselves by the state they lived in. People saw themselves as Virginians or Rhoad Islanders. However, it seems as the years pass, more and more people in America are loosing their sense of place.
Today it hardly matters where in the US you live. the suburbs of Los Angeles aren't all that different from the suburbs of Austin. Chicago is becoming less and less distinct from Atlanta. Wherever you go there will be a Walmart and a McDonald's. There is becoming less and less of what makes home special and unique.
In Europe, when you walk down the cobblestone streets of your town, you are likely to pass the 1500 year old church that your great great great grandfathers helped construct. Your family would have likely lived in the area for a zillion generations. Direct ancestors may have crafted the brass doorknobs, or the stain glass windows. In contrast, if your family has been in America for a couple of generations, your ethnicity probably includes a Heinz 57 mix of a handful of ethnicities. And if you are like me, because of the unstable economy, it is not unusual to hear new couples moving, on average, once per year of marriage.
What happened to the day when people lived in the towns where they grew up, and children were around to care for aging parents, and siblings were there to watch your kids while you enjoyed a night out or weekend away with your spouse. What happened to America? I live in a town in the Deep South were the top 3 employers are an Army Base, a national nuclear laboratory and a medical school. Everyone here is from somewhere else and no one except the poor stay long.
I think one factor to the loss of place in America is due to the Federalization of America. When the Founding Fathers established the Constitution, there were specific checks and balances put in place to limit the power of the Federal government and reserve all other rights to the States. One of these important checks and balances was destroyed by the 17th Amendment. The original Constitution proscribed that the Senators not be elected by popular vote but selected by their respective state legislatures. This proved to be an important check against the Federal government passing laws and programs which usurped States rights. Since, Senators became servants of the people and not the State, big federal spending programs began to be passed without regard to States rights.
The Constitution originally intended only specific rights be granted to the Federal government. Some of these were to establish an Army to defend this country from threats foreign and domestic. Other rights were to establish treaties, levy taxes, and tariffs. Now it seems the Federal government has got its hand in every single major industry in America. And now with the failure of the car industry, banking, mortgages, and insurance, our Federal government is now selling cars, lending money, and playing insurance salesman. What happened to the principal of self government. How did we get to the point where our local and state institutions failed such that big brother needed to step in and take over.
America was founded on the principle of self government. Every person has been endowed by their creator with the rights of life, liberty and property. Rights to not come from the Federal government down. Instead, the rights of the Federal government are specifically and individually derived from the governed. Instead of putting our trust in a king or oligarchy, in America, we were to develop great institutions of commerce, trade, learning, and art who would govern themselves. However, due to the increasing greed and dishonesty of several high profile corporations, the public has lost faith in many of our great institutions. And some in the Federal government are a little too quick to demonize our institutions with the epithet of "Big Business."
One of the most fundamental violations of States rights I think is the establishment of national parks and national forests. Over 75% of land in Utah for example is federal land. That is Utah land that Utah should be able to sell mineral, logging, water and grazing rights to private and corporate entities. Instead, the federal government owns 76% of all public lands while local governments control a mere 3 %.
Another major problem in America is our lack of self-sufficiency. America is not only importing a majority of its oil to satisfy its energy needs, but we are also importing an increasing amount of food and textiles. Local textile mills in my town have been slowly closing one by one and jobs being shipped overseas to China and now Vietnam and other 3rd-world countries where labor costs are cheap. In our "just-in-time" economy, if there were to be any type of transportation disruption, America is going to be in a world of hurt. It seems to me that if brand were not an issue, could technology help local companies compete with global companies? No one wants to work in a textile mill doing manual labor. But if computers and robots were designed to make clothing, then they would require a few skilled and educated technicians to operate and service the machines. And by buying local, local companies could possibly compete by saving on transportation costs.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Freedom of Opportunity
My son Devin (8) and I were playing Pokemon today. The past few weeks I have been showing him how to divide up the cards by color, and select the best proportion of 60 Pokemon, energy, and supporter cards he should use to win. So far, I have won the first 2 games. The first game we randomly divided the supporter cards and I played a purple-green deck, and this time I let Devin play the purple-green deck and I played the blue-pearl deck. Despite the 2 defeats, Devin has taken the loses well.However, despite my helping Devin play the game better, my wife Ruth wondered if it wouldn't be better for Devin's self-esteem if I let him win every once in a while. Let him win?!! I don't know why these types of comments continue to surprise me. We will have been happily married for 10 years this June. And I knew when I married her that she was a bit of a "social progressive." But, if sometimes a little thing like a card game can suddenly become a metaphor for life and politics and everything that is wrong with America, this is a time.
Even though I disagree on this issue, I do appreciate and value my wife's empathetic perspective. However, I think we have been doing a little too much letting people win in America instead of helping people compete. I mean, who are we kidding if we just lower our expectations for people. And what kind of satisfaction and self-esteem does a person really derive from a victory if they know the game was rigged from the start.
Ruth did say, that her reasoning for wanting me to let Devin win was that she didn't want Devin to take out his frustration on his younger cousin Cameron by endlessly thrashing him every time they play Pokemon together. That is a bit of a red herring. No one wants that. In stead, I am hoping he will do as I have done with him and help his cousin to become a better Pokemon player as well.
This is the difference between equality of opportunity verses equality of results and the Founding Fathers established this nation based on the prior principal over the later. Unfortunately, through LBJ's "great society" and similar socialist legislation since, our country has been focused on lowering expectations and letting people think they are winning at the game of life instead of empowering people to truly succeed.
Friday, April 24, 2009
5,000-Year Leap: The True Political Center
Glen Beck this month challenged all Americans to read the following book, The Five Thousand Year Leap, by Cleon Skousen which discusses the fundamental principles upon which the Founding Fathers built this nation. Glen Beck even wrote the forward to the new edition. This post will attempt to briefly summarize the principles listed in the book.
A few Critics question some Skousen's assertions when it comes to the Old Testament and Jewish Law. The critic listed above claims the OT endorses slavery. But nothing could be further from the truth. I don't think that person could misunderstand God and Scripture more then by saying the God of Israel sanctioned slavery right after freeing the Jews from slavery. What the Bible refers to is not slavery but the rules regarding indentured servants. And according to the OT, all debts and servants were to be freed before 6 years or every 50th year (Year of Jubilee), whichever came first. In this particular example, the it is clear that the author has a bigger problem with Bro. Skousen being Mormon than his understanding of constitutional law.
Lev. 25: 39-43 And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee; thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bondservant: But as an hired servant, and as a sojourner, he shall be with thee, and shall serve thee unto the year of jubile: And then shall he depart from thee, both he and his children with him, and shall return unto his own family, and unto the possession of his fathers shall he return. For they are my servants, which I brought forth out of the land of Egypt: they shall not be sold as bondmen. Thou shalt not rule over him with rigour; but shalt fear thy God.
Glen Beck begins the book in the Forward retelling the true story of Thanksgiving. Glen relates that William Bradford and the Puritan Pilgrims attempted to establish a Utopian or Zion society at Jamestown by instituting a communalist program practiced by Christ's Apostles and the Early Christian Saints who the Bible describes as living with all things in common. But because there were so many colonists who refused to work, preferring rather to leach off the Bishops storehouse, the entire community suffered greatly. Colony leadership in 1614 finally scrapped the socialist program and instituted a free enterprise economy that protected the colonists rights to own property and keep or give away their hard earned wealth. The result of the change was immediate prosperity. So, much prosperity in fact that the colonists got together to thank God for His bounteous blessings upon them, and even invited the Indians to the feast. And that was the first Thanksgiving.
The next important point that Dr. Skousen makes is about the political spectrum. Many liberals in the US have gotten us to believe that while Soviet Communism exists on the extreme far left of the political spectrum, Nazi Germany exists on the extreme far right. So, while liberals and social progressives in America concede that they may be left-leaning; they have convinced us that Conservative Republicans are right-leaning. This mis-characterization of the political spectrum of the Founding Fathers. To them, monarchy existed at the far left, and anarchy existed at the far right. Soviet Communism and Nazi Fascism are both manifestations of a police state and therefore by definition both exist on the far left of the true political spectrum. Socialist Europe according to the Founding Fathers was also too far left. The genius of the Founding Fathers was to find a balance in government with protected the natural rights of the individual and limited the power of the federal government. These conservative principles of personal responsibility and limited government sit right at the very political center of the spectrum. And this kind of government was founded on the following principles.
Principle 1: Correct Government is based on Natural Law. Cicero among others recognized that there is a God, that God endowed all men with reason and knowledge sufficient to know right and wrong. And that all law was to be based on the two great commandments that one should love God and treat their fellow man as they would want to be treated (the golden rule).
Principle 2: Free People must be a Morally Virtuous People. Republican government or a Representative Democracy depends on the principle of self-government or that its citizens govern themselves according to natural law. That is that the electorate must be unselfish and always put the good of society before their own self-interest.
Principle 3: Virtuous People must elect Virtuous Leaders. A Representative democracy is not run by Aristocracy but people whether they are farmers or businessmen who have demonstrated a life of faith, industry, community service, and self mastery. These criteria are very different than the ones the media tells us influence our voting such as whether or not we feel we could sit down and have a drink with them. Our leaders should be better than us in matters of virtue. Thomas Jefferson called this a "natural aristocracy." The founders said public service should be an honor but not a means of obtaining wealth.
Principle 4: Self-Government depends on Religion. Despite a need for a separation of church and state, the Founders never meant to exclude religion from government. It can be said they sought to protect religion from government but not take religion out of government. In fact, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 required that religion, morality, and government be taught in all schools to all American citizens. While the US Government was not to favor one Church above another, or limit the free expression of religion, the Founding Fathers recognized a set of 5 religious principles upon which all churches could agree. These were: 1. there is a Supreme Creator who man should worship, 2. the Creator has empowered man to know right and wrong, 3. man is responsible to God for how we behave and treat others, 4. life continues after death, and 5. in the next life all mankind will stand before the Creator to be judged according to our conduct in this life. While there was to be no state church or religious organization, these 5 principle represent the national religion and faith.
Principle 5: In God we Trust. The Founders recognized that there is a God, and that upon Him we must rely upon for His divine providence but also responsible to.
Principle 6: All men are created Equal. God is no respecter of persons. All men should have equal rights and opportunity of life, liberty, and property; but not necessarily equal results. Our country is a country of immigrants and minorities. Minorities rights are to be protected but they are expected and encouraged to culturally assimilate with the majority.
Principle 7: Government should protect Equal Rights but not provide equal things. In our society, and economy certain people by a combination of hard work and good fortune would become wealthy. However, that wealth and capital could be used to invest in business, by machinery, and create jobs. The money from wealthy donors would also be used to create great institutions like museums, societies,etc. The Founders rejected the Socialist programs of Europe which made the poor weaker and dependent upon the government. However, the rich did have a great responsibility of the poor but they must be free to give or to hoard their wealth. When the government practices income redistribution, it not only steals from the rich to give to the poor, but it also robs the rich from the personal rewards of giving to the poor voluntarily.
Principle 8: God endowed man with unalienable rights. The right to life, liberty and property are inherent and given to man by God and not given by government or any ruler and they are not the product of any laws. While a person can do something to forfeit these rights, no one can take them away from us without being subject to the judgements of God. Some of these inherent rights include the right of self-government, self-defence, own and sell property, personal choice, free conscience, choose a profession, choose a mate, beget one's kind, assemble, petition, free speech, free press, enjoy the fruits of our labors, improve you position by barter and sale, right to invent, right to explore natural resources, privacy, fair trial, free association, make contracts, and provide nature's necessities.
Principle 9: God has revealed divine law. God protects the rights of each person by revealing to man the blessings and punishment promised by keeping or breaking natural law. Men should make all oaths in the name of God. Together with our unalienable rights are unalienable duties and responsibilities. Men have both public and private duties that they must satisfy. Men have a duty to be moral and act with virtue in their personal as well as public
life.
Principle 10: Government by the people. The authority to govern has been given by God to the people who then have the right to consent to or invest their elected and appointed leaders with that power to govern on their behalf. There is no divine right of kings.
Principle 11: The majority can alter or abolish a tyrannical government. Power rests in the majority and the minority has no right to revolt.
Principle 12: The USA should be a Republic. The United States is not a democracy but a republic or representative democracy. The common man doesn't have the time to decide every detail of government. So, we elect representatives to study the issues and act on our behalf.
Principle 13: The Constitution should protect us from the weakness of our rulers. Therefore the Constitution has a series of checks and balances so that each branch of government can oversee the actions of the other.
Principle 14: Life and liberty are secure as long as property rights are also secure. The Earth is a common gift to man with a responsibility to improve and manage it (subdue it and have dominion over it). Without property rights there would be no incentive to work, the industrious worker would be deprived of the fruit of his labor. Therefore it is the duty of government to protect property rights. The government should never practice a redistribution of wealth. The private sector has the duty to care for the poor voluntarily.
Principle 15: Prosperity is a product of a free-market economy and limited government. Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" advocates specialized production, free exchange of goods, prices and wages set by supply and demand, profits makes the production of goods and services worthwhile, competition improves quality and reduces cost. The government should protect the freedom to try, buy, sell, and fail. The government should protect from sales via illegal force, fraud, monopoly, and debauchery. In contrast to Smith, the economic philosophies of Marx and Keynes advocated government interference and control. Our country mad a mistake in its early days by turning over the control of our money system to investment bankers and operating our banks on fractional reserve lending resulting in an economy of debt instead of wealth.
Principle 16: Government is controlled by 3 branches: Legislative, Judicial, and Executive. Polybius and later Montesquieu described the virtues of a "mixed" constitution vesting certain responsibilities of government to different groups or institutions.
Principle 17: There should be a separation of powers with a system of checks and balances. There should be built into the constitution mechanisms for peaceful self-repair.
Principle 18: The Constitution should be written.
Principle 19: Defined powers are given to the government. All other powers not expressly given by the constitution are retained by the people. The 17th Amendment provided that the people elect Senators instead of being selected by the State Legislature. This amendment destroyed a critical check and balance between the power of the states vs. the federal government.
Principle 20: Government operates by the will of the majority with careful protection of the rights of the minority.
Principle 21: Strong local self-government preserves human freedom best. The local affairs of our lives should not be dictated to us from Washington.
Principle 22: Free people should be governed by the rule of law.
Principle 23: Free people must be educated. Public education must include literacy, religion, politics, and morality.
Principle 24: Peace through Strength. To maintain prosperity and peace a free people must always be vigilant and ready for war to defend their rights, family, and country.
Principle 25: The US should enjoy friendship with all nations and entangling alliances with none. The US should always act for its own self interest. So, it should never enter into agreements that it is guaranteed to break. The US should practice "separatism" but not "isolationism." Making friends with one nation would mean becoming enemies with others. we should avoid playing favorites. The US should be the great "peacemaker" and not the great "policeman" of the world.
Principle 26: The US should protect the rights and integrity of the family. A nation is only as strong as its families. Men and women have different roles under natural law but equal rights. Parents have a duty to provide for their children and children have a responsibility to honor their parents.
Principle 27: The burden of debt is as destructive to freedom as subjugation by conquest. Debt should only be incurred in times of emergency and paid immediately. Debt should never be incurred for luxury, and never imposed on the next generation. Pensions are an example of debt burden being placed on the shoulders of the next generation.
Principle 28: The US has the manifest destiny to be an example and blessing to the entire human family. The US and our Constitution is inspired by God and is something special and not just US arrogance. Failure of our nation would be considered treason against the world.
A few Critics question some Skousen's assertions when it comes to the Old Testament and Jewish Law. The critic listed above claims the OT endorses slavery. But nothing could be further from the truth. I don't think that person could misunderstand God and Scripture more then by saying the God of Israel sanctioned slavery right after freeing the Jews from slavery. What the Bible refers to is not slavery but the rules regarding indentured servants. And according to the OT, all debts and servants were to be freed before 6 years or every 50th year (Year of Jubilee), whichever came first. In this particular example, the it is clear that the author has a bigger problem with Bro. Skousen being Mormon than his understanding of constitutional law.
Lev. 25: 39-43 And if thy brother that dwelleth by thee be waxen poor, and be sold unto thee; thou shalt not compel him to serve as a bondservant: But as an hired servant, and as a sojourner, he shall be with thee, and shall serve thee unto the year of jubile: And then shall he depart from thee, both he and his children with him, and shall return unto his own family, and unto the possession of his fathers shall he return. For they are my servants, which I brought forth out of the land of Egypt: they shall not be sold as bondmen. Thou shalt not rule over him with rigour; but shalt fear thy God.
Glen Beck begins the book in the Forward retelling the true story of Thanksgiving. Glen relates that William Bradford and the Puritan Pilgrims attempted to establish a Utopian or Zion society at Jamestown by instituting a communalist program practiced by Christ's Apostles and the Early Christian Saints who the Bible describes as living with all things in common. But because there were so many colonists who refused to work, preferring rather to leach off the Bishops storehouse, the entire community suffered greatly. Colony leadership in 1614 finally scrapped the socialist program and instituted a free enterprise economy that protected the colonists rights to own property and keep or give away their hard earned wealth. The result of the change was immediate prosperity. So, much prosperity in fact that the colonists got together to thank God for His bounteous blessings upon them, and even invited the Indians to the feast. And that was the first Thanksgiving.
The next important point that Dr. Skousen makes is about the political spectrum. Many liberals in the US have gotten us to believe that while Soviet Communism exists on the extreme far left of the political spectrum, Nazi Germany exists on the extreme far right. So, while liberals and social progressives in America concede that they may be left-leaning; they have convinced us that Conservative Republicans are right-leaning. This mis-characterization of the political spectrum of the Founding Fathers. To them, monarchy existed at the far left, and anarchy existed at the far right. Soviet Communism and Nazi Fascism are both manifestations of a police state and therefore by definition both exist on the far left of the true political spectrum. Socialist Europe according to the Founding Fathers was also too far left. The genius of the Founding Fathers was to find a balance in government with protected the natural rights of the individual and limited the power of the federal government. These conservative principles of personal responsibility and limited government sit right at the very political center of the spectrum. And this kind of government was founded on the following principles.
Principle 1: Correct Government is based on Natural Law. Cicero among others recognized that there is a God, that God endowed all men with reason and knowledge sufficient to know right and wrong. And that all law was to be based on the two great commandments that one should love God and treat their fellow man as they would want to be treated (the golden rule).
Principle 2: Free People must be a Morally Virtuous People. Republican government or a Representative Democracy depends on the principle of self-government or that its citizens govern themselves according to natural law. That is that the electorate must be unselfish and always put the good of society before their own self-interest.
Principle 3: Virtuous People must elect Virtuous Leaders. A Representative democracy is not run by Aristocracy but people whether they are farmers or businessmen who have demonstrated a life of faith, industry, community service, and self mastery. These criteria are very different than the ones the media tells us influence our voting such as whether or not we feel we could sit down and have a drink with them. Our leaders should be better than us in matters of virtue. Thomas Jefferson called this a "natural aristocracy." The founders said public service should be an honor but not a means of obtaining wealth.
Principle 4: Self-Government depends on Religion. Despite a need for a separation of church and state, the Founders never meant to exclude religion from government. It can be said they sought to protect religion from government but not take religion out of government. In fact, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 required that religion, morality, and government be taught in all schools to all American citizens. While the US Government was not to favor one Church above another, or limit the free expression of religion, the Founding Fathers recognized a set of 5 religious principles upon which all churches could agree. These were: 1. there is a Supreme Creator who man should worship, 2. the Creator has empowered man to know right and wrong, 3. man is responsible to God for how we behave and treat others, 4. life continues after death, and 5. in the next life all mankind will stand before the Creator to be judged according to our conduct in this life. While there was to be no state church or religious organization, these 5 principle represent the national religion and faith.
Principle 5: In God we Trust. The Founders recognized that there is a God, and that upon Him we must rely upon for His divine providence but also responsible to.
Principle 6: All men are created Equal. God is no respecter of persons. All men should have equal rights and opportunity of life, liberty, and property; but not necessarily equal results. Our country is a country of immigrants and minorities. Minorities rights are to be protected but they are expected and encouraged to culturally assimilate with the majority.
Principle 7: Government should protect Equal Rights but not provide equal things. In our society, and economy certain people by a combination of hard work and good fortune would become wealthy. However, that wealth and capital could be used to invest in business, by machinery, and create jobs. The money from wealthy donors would also be used to create great institutions like museums, societies,etc. The Founders rejected the Socialist programs of Europe which made the poor weaker and dependent upon the government. However, the rich did have a great responsibility of the poor but they must be free to give or to hoard their wealth. When the government practices income redistribution, it not only steals from the rich to give to the poor, but it also robs the rich from the personal rewards of giving to the poor voluntarily.
Principle 8: God endowed man with unalienable rights. The right to life, liberty and property are inherent and given to man by God and not given by government or any ruler and they are not the product of any laws. While a person can do something to forfeit these rights, no one can take them away from us without being subject to the judgements of God. Some of these inherent rights include the right of self-government, self-defence, own and sell property, personal choice, free conscience, choose a profession, choose a mate, beget one's kind, assemble, petition, free speech, free press, enjoy the fruits of our labors, improve you position by barter and sale, right to invent, right to explore natural resources, privacy, fair trial, free association, make contracts, and provide nature's necessities.
Principle 9: God has revealed divine law. God protects the rights of each person by revealing to man the blessings and punishment promised by keeping or breaking natural law. Men should make all oaths in the name of God. Together with our unalienable rights are unalienable duties and responsibilities. Men have both public and private duties that they must satisfy. Men have a duty to be moral and act with virtue in their personal as well as public
life.
Principle 10: Government by the people. The authority to govern has been given by God to the people who then have the right to consent to or invest their elected and appointed leaders with that power to govern on their behalf. There is no divine right of kings.
Principle 11: The majority can alter or abolish a tyrannical government. Power rests in the majority and the minority has no right to revolt.
Principle 12: The USA should be a Republic. The United States is not a democracy but a republic or representative democracy. The common man doesn't have the time to decide every detail of government. So, we elect representatives to study the issues and act on our behalf.
Principle 13: The Constitution should protect us from the weakness of our rulers. Therefore the Constitution has a series of checks and balances so that each branch of government can oversee the actions of the other.
Principle 14: Life and liberty are secure as long as property rights are also secure. The Earth is a common gift to man with a responsibility to improve and manage it (subdue it and have dominion over it). Without property rights there would be no incentive to work, the industrious worker would be deprived of the fruit of his labor. Therefore it is the duty of government to protect property rights. The government should never practice a redistribution of wealth. The private sector has the duty to care for the poor voluntarily.
Principle 15: Prosperity is a product of a free-market economy and limited government. Adam Smith's "The Wealth of Nations" advocates specialized production, free exchange of goods, prices and wages set by supply and demand, profits makes the production of goods and services worthwhile, competition improves quality and reduces cost. The government should protect the freedom to try, buy, sell, and fail. The government should protect from sales via illegal force, fraud, monopoly, and debauchery. In contrast to Smith, the economic philosophies of Marx and Keynes advocated government interference and control. Our country mad a mistake in its early days by turning over the control of our money system to investment bankers and operating our banks on fractional reserve lending resulting in an economy of debt instead of wealth.
Principle 16: Government is controlled by 3 branches: Legislative, Judicial, and Executive. Polybius and later Montesquieu described the virtues of a "mixed" constitution vesting certain responsibilities of government to different groups or institutions.
Principle 17: There should be a separation of powers with a system of checks and balances. There should be built into the constitution mechanisms for peaceful self-repair.
Principle 18: The Constitution should be written.
Principle 19: Defined powers are given to the government. All other powers not expressly given by the constitution are retained by the people. The 17th Amendment provided that the people elect Senators instead of being selected by the State Legislature. This amendment destroyed a critical check and balance between the power of the states vs. the federal government.
Principle 20: Government operates by the will of the majority with careful protection of the rights of the minority.
Principle 21: Strong local self-government preserves human freedom best. The local affairs of our lives should not be dictated to us from Washington.
Principle 22: Free people should be governed by the rule of law.
Principle 23: Free people must be educated. Public education must include literacy, religion, politics, and morality.
Principle 24: Peace through Strength. To maintain prosperity and peace a free people must always be vigilant and ready for war to defend their rights, family, and country.
Principle 25: The US should enjoy friendship with all nations and entangling alliances with none. The US should always act for its own self interest. So, it should never enter into agreements that it is guaranteed to break. The US should practice "separatism" but not "isolationism." Making friends with one nation would mean becoming enemies with others. we should avoid playing favorites. The US should be the great "peacemaker" and not the great "policeman" of the world.
Principle 26: The US should protect the rights and integrity of the family. A nation is only as strong as its families. Men and women have different roles under natural law but equal rights. Parents have a duty to provide for their children and children have a responsibility to honor their parents.
Principle 27: The burden of debt is as destructive to freedom as subjugation by conquest. Debt should only be incurred in times of emergency and paid immediately. Debt should never be incurred for luxury, and never imposed on the next generation. Pensions are an example of debt burden being placed on the shoulders of the next generation.
Principle 28: The US has the manifest destiny to be an example and blessing to the entire human family. The US and our Constitution is inspired by God and is something special and not just US arrogance. Failure of our nation would be considered treason against the world.
Saturday, April 04, 2009
Free Will and Quantum Mechanics
John Conway and Simon Kochen recently wrote a paper with a mathematical proof showing that particles exhibiting quantum mechanical behavior can be shown to demonstrate free will. John John Conway gave a lecture at Princeton University explaining the significance of their theorem and proof.
The idea of quantum mechanics as a proof for free will is not new with Conway and Kochen. This idea has been debated as a product of quantum mechanics since these theories were first discovered. I remember Cleon Skousen talking about this in his controversial talk where he mentions quantum mechanics and free will but falsely concludes that God has to appease the intelligences. Nevertheless, this new proof of free will has profound theological and philosophical implications.
What is all this about? Well, I am not going to pretend to understand quantum mechanics completely but there are few basics ideas I picked up along the way. Before Einstein's relativity and quantum mechanics were discovered, most every behavior of matter was described by classical Newtonian physics. Apples falling from trees and bowling balls rolling down inclines, etc. In fact, the laws of classical physics don't just explain these behaviors but they are also predictive. By applying these laws you can in fact precisely tell the future and the past. However, as our society advanced technologically and astronomers began to look out into the universe at really big things moving very fast like stars, and planets etc., and physicists started looking at really small things like electrons and atoms, there began to arise many instances when classical Newtonian physics failed to predict physical behavior.
Quantum Mechanics came about because of Newtonian physics failing to account for black body-radiation, the emission spectrum of hydrogen, and the photoelectric effect. Relativity was discovered to explain the behavior of light in interferometers and laser gyroscopes, gravitational lensing, and moving clock desynchronization. However, the failure of classical physics for big things and small things is for different reasons. While the new equations of relativity allow us to explain and predict behavior of matter moving at or near the speed of light, quantum mechanics does not completely predict the behavior of individual particles like electrons around an atom. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle states that if you want to know the position and the momentum of an electron around an atom, the more precisely you measure one, the less precisely you can know the other because the act of measuring changes the system.
The consequences of relativity are such because it turns out that nothing can move faster than the speed of light or 3x10^8 m/s. According to Newton, if you were driving 2 m/s in a car and you turned your headlights on then the light exiting the lights would appear to be traveling 3x10^8 m/s + 2 m/s to a stationary observer. But it turns out that isn't the case. The experimentally proven reality is that the speed of light remains constant independent of reference frame. All the crazy equations are derived from this and similar observations.
For example, because of time dilation, if you have a set of twins and you keep one on Earth and send the other away on a space ship at near the speed of light and then turn around and come back to Earth, the twin who stayed at home would have aged more then the one who left home. Similar laws and equations that account for relativistic phenomenon such as length contraction and time dilation explain how fiberoptic laser gyroscopes work and allows us to keep the atomic clocks in the GPS satellites from becoming desynchonized.
However, quantum mechanics doesn't work that way. It is inherently unpredictable. Consequently, physicist talking in terms of quantum mechanics routinely use terms such as probability and spacial density to talk about the behavior of whatever particle they are describing. Entanglement helps by associating two or more particles by the laws of the conservation of momentum and then interrogating them separately in different rooms. They will always give the same story (opposite spin state). However, these experiments only get us closer to the Heisenberg's limit but not beyond it.
An example of what I am talking about is explained by another thought experiment by Erwin Schrödinger known as Schrödinger's cat. This thought experiment calls attention to our inability to predict certain things like the spin state (1/2 or -1/2) of an electron around a nucleus. Schrodinger described a situation where you had an atomic atom in a box that would eventually radioactively decay giving off an alpha particle. Also in the box was a Geiger counter connected to a contraption holding a vial of poison. And in addition to the radioactive atom, the detector, and the vial of poison was Schroeder's cat. If the atomic atom decayed, the Geiger counter would detect it, releasing the poison and killing the cat. The question being asked is whether the cat is alive or dead. Ramifications of this scenario are that, only opening the box can reveal the answer, the answer will either be one or the other, and it doesn't make sense to talk about the cat as being half dead and half-alive. It has to be one or the other.
Now is where it gets weird. You would think Entanglement would solve the Heisenberg dilemma. So, if you had a radioactive pion decay giving two electrons (A and B), to conserve angular momentum, one electron (A) would have a positive spin and the other would have a negative spin (B). And If you wanted to measure the spin state along several axis (x,y,z); while you can measure the spin in the x-axis in electron A and correctly infer the spin in electron B, you cannot then measure the y-axis spin in electron B and infer the spin in electron A with any more precision than what Heisenberg's principle allows. Somehow, electron B knows that you have already measured electron A.
I wonder if this is something like the Lets Make a Deal/Monty Hall Principle. After picking one of three doors on the show, only one with a big prize behind it, The Show Host opens up one of the doors that he knows doesn't have the prize behind it and asks you if you want to switch doors. Some may think to tell you to stay with your first choice. But statistics demonstrates that your odds increase from 33% to 66% by always switching your choice. Somewhat counter-intuitive but check out an online simulator and verify it for yourself. Nevertheless, switching doors doesn't make it 100%.
So, in this paper, Conway and Kochen suggest that the spin states don't exist until the point they are measured. Then the particle is free to "decide" which state it will adopt at the moment of measurement. They begin with the assumption that there is at least one being or experimenter in the universe with free will. Then by applying the following axioms they derive their conclusion. The TWIN axiom states that when dealing with entangled particles that while you cannot predict their individual states before measurement, the states between both particles do correlate with one another. The MIN axiom states that is the future cannot change the past, that the past cannot determine the future. The FIN axiom states that information cannot be transmitted faster than the speed of light. And the SPIN axiom says that the three perpendicular spin states (x, y, z) commute to always equal 2 or (101). However, the Kochen-Specker Paradox says that these states don't exist before being measured because a solution does not exist when measuring all 33 axis of a sphere superimposed on a cube. All of this result in the conclusion that the particle being measured by the experimenter also exhibits free will.
I don't really understand the math part of it, but they seem to be saying the math proves that there is nothing deterministic about which way the spin will be. There are no hidden or unaccounted for variables. Or in other words, whether a butterfly flaps its wings in Kansas does not result in thunderstorms in Tokyo verses sunny skies. The paper makes a point to say that they make no attempt to comment on probability and uncertainty. However, an important assertion that Dr. Conway makes using this theorem and proof is to explain randomness in the universe. Dr. Conway is quoted in a lecture in Auckland New Zealand as saying his Theorem could also rightly be named the "Free Whim Theorem." So, in a nutshell this theorem seems to be trying to explain how God plays dice with the Universe despite Einstein's objection to that idea.
The idea of quantum mechanics as a proof for free will is not new with Conway and Kochen. This idea has been debated as a product of quantum mechanics since these theories were first discovered. I remember Cleon Skousen talking about this in his controversial talk where he mentions quantum mechanics and free will but falsely concludes that God has to appease the intelligences. Nevertheless, this new proof of free will has profound theological and philosophical implications.
What is all this about? Well, I am not going to pretend to understand quantum mechanics completely but there are few basics ideas I picked up along the way. Before Einstein's relativity and quantum mechanics were discovered, most every behavior of matter was described by classical Newtonian physics. Apples falling from trees and bowling balls rolling down inclines, etc. In fact, the laws of classical physics don't just explain these behaviors but they are also predictive. By applying these laws you can in fact precisely tell the future and the past. However, as our society advanced technologically and astronomers began to look out into the universe at really big things moving very fast like stars, and planets etc., and physicists started looking at really small things like electrons and atoms, there began to arise many instances when classical Newtonian physics failed to predict physical behavior.
Quantum Mechanics came about because of Newtonian physics failing to account for black body-radiation, the emission spectrum of hydrogen, and the photoelectric effect. Relativity was discovered to explain the behavior of light in interferometers and laser gyroscopes, gravitational lensing, and moving clock desynchronization. However, the failure of classical physics for big things and small things is for different reasons. While the new equations of relativity allow us to explain and predict behavior of matter moving at or near the speed of light, quantum mechanics does not completely predict the behavior of individual particles like electrons around an atom. Heisenberg's uncertainty principle states that if you want to know the position and the momentum of an electron around an atom, the more precisely you measure one, the less precisely you can know the other because the act of measuring changes the system.
The consequences of relativity are such because it turns out that nothing can move faster than the speed of light or 3x10^8 m/s. According to Newton, if you were driving 2 m/s in a car and you turned your headlights on then the light exiting the lights would appear to be traveling 3x10^8 m/s + 2 m/s to a stationary observer. But it turns out that isn't the case. The experimentally proven reality is that the speed of light remains constant independent of reference frame. All the crazy equations are derived from this and similar observations.
For example, because of time dilation, if you have a set of twins and you keep one on Earth and send the other away on a space ship at near the speed of light and then turn around and come back to Earth, the twin who stayed at home would have aged more then the one who left home. Similar laws and equations that account for relativistic phenomenon such as length contraction and time dilation explain how fiberoptic laser gyroscopes work and allows us to keep the atomic clocks in the GPS satellites from becoming desynchonized.
However, quantum mechanics doesn't work that way. It is inherently unpredictable. Consequently, physicist talking in terms of quantum mechanics routinely use terms such as probability and spacial density to talk about the behavior of whatever particle they are describing. Entanglement helps by associating two or more particles by the laws of the conservation of momentum and then interrogating them separately in different rooms. They will always give the same story (opposite spin state). However, these experiments only get us closer to the Heisenberg's limit but not beyond it.
An example of what I am talking about is explained by another thought experiment by Erwin Schrödinger known as Schrödinger's cat. This thought experiment calls attention to our inability to predict certain things like the spin state (1/2 or -1/2) of an electron around a nucleus. Schrodinger described a situation where you had an atomic atom in a box that would eventually radioactively decay giving off an alpha particle. Also in the box was a Geiger counter connected to a contraption holding a vial of poison. And in addition to the radioactive atom, the detector, and the vial of poison was Schroeder's cat. If the atomic atom decayed, the Geiger counter would detect it, releasing the poison and killing the cat. The question being asked is whether the cat is alive or dead. Ramifications of this scenario are that, only opening the box can reveal the answer, the answer will either be one or the other, and it doesn't make sense to talk about the cat as being half dead and half-alive. It has to be one or the other.
Now is where it gets weird. You would think Entanglement would solve the Heisenberg dilemma. So, if you had a radioactive pion decay giving two electrons (A and B), to conserve angular momentum, one electron (A) would have a positive spin and the other would have a negative spin (B). And If you wanted to measure the spin state along several axis (x,y,z); while you can measure the spin in the x-axis in electron A and correctly infer the spin in electron B, you cannot then measure the y-axis spin in electron B and infer the spin in electron A with any more precision than what Heisenberg's principle allows. Somehow, electron B knows that you have already measured electron A.
I wonder if this is something like the Lets Make a Deal/Monty Hall Principle. After picking one of three doors on the show, only one with a big prize behind it, The Show Host opens up one of the doors that he knows doesn't have the prize behind it and asks you if you want to switch doors. Some may think to tell you to stay with your first choice. But statistics demonstrates that your odds increase from 33% to 66% by always switching your choice. Somewhat counter-intuitive but check out an online simulator and verify it for yourself. Nevertheless, switching doors doesn't make it 100%.
So, in this paper, Conway and Kochen suggest that the spin states don't exist until the point they are measured. Then the particle is free to "decide" which state it will adopt at the moment of measurement. They begin with the assumption that there is at least one being or experimenter in the universe with free will. Then by applying the following axioms they derive their conclusion. The TWIN axiom states that when dealing with entangled particles that while you cannot predict their individual states before measurement, the states between both particles do correlate with one another. The MIN axiom states that is the future cannot change the past, that the past cannot determine the future. The FIN axiom states that information cannot be transmitted faster than the speed of light. And the SPIN axiom says that the three perpendicular spin states (x, y, z) commute to always equal 2 or (101). However, the Kochen-Specker Paradox says that these states don't exist before being measured because a solution does not exist when measuring all 33 axis of a sphere superimposed on a cube. All of this result in the conclusion that the particle being measured by the experimenter also exhibits free will.
I don't really understand the math part of it, but they seem to be saying the math proves that there is nothing deterministic about which way the spin will be. There are no hidden or unaccounted for variables. Or in other words, whether a butterfly flaps its wings in Kansas does not result in thunderstorms in Tokyo verses sunny skies. The paper makes a point to say that they make no attempt to comment on probability and uncertainty. However, an important assertion that Dr. Conway makes using this theorem and proof is to explain randomness in the universe. Dr. Conway is quoted in a lecture in Auckland New Zealand as saying his Theorem could also rightly be named the "Free Whim Theorem." So, in a nutshell this theorem seems to be trying to explain how God plays dice with the Universe despite Einstein's objection to that idea.
Monday, March 30, 2009
On the Road: I Just Like the Beat
Did your parents ever ask or have you ever asked your children, "How do you stand listening to the terrible lyrics of your rap and rock music?" It is likely that the response went something like, "I don't listen to the lyrics Mom, I just like the beat." Honestly, I am guilty of saying it. But not until recently did I discover the terrible irony in my response. It turns out the inspiration behind most rock, pop, rap, and r&b music today comes from a very sick and perverted hedonistic and shamanistic philosophy reintroduced and popularized by a small group of crude writers and poets known as the "beat writers."
I was listening to the following lecture by Yale English professor Amy Hungerford's on Jack Kerouac's novel "On the Road." Honestly, I knew of this book but really didn't have a full appreciation of how important this book is to our current political and cultural challenges in America. Thanks to this lecture and the Internet, I now have a new understanding for how Modern and Post-modern American literature, art, poetry have influenced western culture and politics.
Religious, Classical, Humanistic, and Romantic philosophy actually share something in common. They all share the optimistic view that ultimate truth and absolute morality can be known and applied to form a perfect culture and society. However, after the suffering during the Great Depression and the genocide practiced by Stalin and Hitler during World War II a new modern philosophy or nihilism emerged that was inherently and intrinsically pessimistic. Nihilist philosophers were ardent atheists based what they say is the "problem of suffering." Or in other words, because bad things happen to good people, God cannot exist. Nihilism suggested that there is no meaning for life and therefore because there is no God then death causes the cessation of consciousness. The result of this thinking led to the conclusion that if we all die tomorrow, we might as well eat, drink, and be merry today.
In the 1940's and 50's the United States emerged from World War II as the most powerful nation on Earth. Men returned home from the war, got married, and moved their families from the cities out to the suburbs. This new middle class bought cars, dishwashers, laundry machines, and television sets while at the same time participated in organized religion. However, some of the children of the "greatest generation" became delinquent. The movie "Rebel Without a Cause" starring James Dean in 1955 was based on a scientific paper from 1944 by Psychiatrist Dr. Robert Lindner with the same name. This paper ascribed childhood delinquency to the seeming hypocrisy of parents who profess religious spirituality, but demonstrate superficial materialism and consumerism. While this wasn't a logical justification for self-centered behavior, children did use the materialism of their parents to rationalize their hedonism. And children weren't the only ones who used this excuse. The poor in America envied and resented the prosperity of the new middle class used this excuse as well.
Friedrich Nietzsche lost faith in God after the suffering of WW2, Charles Darwin denied God after losing his daughter Annie to disease, and James Joyce (idolized by the beat writers) turned from God over the social and sexual guilt he experienced growing up Catholic. These influential philosophers, scientists, and authors reflected and influenced a general rejection of faith in America and Europe. However, the human soul has an inherent need for spirituality. Unfortunately, parents were ill-equipped to answer their children's spiritual questions regarding the purpose of life. Consequently, this opened the door for the counterfeit and debased philosophies of humanism, and hedonism and an archaic form of spirituality known as shamanism which involves taking mind-altering, hallucinogenic substances.
So, what is "On the Road" about and how does it relate to all this? Honestly, let me just say that I haven't read this book nor do I think I will read it. However, the Amy Hungerford's lectures do a great job at summarizing the book. During the late 1940's a small group of writers at Columbia University in New York claimed to obtain truth from the rebellious, fallen, lost and "beat" generation by living and writing about this self-centered and hedonistic lifestyle. This New York circle of beat writers includes Jack Kerouac, John Holmes, Lucien Carr, Alan Ansen, Allen Ginsberg and William Burroughs. Kerouac's "On the Road" together with Ginsberg's poem "Howl" and Burroughs "Naked Lunch" are the three most important works of the beat writers. These poems and novels triggered obscenity hearings around the country after being ban at many schools like James Joyce's "Ulysses" before them.
"On the Road" by Jack Kerouac's is autobiographical in nature and tells the story of the beat writers with the young man Neal Cassady who is called "Dean Moriarty". Neal Cassady was born in Salt Lake City, Utah but suffered the death of his mother at 10 years of age. He was raised with his alcoholic father in Denver, CO on skid row. Neal was in and out of jail or reform school until 1945 when at age 20 he married LuAnn Henderson and went to New York on their honeymoon where he first met Jack Kerouac and Allen Ginsberg. A year later Neal moved to New York to join the beat writers. There seems to have been a mutual fascination. Cassady lacked significant formal education but tried to sound educated as he tried to emulate Kerouac and Ginsberg. Kerouac on the other hand was just as interested in emulating Cassady and another friend, Herbert Hunke, as Cassady was interested in emulating Kerouac. Ginsberg was fascinated with Cassady for other reasons and had a sexual relationship with him over the next 20 years. The Book chronicles the travels of this group with Cassady across the United States and back to Denver to experience his life of debauchery, drug abuse, and hedonism first-hand.
But unlike Nihilist philosophers who denied any type of spirituality. The Beat writers attempted to mixed into their writing Judeo-Christianity and Eastern Religious thought except when it came to the part about temperance and self-restraint. Their philosophy seemed to be that they could attain enlightenment through drug use and unrestrained sexuality. Their writings refer to several instances of hallucinatory visions while under the influence of illicit drugs. It is no surprise the Beat writers identified with certain Native American tribes and other Southeast Asian groups as "noble savages" who also practice shamanism. In fact, Kerouac and the group make a special side trip to try peyote with a group of Native Americans in "On the Road."
These beat writers automatically garnered a cult following which continues to the present. And not surprising. These writers identified a hedonistic sub-culture, emulated it, and then wrote propaganda to justify and glorify the lifestyle. More and more youth in America and around the world began reading this literature and sought to emulate it, and these and other beat writers continued to glorify the behavior. In addition, these writers inspired a whole generation of musicians who used the influence of Blues and Jazz and created Rock and Roll. Hundreds of Rock and Roll bands including the Beatles, Grateful Dead, Queen, and Bob Dylan claim inspiration from the these beat writers and numerous of songs have been written about them. I realized I have one on my ipod. "Hey Jack Kerouac," Natalie Merchant and 10,000 Maniacs.
But while the rebel kids of the 50's didn't have a cause, the Vietnam gave the kids of the 60's a new justification. Consequently, the "beatniks", "bohemians hedonists" and "hipsters" of the 50's became the "hippies" and "peaceniks" of the 60's in Berkley, California. This counterculture group embraced the sexual revolution and experimented with drugs all while protesting against the war. By the late 70's and early 80's this generation of "baby boomers" finally married and settled down, but the philosophies are still reflected and protected today through social liberalism. After the Vietnam War this group searched for new causes. Many from these "dead beats" remained politically active by joining pro-communist groups united against what they saw was US capitalist imperialism. Later this group gravitated towards environmental issues and are behind the recent "man-made global warming" delusion. Most recently, this group has been advocating for same-sex marriage which they are calling "the civil rights issue of our generation."
MTV, VH1, and BET use the same tactics today as the beat writers. MTV claims it is simply holding up a mirror to society. However, that mirror is only reflecting a specific debased and corrupt sector of society. Consequently, kids across the world are exposed to this depraved sector of society and are seeking more and more to emulate what they see glorified on MTV. So, it is no surprise that we have seen hedonistic behavior spiral out of control with Generation X. Unfortunately, too many in our society say, "kids will be kids" and "I just like the beat" without considering the dire consequences of our unrestrained, family and self-destructive, hedonistic behavior.
So, what happened to the Beat writers? After spending time in France at the Beatnik Hotel and in Mexico and Florida, the movement remained strong in San Fransisco which attracted a large homosexual population with the support of Allen Ginsberg. But despite being very politically powerful in San Fransisco and even having very liberal federal judges but were not powerful enough to overturn proposition 8 defining marriage as only between a man and woman. But the New York and Boston Liberals have been moving in increasing numbers to Vermont and are recently attempting to approve same-sex marriage as Massachusetts and Connecticut have done. As for the beat writers themselves, they have all since passed away. Some earlier then others from overdose or health conditions relating to drug and alcohol abuse. Unfortunately, the self-destructive philosophy continues which resulted in the early deaths Jack Kerouac, Neal Cassady, and others like Elvis Presley, Marlyn Monroe, and Kurt Cobain and hundreds of thousands of youth who just like the beat.
I was listening to the following lecture by Yale English professor Amy Hungerford's on Jack Kerouac's novel "On the Road." Honestly, I knew of this book but really didn't have a full appreciation of how important this book is to our current political and cultural challenges in America. Thanks to this lecture and the Internet, I now have a new understanding for how Modern and Post-modern American literature, art, poetry have influenced western culture and politics.
Religious, Classical, Humanistic, and Romantic philosophy actually share something in common. They all share the optimistic view that ultimate truth and absolute morality can be known and applied to form a perfect culture and society. However, after the suffering during the Great Depression and the genocide practiced by Stalin and Hitler during World War II a new modern philosophy or nihilism emerged that was inherently and intrinsically pessimistic. Nihilist philosophers were ardent atheists based what they say is the "problem of suffering." Or in other words, because bad things happen to good people, God cannot exist. Nihilism suggested that there is no meaning for life and therefore because there is no God then death causes the cessation of consciousness. The result of this thinking led to the conclusion that if we all die tomorrow, we might as well eat, drink, and be merry today.
In the 1940's and 50's the United States emerged from World War II as the most powerful nation on Earth. Men returned home from the war, got married, and moved their families from the cities out to the suburbs. This new middle class bought cars, dishwashers, laundry machines, and television sets while at the same time participated in organized religion. However, some of the children of the "greatest generation" became delinquent. The movie "Rebel Without a Cause" starring James Dean in 1955 was based on a scientific paper from 1944 by Psychiatrist Dr. Robert Lindner with the same name. This paper ascribed childhood delinquency to the seeming hypocrisy of parents who profess religious spirituality, but demonstrate superficial materialism and consumerism. While this wasn't a logical justification for self-centered behavior, children did use the materialism of their parents to rationalize their hedonism. And children weren't the only ones who used this excuse. The poor in America envied and resented the prosperity of the new middle class used this excuse as well.
Friedrich Nietzsche lost faith in God after the suffering of WW2, Charles Darwin denied God after losing his daughter Annie to disease, and James Joyce (idolized by the beat writers) turned from God over the social and sexual guilt he experienced growing up Catholic. These influential philosophers, scientists, and authors reflected and influenced a general rejection of faith in America and Europe. However, the human soul has an inherent need for spirituality. Unfortunately, parents were ill-equipped to answer their children's spiritual questions regarding the purpose of life. Consequently, this opened the door for the counterfeit and debased philosophies of humanism, and hedonism and an archaic form of spirituality known as shamanism which involves taking mind-altering, hallucinogenic substances.
So, what is "On the Road" about and how does it relate to all this? Honestly, let me just say that I haven't read this book nor do I think I will read it. However, the Amy Hungerford's lectures do a great job at summarizing the book. During the late 1940's a small group of writers at Columbia University in New York claimed to obtain truth from the rebellious, fallen, lost and "beat" generation by living and writing about this self-centered and hedonistic lifestyle. This New York circle of beat writers includes Jack Kerouac, John Holmes, Lucien Carr, Alan Ansen, Allen Ginsberg and William Burroughs. Kerouac's "On the Road" together with Ginsberg's poem "Howl" and Burroughs "Naked Lunch" are the three most important works of the beat writers. These poems and novels triggered obscenity hearings around the country after being ban at many schools like James Joyce's "Ulysses" before them.
"On the Road" by Jack Kerouac's is autobiographical in nature and tells the story of the beat writers with the young man Neal Cassady who is called "Dean Moriarty". Neal Cassady was born in Salt Lake City, Utah but suffered the death of his mother at 10 years of age. He was raised with his alcoholic father in Denver, CO on skid row. Neal was in and out of jail or reform school until 1945 when at age 20 he married LuAnn Henderson and went to New York on their honeymoon where he first met Jack Kerouac and Allen Ginsberg. A year later Neal moved to New York to join the beat writers. There seems to have been a mutual fascination. Cassady lacked significant formal education but tried to sound educated as he tried to emulate Kerouac and Ginsberg. Kerouac on the other hand was just as interested in emulating Cassady and another friend, Herbert Hunke, as Cassady was interested in emulating Kerouac. Ginsberg was fascinated with Cassady for other reasons and had a sexual relationship with him over the next 20 years. The Book chronicles the travels of this group with Cassady across the United States and back to Denver to experience his life of debauchery, drug abuse, and hedonism first-hand.
But unlike Nihilist philosophers who denied any type of spirituality. The Beat writers attempted to mixed into their writing Judeo-Christianity and Eastern Religious thought except when it came to the part about temperance and self-restraint. Their philosophy seemed to be that they could attain enlightenment through drug use and unrestrained sexuality. Their writings refer to several instances of hallucinatory visions while under the influence of illicit drugs. It is no surprise the Beat writers identified with certain Native American tribes and other Southeast Asian groups as "noble savages" who also practice shamanism. In fact, Kerouac and the group make a special side trip to try peyote with a group of Native Americans in "On the Road."
These beat writers automatically garnered a cult following which continues to the present. And not surprising. These writers identified a hedonistic sub-culture, emulated it, and then wrote propaganda to justify and glorify the lifestyle. More and more youth in America and around the world began reading this literature and sought to emulate it, and these and other beat writers continued to glorify the behavior. In addition, these writers inspired a whole generation of musicians who used the influence of Blues and Jazz and created Rock and Roll. Hundreds of Rock and Roll bands including the Beatles, Grateful Dead, Queen, and Bob Dylan claim inspiration from the these beat writers and numerous of songs have been written about them. I realized I have one on my ipod. "Hey Jack Kerouac," Natalie Merchant and 10,000 Maniacs.
But while the rebel kids of the 50's didn't have a cause, the Vietnam gave the kids of the 60's a new justification. Consequently, the "beatniks", "bohemians hedonists" and "hipsters" of the 50's became the "hippies" and "peaceniks" of the 60's in Berkley, California. This counterculture group embraced the sexual revolution and experimented with drugs all while protesting against the war. By the late 70's and early 80's this generation of "baby boomers" finally married and settled down, but the philosophies are still reflected and protected today through social liberalism. After the Vietnam War this group searched for new causes. Many from these "dead beats" remained politically active by joining pro-communist groups united against what they saw was US capitalist imperialism. Later this group gravitated towards environmental issues and are behind the recent "man-made global warming" delusion. Most recently, this group has been advocating for same-sex marriage which they are calling "the civil rights issue of our generation."
MTV, VH1, and BET use the same tactics today as the beat writers. MTV claims it is simply holding up a mirror to society. However, that mirror is only reflecting a specific debased and corrupt sector of society. Consequently, kids across the world are exposed to this depraved sector of society and are seeking more and more to emulate what they see glorified on MTV. So, it is no surprise that we have seen hedonistic behavior spiral out of control with Generation X. Unfortunately, too many in our society say, "kids will be kids" and "I just like the beat" without considering the dire consequences of our unrestrained, family and self-destructive, hedonistic behavior.
So, what happened to the Beat writers? After spending time in France at the Beatnik Hotel and in Mexico and Florida, the movement remained strong in San Fransisco which attracted a large homosexual population with the support of Allen Ginsberg. But despite being very politically powerful in San Fransisco and even having very liberal federal judges but were not powerful enough to overturn proposition 8 defining marriage as only between a man and woman. But the New York and Boston Liberals have been moving in increasing numbers to Vermont and are recently attempting to approve same-sex marriage as Massachusetts and Connecticut have done. As for the beat writers themselves, they have all since passed away. Some earlier then others from overdose or health conditions relating to drug and alcohol abuse. Unfortunately, the self-destructive philosophy continues which resulted in the early deaths Jack Kerouac, Neal Cassady, and others like Elvis Presley, Marlyn Monroe, and Kurt Cobain and hundreds of thousands of youth who just like the beat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
