Machiavellian

Do not separate text from historical background. If you do, you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution, which can only end in a distorted, bastardized form of illegitimate government.

James Madison

The advancement and diffusion of knowledge is the only guardian of true liberty.

James Madison

One of the most pressing issues of today, and if you had bothered to read history, any day that involved the existence of humans, is prevarication.  We all engage in the activity.  In some fashion, because of certain occultic and draconian silent rules of being a social herd animal, we don’t necessarily have a choice.  The little white lie is of less importance, it’s only arena is the singular of interpersonal communication.

What about that big, bad, nasty tosser?  The political lie, the corporate lie, the military lie.  Nothing much is my answer.  A lie is only as good as the story that is used to build it’s framework; which requires a good storyteller.  It should be rather simple to tell, mostly because anyone educated in the rudiments of their language would understand proper use of imagery, literary devices, solid word choice, required structure, etc.  It should also be rather simple to tell when someone’s story is just piss poor.

Notice that in both instances I used the terms, “should be”.

If James Madison’s words were ever heeded, it hasn’t been at any time in the last century.  There’s no point pulling punches, our prostiticians are morons, of the licentious variety; and yet, the populace seems to be none the wiser.  The flat-lined plebes of America still buy into the fallacy of bifurcation that is the left/right political spectrum.  It wouldn’t hold up as evidence under an adjudicatory hearing, but it is enough if you happen to ever part the pages of one of those dirty, better for cleaning windshields, factless periodicals known as a newspaper.  Or if you happen to have an IQ greater than a speed limit sign.

Are you groaning from the negativity yet?  I would be remiss for not reveling in the reader’s agony.

As I’m back in University, I have been forced into taking a “professional business writing” class.  I’ll digress on the overarching stupidity of the class and the nature of business writing I’ve encountered through the years, none of which succeeds in proving “professionalism”, in any sense.  But, I have learned one interesting tidbit from the class, via a rather harsh critique from the instructor.  It appears, according to his missive, that my writing fails to meet requisite standards of both the Fog Index and the Flesch Kincaid scale.

These are used everywhere in the news media, business and a mass of other publishing?  Read what the links explain plainly: both are setup to calculate whether or not you are writing at the “acceptable” level of 7th or 8th graders.  Don’t argue with me, it’s all there for you to read for yourself.

Modern writing is setup to the default standard of children, because regardless of where one finds oneself in this society, what magnanimous station you feel you’ve attained; the actuality is that your world is setup for the morons, the uneducated, the idiots, the cerebrally uncaring, however you choose to label them.

Fortunately, Mr. Madison has long since left this world and can no longer see the depraved indifference shown towards borderline illiteracy and lack of education.  There is no need to wonder why our government can rape, sodomise, pillage and loot the public; while still being defended by masses of individuals who watch the evening news.

Change the sign and the song: Amurika, home of the uneducated, land of the 7th grade reading level.  This country is beautiful, magnificent; Amurikans make me ill.

Sorry Mr. Madison, the experiment is ending as an abject failure, but on the positive side, none of the subjects will even be capable of reading the abstract.

Okay, so I have teenagers.  We have an Xbox 360.  Teenagers, video games, parenting … it’s the modern era, it is, part of how it is done.

The point of any video game: e.n.t.e.r.t.a.i.n.m.e.n.t.

Did you catch that?  Was it clear?  One more time: E N T E R T A I N M E N T.  (Notice, with a “period”).

Okay, so the games of choice currently are Darksiders and Assassin’s Creed II.  Do yourself, don’t read critique’s of video games, the people who do this, are, well, they are fucking idiots.  They actually take their critique’s seriously, and have some of the most atrocious spelling and writing skills you can find.

So, how about that Darksiders?

War, Horseman of the Apocalypse

It’s a beautifully rendered game, only a touch campy with colors at times.  It is fun, it doesn’t require a career as a “video game player”.  The primary point of it, if you have an intellect higher than a speed limit sign, is the story behind it; as long as the game play doesn’t suck, which it doesn’t.

It has a great fantasy story.  It takes the old Jewish/Christian mythology of the war in Heaven, and twists it; the angels, the demons, the “Creator”, Lucifer, the whole apocalypse ending to all of creation … fantastic fantasy making.  The point of the game is to play it out, and … Oh, holy shit, reveal the story that the game is built upon.  Who’da thunk it!!!  That’s how you get entertained best; a great story, and this game has one.  But you’ll never see that in any review ~ because it appears that video games are made for button pushing morons.  Well, that and critics who don’t know what a storyline is either.

Assassin’s Creed II, same thing; a great story.

This game is set in medieval Italy, the greatest cities, Florence, Venice, Tuscany, Rome.  Has a slew of great Italian historical figures included, which are involved in moving the story ahead.  Hands down, one of the most beautiful games I’ve ever seen; absolutely flawless digital rendering.  The story centers around a fictional/fantasy war occurring through history amongst the Templars and their counter cult, the Assassins.

Again, the game is played to … (wait for it … wait for it …) … to reveal the story!!!  But hey, go read the critics for yourself, don’t take my word for it.

I abhor stupidity; really, can’t stand the criminally inane.

Well, it’s trying to get around to spring like behavior.

I love spring.  Life.  There is a strange fixation through winter time with the nakedness of trees. Cannot stand trees without foliage.  Waiting for the return.

But …

Some of life’s little visitors have been about, starting into their routines.  Like this guy…

These little guys are great, and considering the CCD issues of recent years, it’s even better to see some drifting around, looking for food stuffs.  But as with all things of nature, the little drone’s life expectancy was limited.  Mostly, by this fellow, another of my spring favorites …

It’s just that fabulous circle of life thing.  Unfortunately, humans don’t have the same opportunity to be part of the food chain.

Sorry for the delay, had some school work to get through, exams and what not.

Okay, so back to the story.

I want to go back to a specific quote:

There is no surer sign of decay in a country than to see the rites of religion held in contempt.
Niccolo Machiavelli

Now, if we remember from part one, there is a particular theme that comes from the Founding Fathers, the Framers of the Constitution, and the early development of the U.S.  Namely, believe what you would like to believe, but the government is secular.  The fact that freedom of religion exists, Constitutionally, and is worded as:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

This tells us that there are probably a number of ways that this can be viewed.  Respectfully, there should be a number of ways to view it.  Of those views, perspectives, one mostly certainly is that because there is to be no law “respecting an establishment”, those of us, of the godless variety, should feel no pressure from any governmental agency, institution, program, etc., that shows any signs of pushing a particular agenda of religion or religious faith.  Unfortunately, as is noticeable from P1., this isn’t the case.  There are a number of manners for individuals of agenda to influence government involvement, or seemingly, to dissuade government action also.   Under the Constitutional Authority, the behavior in Texas of forcing particular non-academic, faith driven revisions of the U.S. history is a direct violation of the First Amendment.

Naturally, it would follow that non-faith driven people would get a bit sphincter pinched about it.  Not surprising.  The problem though, has become one of continual escalation, and with it, the emotional conflagration on both sides.  Namely, emotion to the point that logic is lost.

The point of religion in society has to be made; and I believe Machiavelli already made it clear in his works.  If you’re interested, here is where you can find the reasoning behind his thoughts.  To any discerning mind, and anyone who hasn’t been a complete plebe and buried their head in the sand, has read history as they should have, it is just rather plain.

To get a more complete picture, we have to go visit that brilliant mind of a friend of mine, Tabula Rasa, and get our heads around some Game Theory.  He says it’s a 101 course, hrmmm, maybe not for everyone, but if you take the time to read it, he’ll illuminate the necessity of religion in society.  We humans, really like to think ourselves overmuch complicated and have an odd tendency to be overwhelmingly amazed with our kind.  Honestly, not so much, no.  Another stop on the journey to understanding is Jonah Lehrer’s book, “How We Decide“.

So in short, here’s the list, a good time to get busy on it was a few yesterdays ago, but if you haven’t, well, no time like the present either:

1. History of major world civilisations
2. Machiavelli, the Discourses of the First Ten Books of Titus Livy
3. Game Theory
4. Basic neurology of human decisions and thought

I can hear the groaning and wailing across the internets; “Why should I read all that shit?  I don’t have time for this, I have a life.”

::ping::

Guess what?  That is exactly the purpose of religion in society.  The majority of the human population doesn’t know, doesn’t want to know, doesn’t care and doesn’t have any desire to expend the energy to understand.  So what does religion do for the masses?  Simple; comfort, cohesion, identity and oversimplification.  All the major players of the human social brain.  There’s no point in my playing it all out, it would take more pages than the blog can afford, and I’ve given you your best starting points.

So what does this mean for the atheist, the godless, the agnostic?  A lot.  Primarily, of the “get over yourself” style.  If you have no beliefs, like myself, then be content with your own world view, cosmic view, hell, just the view of your own backyard.  The beauty of the U.S. Constitution is that we have that ability; to observe and dismiss, observe and take action, observe and whine, whinge and groan while stuffing another bag of high sodium, cholesterol saturated chips down our gullet while swilling in Coke or Pepsi’s latest diabetes inducing swill; all from the comfort of our sofa bought with debt credit payments at 22.9% interest that we have no money to .

Am I saying there aren’t battles to be fought?  No, I’m not.  The Texas example is one such battle that needs to be fought.  But, how about we try a more pragmatic path to the end result.  Don’t attack the people or their foundations, they really don’t know any other way in which to operate.  It is their understanding.  How about we push a movement that not only puts academics at the forefront, but, (wait for it ….. wait for it …..), ::gasp:: leaves room open for the students to decide; or, Holy Shit, forces them to take the time to research on their own and draw their own most reasonable conclusions?  Maybe stop dealing in absolutes, especially where history and beliefs are concerned, pull our collective heads out of our collective social asses and say, “This is what I understand, and we will have to agree to disagree”?

There’s two major points to religion in society; it gives the masses something to hold onto, which gives them the comfort to operate within their in-group that they most desperately need/desire, and in that holding onto, gives society a general overall cohesiveness that we all need, to continue to be a society that is not part of the historical record, yet.

Religion as part of government is not wise, it promotes power struggles based on belief, and if the history of England and the Roman Catholic Church have taught the world nothing else, it is that governing bodies run by holy men, corrupt far too easily, and have the ability to generate too much power.  So we have the Constitution, and should pay a bit more attention to the voices of the past, as well as the few sane voices of today, and realise, religion is for society; not government.  But those same voices will tell you, religion isn’t going anywhere, and wars of belief, well, I’ll let Hitler, Stalin, the Crusaders, and the Muslims finish that off.

Ancient Rome was as confident of the immutability of its world and the continual expansion and improvement of the human lot as we are today.
Arthur Erickson

But, history never repeats.

Came across this article from the New York Times magazine.  It appears that once again, the great State of Texas, that gave us the fradulent study from a non-existent school for NCLB, is at it again.  The Creationists and New Earth Creationists are busy trying to mold historical education in their image. There are ten pages to the article, so I’m not going to be covering it, the link is there, feel free to read away.

The primary driver of this newest attempt at rewriting American history to suit personal agenda, comes most prominently from Don McLeroy; a former State Board of Education Chairman for Texas, (1999 – 2007).  He was officially demoted from that position in that last year because of his religious views and desire to influence the education system with them.  Let me just be clear here: each and every individual is completely and inexorably entitled, under the Constitutional Authority, to hold whatever views they so choose, not up for debate.  I have no problem with Christians or their belief in a divinity that I personally have never found to be evidentiary or provable.

But there are limitations to tolerance:

“I consider myself a Christian fundamentalist,” he announced almost as soon as we sat down. He also identifies himself as a young-earth creationist who believes that the earth was created in six days, as the book of Genesis has it, less than 10,000 years ago.

Okay, WOW.  I think this requires a visual aid to more aptly express how I feel about those statements.

Now on to the good stuff, hopefully I’ve sprayed enough Plebe-B-Gone around, that none of that sticks to me.  Seriously, those statements caused my brain to reboot.  The main thrust and pinch of the article concerns certain individuals and organisations in Texas attempting to refashion American history in an image that they find appealing.  So, let’s talk about that for a minute.

The Founding Fathers.  Great minds of great men, undoubtedly.  I’m going to just concentrate on the primaries, not going through the whole list of the House of Burgesses and the Constitutional Convention.  So, essentially the most influential would be Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and George Washington.  As for Benjamin Franklin and James Madison, there is little doubt that they served us as men of Godly inspiration.  Both Thomas Jefferson and George Washington it seems, there is room for doubt that either were more than deists, and certainly not orthodox Christians.  Both have also suffered continual attacks on their character, either from the Church or the Secularists, dependent upon what the prevailing opinion is coming from the most recent works, and who the academic putz was that wrote the subjective trash.  That’s a matter for part 2 though.

An important part of understanding history, which should be rather plain and simple isn’t: we didn’t live it.  So, we can cinch up our knickers in a nice tidy bunch, over our own personal view of what they were, who they were, how they lived; but at the end of the day, it is just so much subjective bullshit.  What we do know of them, is their words; the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and all the letters, essays and published material that they left behind.

Go back to the links I provided for them, and a rather clear picture emerges; they had a Machiavellian understanding of the combination of Church, society, and using the Church in society, not in government, to maintain the establisment of liberty, or freedom if you prefer, and for aiding in the maintenance of virtues of “free” men.  It was a utilitarian matter, it was a pragmatic matter; it was not a matter for government, that much is clear.  Were they flawless in their execution?  No, they weren’t, because it wasn’t necessity to press their agenda, and if you look at the history of churches in the colonies and early U.S., there was plenty of money flowing to them from what was later the early States.  None of them were avid church goers.  So that might tell us something about men who not only feared the tyranny of monarchs, but further, the tyranny of the Church of England as well.

There is no surer sign of decay in a country than to see the rites of religion held in contempt.
Niccolo Machiavelli

So, we are talking about men who spent the majority of their days studying, reading books, learning.  Do you think they might have had personal views that might not have particularly coincided with their times, and perhaps, being learned and studied men, they knew well enough to play possum with the masses?  Attempting to regulate belief is folly; for those not paying attention, that was one of the most important reasons we ended up with America at all.  It wasn’t just the monarchy stomping their bollocks into dust and ash, it was the fact that the monarch controlled the Church, so even their belief wasn’t their own.

In the Papal System, Government and Religion are in a manner consolidated, & that is found to be the worst of Govts.

Under another aspect of the subject there may be less danger that Religion, if left to itself, will suffer from a failure of the pecuniary support applicable to it than that an omission of the public authorities to limit the duration of their Charters to Religious Corporations, and the amount of property acquirable by them, may lead to an injurious accumulation of wealth from the lavish donations and bequests prompted by a pious zeal or by an atoning remorse. Some monitory examples have already appeared.

James Madison, letter in reply to Jasper Adams pamphlet The Relation of Christianity to Civil Government in the United States

I can’t see that particularly, Thomas Jefferson was a fan of the Church either:

The Christian priesthood, finding the doctrines of Christ levelled to every understanding and too plain to need explanation, saw, in the mysticisms of Plato, Materials with which they might build up an artificial system which might, from its indistinctness, admit everlasting controversy, give employment for their order, and introduce it to profit, power, and preeminence. The doctrines which flowed from the lips of Jesus himself are within the comprehension of a child; but thousands of volumes have not yet explained the Platonisms engrafted on them: and for this obvious reason that nonsense can never be explained.

Thomas Jefferson, In 1817 he writes to John Adams

On Washington, the jury is still out.  In his inauguration alone, there is so much myth and hyperbole, it is impossible to clearly discern what his position was, and whether it was genuine, or the cunning of a brilliant man.  Afterall, he was a Free Mason, when that actually meant something.

On the face and the bottom of it, it is clear; the Founders supported the cohesion of society that religion afforded, thought that a virtuous and moral society would create more responsible citizenry, but did not think that religion should hold sway over governmental decision.  As a final side note concerning the article, apparently the State of Texas has such influence over education, the majority of the States follow their prescriptions for education and curriculum requirements.

Right about the time that Texas and Texans start paying my fucking taxes, then they can talk to me about influencing schools where my children attend; otherwise, stick to barbeque and football, and I’m quite happy we were able to send back that Idiot who was so long gone from your village.