The future darkly, and the past & American Pie

So referencing my previous post it might seem likely that
this blog would reach it's end. But not yet, I think.

First, I have to talk more about why this might be a good idea,
in spite of being rather obvious there might be a better solution.

Well, to start out on that, I don't know what that better
solution is.

Now, obviously, the " Devil " is in the details, but
clearly a lot of the value, plus or minus is in the
implementation of the solution, and what that might
be like.

please refer to the following:

American Pie  - Don Mclean

Beating around the bushes

Sounds like Hugh Masekela: beatin' aroun de bush

But that is not it, it's about my beating around the
bush with this blog, not getting to anything
definitive.

But first, hopefully, another brief digression.

If you take two sufficiently large sets with
enough variation, you are likely to find
information in both which is similar.  To put
it another way, if you select two individuals
randomly from two separates sets,  allegiances
,you might say, then you might expect some
commonality between the individuals as to
behaviors and ideas .

Now, of course when I started this blog, I thought
I had a solution, and it probably is, but here's another.
And I also believe it might save some money.

So, yes it takes a good deal of work to implement
but here goes:

The two years before a presidential election, a committee
of electors is elected.   That may sound redundant, but
it would be a non-partisan election, and I'm not exactly
sure how it would work, but national it scope.

These electors would be responsible for how the
presidential election proceeds.  The number
of candidates, how many candidates from each
party, etc.

The question I am not sure about it how to deal with
a sitting president, I think, it might be negotiated between
that president and the committee.

But the idea would be to involve more people
into the process from a greater level of diversity
and at the same time, ideally, save money.

Belligerence

Now there might be a better word to describe an absence of
co-operation, but I'm not sure what that might be.

But you need to congratulate the guys who came up with
"United States", as a name, which does exude a sense of
concept of co-operation, as compared to the " Belligerent
States ",,, which I don't think would be highly conducive
to making many friends.  In fact the Belligerent States
would simply be B.S.

Another kind of "big" problem with belligerence is that
when one person is being belligerent it's really easy to
blame the belligerence on another party.   Huge problem,
which has become very much in vogue these days.
In other words, I am not belligerent you are belligerent.


And so back to discussing the whole issue of the excessive
unpleasant trends moving more rapidly toward a highly
conflictive ( ? )  environment I  have already said it
will take quite a bit of effort to over come this, but
meanwhile, it seems that we should focus efforts into
our political system to reduce this trend as much as
possible, and  in effect to reduce this we need to
at least elect one official who's primary mandate
it to reduce that conflict.  Therefore it seems
sensible for that person would hold the highest office.
And again it seems that that individual should
be elected from a group of individual who do
not represent a particular partisan position,
in other words to elect that official in a mostly "non-partisan"
environment .  But in the end whatever efforts we
can make collectively to reduce what I would describe as
a run away train ( Kind of reminds me of Jethro Tull, no? )...

Anyway, this is also a kind of birthday card to
a friend far away.

And what's more .....

Okay, I need to readdress the problem before continuing with
discussions of the solution.

So there is a problem.  Now, it could be said that only
a certain number of people are capable of finding that
solution.

And perhaps, it might be thought that all of those
people belong to a " particular mindset "....

I emphatically assert, that notion is ridiculous, for
the following reason.

Everybody, constantly solves myriads of problem
every day.  Therefore everyone is good at it.

Finally, we don't even now what the problem is,
we are just talking about problems in general.

When dealing with collective problems, it seems
likely the greater input that goes into the solution,
that is from a variety of perspectives, the more sturdy
or solid will be the final outcome.....

You know ,,,, results.

I will continue more with discussions of solution
further down the road.

And so, and so , and so

And also I could say , so forth, but no.

So the level of adversarial discourse, has essentially
drowned out just about any other dialog.

IMHO,, not a good situation in practical terms,
because you must either conscientiously ignore it,
or alternatively , become mostly consumed by
it.

Seems to me there should be an alternative path.
You might think of it not inappropriately as a
path towards sanity, which would include most probably
a pretty strenuous effort to achieve an atmosphere of
co-operation. 

And I think one way this might occur is if we make an
attempt to change our selection of president, first
by being more inclusive , and secondly, attempting
as much as possible to make it non-partisan.  The objective
would be to have a president who is essentially
all about encouraging bi-partisan and co-operative
discourse.

Certainly, a strenuous effort, but I do not believe
it is impossible.

This is something that would have to seriously
involve the media, because of course the media
does, in fact ,profit from the promotion of adversarial
discourse. 

But largely and primarily it needs to be done I feel
on a local or regional level before there is sufficient
support for it.  The requirement of these different
organizations, must , I feel, occur regionally
and locally.  This will give this process sufficient
foundation, to demand support on the  level
of the nation.

There may be those that argue organization and
co-operation is not required in our public life.

Really?  I hope this is not a position supported by
the eminent scientists of economy.

Well, perhaps if nothing is done the historians
will inherent the world, but then who will they
tell their stories to?

Consensus and/or HaHa

17th Anniversary of 9/11/2001

Starting out with HaHa, I'm not sure what that means right now,
maybe in the course of this we will find out, more.

Now,,,,,

Consensus, what is this?   Well , following on with what has gone
before, consensus is one of the best ways of solving problems.
A highly effective tools, used all the time, in families, small
groups and many other environments.

That doesn't really tell us what it is, more than saying it's
something like a screw diver or something.

Actually, you might more accurately consider it to be like
a straight edge of t-square, maybe a level of some type.
I helps to put things in alignment and therefore, contributes
to the kind of more solid or enduring solutions.

Now, in my opinion, the situation which has evolved in
the U.S., two party system has gravely impacted this
countries ability to achieve valid or valuable consensus,
which is why, many of the most challenging issues/problems
of this time are being either put on the back burner, or
entirely ignored.  This lack of consensus also impacts
seriously the way in which we develop priorities.

Well, in my opinion, this is an issue created by
what I have previously referred to as the tyranny
of the two party system.

The problem is this system has a perverse behavior
of trying to define what consensus is, mostly based
on the " majority ", view point which goes back and
forth, like a pendulum and currently endangers the
mechanical stability of that pendulum.  I guess the
slow motion destruction of the pendulum is maybe
what I would refer to as " HaHa ".

Now,  this is in my mind why efforts need to be
made to really support and encourage " genuine "
consensus.

The above term " genuine " is of course what is
hard, but the nice thing is you know it when
you have it.   You know when differing view
points have the opportunity to influence
the decision making process.

Obviously, as before, there is much more to
this which I must belay for this moment.

continue on, hey jude?

Yesterday?  was John McCain's, funeral, I am linking to Mr. Obama's
eulogy, delivered at that time:  eulogy

There were other speaker's but many of Obama's comments connected
especially to previous post, especially on the notion that there are
"American" ideals which transcend politics.

So, that is following with the notion that there needs to be
more co-operation to make this country work, effectively
to achieve it's " goals ".....

So, what this implies is there needs to be " efforts ", applied
to bring American's together, to make our social experiments
in government, perhaps work in  more effective ways, which
means I think, reducing some of the difficulties which confront
us, at this time.

Obviously, I must still get into this a bit deeper.

Also last Sunday(Aug.26), was the 50th anniversary of the release
of Hey Jude

Too Much Stuff

So, oddly I must begin with two important events, sort of colliding
as it were, in mid air ????

One of  those events are the passing of John Mc Cain.  He will be remembered
I am sure in many ways.  But I believe also as a heroic figure, as well
as some one who gave this country valuable service in our Senate, in
the U.S.

The other event of course would be the 50th anniversary of the Chicago
Democratic convention.

I wish to discuss neither, but focus more on two issues.

#1 Problems --- especially kinds of problems

for right now I will speak about two kinds of
problems.  a)  kind of problem is generally
solvable either directly or after some
reasonable length of time.  These
kind of problems also breakdown into
two types.  One is, really fixed, and the
other is we actually have  created a worse
problem.  b) is a problem which we would like
to see solved, and we work to solve it, but we
don't always get good results from this.

There are of course many other types of problems,
but these represent a number of those problems
which we consider a lot of the time.

Beyond that there are also problems which we are
not currently aware.  These of course are quite difficult
if not impossible to to anything about.

But what I'd really like to discuss, which follows on from
the last post is:  government, or what you might call it.

Now what I am proposing is to describe government in
the following way:  an organization or non-organization
focused primarily on solving those problems which no
one else wishes to deal with.    A garbage dump for
problems, and so in this way Ronald Reagan was
correct in referring to it as " the problem ",,,, viewing
a collection of problems as one single problem.  But
properly or improperly as you may view it,  also it
" represents ", or at least " stands for " the solution,
or process of solution.

Now, viewed in this way " the machinery ", of government
would be those devices or device which allows for the
solution of problems, knowing in fact that the " government "
becomes the repository for these problems.

Viewed in this way it seems quite clear in what ways
excessive national dis-harmony, divisions, or worse, 
could result in the discontinued functionality of that
machinery ( of government ) .

And so I hope to continue with these ideas later.

Looking back and other stuff

A quick look back, refers to this post:

a quick look back

which discusses the 20th century, excess when it comes to violence, and particularly
state sponsored violence from that period, which I think I mention is certainly
a genuine example of trying to solve problems in a really, bad way.

And that is relevant, but also I am actually looking back at this my most
blow-hardy and yet perhaps excessively whimsical blog.

And perhaps what I am suggesting is that the whimsical nature of this blog
has transformed into the present in such a way that what I have been
suggesting and pointing to has evolved into a critical situation for which
I believe some serious reformation of our political environment is
indeed in order.

Now, we can reflect that the carnage and violent excess of the 20th
century has indeed contributed and perhaps explains much of
the current political environment we  experience, however I don't
see it as an excuse, or justification for things to remain as they are.

And although I must admit that the confrontation of opposing views
often does lead one to the truth, however,  that method is perhaps not
the only route to the truth, nor  always the best path.

I believe this is a genuine issue for concern, and so I guess,
I will expect my posts on this blog to continue.

Questions?

And so, should it be questions? or questions.

Well, to start out with many people, perhaps more
than you think, make a living answering questions.
In many ways I believe that is a good thing.

Personally, I generally have many questions.
For example, where are my keys? , some what
mundane.  But more difficult, what do I do
after I forget my keys?  and now I am locked out
of something, and usually ask that question when
it is already happening.

Now, currently I feel I have more questions than
ever.  One question I believe many people are
asking is " which way is up ? ".

Some people believe they have the answer already,
and a lot of people disagree with a lot of other
people on this question.

It is a tricky question, you must admit.

Do I currently have that answer?

Well, what do you think?

4th or fourth or ??? switched to 5th or fifth.... of July ...

How were that able to do that .... These guys are obviously working
with advanced technology of some time, and were able to exchange
one 24 hour period for another.  I am sure it will take many months
of study for me to catch up with this kind of break through,,,,,
literally and figuratively and ever other way beyond my
 comprehension.

But of course July is a celebration of the Roman general,,,,
Julius Caesar, curious gentlemen, ended up in well,
pretty much dead from a conversation with co-workers
in the Roman Senate.... while on his way to start a war
with the Persians.....  How different different our world
might be if he didn't accidentally slip and fall on a whole
mess of sharp pointed things in the hands of his " good "
buddies.  The world and history missed out on a bunch
of " what might have been ".....  More info here:  July

Now as far as July 4th ,,,, many connections here:  July 4


On this particular day, I might have a particularly good
amount to say,,, how much of it might be good I'm not
sure.....

I will only speak briefly about " economics ",,, a real
thing of course and a science...

One of the issues I have observed about this
science is the diligent concern about topics
concerning ,,,, when, how, and where.....
and the lesser significance for  --- why ----.

I would certainly like to know why this
subject of why seems to be discussed
less and of less concern in relationship
to economics and perhaps one day I will
know more......  As soon as I do, I will
try to let you know....Meanwhile, have a happy
4th or 5th..... Maybe even a 6th if you think
you can push it that far.

Literally a post script:

There does not seem to be any photographic
records of the above mentioned event.....
Just imagine if Apple could figure out how
to send cell phones, 2000 years into the past ?

post post script,,, for real:

You know instead of building a
billion $ wall to the south you guys
could just make me a billion $ wrist watch,,,

I promise I would try and take care of it ...

Nicely .....

In conclusion, finally ----

25 or 6 to 4 - Chicago

How Crazy .. ?

Okay, I enjoy thinking about mechanical devices that do things, you would
not normally connect that such a mechanical device might do that.

For example, a mechanical device that could determine
how crazy something or someone might be.

So first consider how often and how much the term, " how crazy " , is
used.  It occurs frequently.  Generally it is connected to an event or
a person.  So you might say:  " how crazy is that person ? ", by which
you might be saying something good or maybe something not so
nice.

So a device of this type was utilized to great effect in the
Ghostbusters movies,  so it's not like something like this
has not been imagined.   Perhaps, even such a thing
exists and very few people know about it, and they
don't want to tell anyone else ,,,, perhaps.

But what it really comes down to is, if " how crazy ", can
be measured and described by some kind of numerically
based, type of number.  (As oppose to the non-numerical
ones ).

Mathematics loves this, obviously, observe the kinds of
things they engage with.

For example, they have an infinite number of numbers,
when for the average guy,  surely a finite number
would do, but you never know what might come
around that corner, so they decide, okay we'll have
more they anybody would really ever need or
want to use for that matter.

So I am afraid, if some mathematicians get a hold
of this they will figure it out,  in order to be able to use some of
their favorite things:  numbers.  Most likely they already did it,
however.

This is getting a little bit tedious, but I thought an example
to which a number might be ascribed, is our " political "
process.  I am of course thinking of what this blog
is about , a 2 party system where in the total population
is divided - really - into 3 majors groups, being the
side that doesn't want to talk about, or think about it,
being the majority.  The smaller groups are the two
groups which are incessantly talking about it ...
but constantly --- disagreeing --- with each other
in what is almost always a very disturbing way.

If you think about it, it is easier to describe the above
mentioned event in terms of words than numbers.

I will not try to assign a number to it, but I
would guess it might be either a really big
one, or ( perhaps ) something very, very small.

I hope I did not say finally before this, but
finally,,,, this disclaimer is to indicate that
the above,  was a contrived and forced effort
at humor, and should only be taken as that.

But seriously ,,,,,,

Human-ness & Time

What makes people, human or maybe what makes humans, people?

But first, time.  I think it's kind of important to understand
that everyone who has ever lived has lived in " modern " times.

In what ever time you live, you are living in the farthest
reaches of the future of mankind.   But of course there is
more than one way to look at that issue.

Anyway, that brings me to the idea of " the primitive ".

This concept is based on the notion that in the past
humans were not always as evolved as they are in
the present age, or in other words " modern times ",
which is basically another way of saying, the present.

But this whole notion of - primitive - indicates an
extra-ordinary leap from assumptions concerning evolution
and time, for which there are conflicting facts and
information.

Nevertheless, this idea has " justified " an incredible
amount of brutality and exploitation throughout
history.

So what makes us human, anyway?

Well, I think one fundamental and important
aspect of human-ness is our ability to see
the humanity in each other.  However, it is
a worthy idea to reflect on, more.

Search & Common Ground

I sort of feel that the earth has moved under my feet, since the last post,
or --  I feel the earth move .


Anyway, when I was quite young, or ,,,, younger than today,
I watched a Walt Disney episode where Jiminy Cricket,
explained how we spend most of our time hunting,
which starred Goofy hunting. 

It seems more accurate I think to say we spend most of our
time searching.  That search might be consciously focused,
or a more diffuse search.  As the British often say,, sorting
it out.

So what does this have to do with common ground. ?

--  Blues - The Common Ground ,,, is an album on
Wikipedia, which is something to think about.

Well, I will just say finally that ,,, in all the searching we
do, do, I think we might, maybe,  spend a little more  time on
searching for a bit of " common ground ".

Interesting quote, George Washington

I am quite fascinated by the following quote from George Washington:

"However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends,
 they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent 
engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be 
enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves 
the reins of government, destroying afterwards .the very engines which 
have lifted them to unjust dominion.".."

which you can see more at :  Mount Vernon

Somebody, I am sure, has wisely told me : " don't destroy your engine ".

Clearly, Mr. Washington was expressing a good deal of concern in this statement above .

And so, Problems & Solutions

First we can talk about how problems and solutions fit
so nicely together, and frankly admit, that there are
not always solutions for problems. 

But as a pervasive human experience,  problems are what
we do most of.  ( mostly ) ..... Start with examples:

I lost my keys.   This seems to happen quite often.
A lot.  Unless you have no keys in which case it is
a rare occurrence.  Now the key syndrome will occur
most often in two places, in the home and outside
the home, in which case the resulting action will often
be different.

And this goes on all the time.  Everyday we struggle with
on a big scale with almost a myriad of problems, and yet
we are generally able to make it through the day.

We probably never stop to add up these miraculous
accomplishments but nevertheless they go on all the
time.

Now,  there are really two kinds of solutions.  There
is the immediate solution to the problem at hand,
example " where are my keys ", second kind is
the one preferred by mathematicians, which is you
solve it once and from then on it's always the same.

Generally, I would say, and it's only an opinion but,

>  I honestly think there are more of the former
than of the latter,  but it doesn't always hurt to
strive for solutions that work in a variety of situations.




 

A Brief Shift in Focus

Intro: 

Don Henley The End of Innocence

So, I did have several ideas about this post, which
-- by whatever course of fortune were mostly
wiped out today by  my listening to the following
interview:

Robert Reich -   The Common Good


Whatever topic I was trying to get at, I felt a lot of
it was covered perhaps more clearly and directly
than the direction my thoughts were taking me.


So it is very interesting, I thought, the many interesting
points addressed in the interview but also
the topic is a title for a new book with the same name.

So he addresses this issue of the common good as
well as a connection to an evolving sense of morality
in our  cultural conversation. And clearly he presents
an important concept in that notion that morality
is ---- changing, and becoming broader in meaning ----
in our culture.  Well, we can only hope in fact this is true.

And so this might as well be as good a time as any for this:

Prayer for America

OThou kind Lord!  This gathering is turning to Thee.  These hearts are radiant with Thy love.  These minds and spirits are exhilarated by the message of Thy glad-tidings.  O God!  Let this American democracy become glorious in spiritual degrees even as it has aspired to material degrees, and render this just government victorious.  Confirm this revered nation to upraise the standard of the oneness of humanity, to promulgate the Most Great Peace, to become thereby most glorious and praiseworthy among all the nations of the world.  O God!  This American nation is worthy of Thy favors and is deserving of Thy mercy.  Make it precious and near to Thee through Thy bounty and bestowal. 

‘Abdu’l-Bahá

copied from this location:  Baha'i Prayers

Sovereignty stuff and other stuff

This is one of my favorite kind of subject, stuff and other stuff,
so I'll jump into that with, And so,,,,

On this subject, we have to inquire if sovereignty begins with either
the individual or God, then, well, how is it possible for a
"sovereign nation " to oppress its citizens.

This is a very good question and I suspect it is a question which
has encouraged many  arguments, but I really have to
suggest, that may be aside the point of how can that be possible?
What is the mechanism in our social structures which allow this
kind of thing to occur?  What human behaviors are we looking
for which allow for this situation?

Well, there is no doubt about it happening because we only have
to reflect on quite a bit of historical record that suggests it has
been an event which occurs with some significant frequency
and beyond that we have only to reflect on the significantly strong
suggestion that national sovereignty exists in fact to protect
the citizens, to a very great degree. 

So we have created organizations to protects us which in many cases
end up oppressing us in various ways.

This is an argument against creating international control on
national organizations, since that would create perhaps a
greater potential for oppressive behaviors.  This is also in
accord with an argument from reducing the " power " in
national organizations as well.  I am not particularly encouraging
this argument because it really doesn't get to the heart of the
issue about the specific behavior which allows this situation
to develop or persist.

Now we are facing considerable difficulties I believe as
a result of these kinds of forces and so figuring this
out is of serious concern for the present.

So I just want to go back to what I have previously suggested
that sovereignty begins with the individual and ideally will
radiate from that point so that the individual then might
anticipate some attitudes and effect radiating back at
more expanding levels.  This would suggest that local organizations
are key in preventing larger organizations from implementing or
contemplating such efforts or implementing oppressive
activities.

And of course we have the highly significant issue that there may
be more that one perspective on what those " oppressive " actions
or behaviors might involve.  So that means that for example
two groups may both believe that the measures they suggest will
" reduce " these kinds of oppressive actions but that may
strongly disagree about what actions need to be taken, ending
in the situation that they find each other to be the actual ' cause ',
now of these oppression s.  Yikes.   Difficult.  In a way you
might call it " fun with mirrors ".

At any rate this is an intriguing but complex issue,
which may need further examination and inquiry.
And maybe you can call it " fun with mirrors ".

Working Together and/or Being Together

So, I seem to off on a lot of tangents, can I find my way back to the
point.  One thing I am pretty grateful about is, getting into this issue
of Sovereignty/sovereignty - and to be honest I would not have gotten
into it without a spell-checker.  It's really not an easy word to spell.


Someday, I'd like to just focus on that topic, but I think I have at least
succeeded in suggesting that there is a strong connected between
morality and sovereignty.  Although I may not have distinctly proven
that these two topic are intimately connected, I believe that after a
certain amount of reflection this seems quite evident.

I want to discuss another topic which is ,,, the idea of working together.
Now, in a way, this idea is almost the definition of the human race, and
also, in a certain way, the idea of sovereignty seems tied into it as well,
as for example the fairly well known country called; United States
or maybe the United States ( ? _, ) which suggests that all these
States are working together.

I also think that in order to work together, you need to " be " together.
Of course, what does that all mean? Being together.  Well, I think
it means just getting along, spending time with each other, and
many things similar  to those ideas.

So the big question is, and has always been the big question,
?                          CAN WE DO THAT                                 ?

Perilous & Pyramids

Mostly people think about pyramids and mysterious, but
this is a different thing, by perilous and I'm referring to the
present.

So I'll start with, pyramids , a prominent view is that
the Great Pyramid  was built 4500 years ago, by a
co-ordinated effort that boggles the imagination.
And there are those that disagree with this perspective
but it is a hopeful perspective about how diligent a
group of people might be.

Back to perilous, there are quite a few who would agree
that we are currently in perilous times.  Thinking about
this, we have lived through many perilous times, and
a complete list like that would be long.  Nevertheless
I will try to express the situation as I see it.  But I will
not go into a specific description of the situation, but
more or less suggest an analogy that might be
helpful ( or not ... ) .....

Think of two teams that are trying to raise something
from horizontal to vertical.  The object is big and
valuable to both teams.  Now, imagine that they
start out with some kind of plan at the beginning,
but for what ever reason they have stopped
communicating effectively and ( wa la ? ) ,
sure enough, they have got themselves in a
situation which endangers ( perilously ) the object
they are trying to erect.

Now what should they do ?

Right now the choice seems to be " just
pull harder ",,,, and " don't talk " ....
And what ever it is they are trying to erect,
seems to move to a more  frightening the postion
all the time.


What do I suggest.  Well, number one,

APPLY LOGIC ...  !!!!!!

What does this have to do with pyramids ?

Good question,  maybe the pyramids where
built in perilous times.

An Example from previous

So let's get into this example, with out dialog and we begin
with two anonymous.

Now we are supposing in advance that one is more liberal
and the other more conservative but it is not necessary to
know which is which.   Now both individuals are in the
same position both had motor vehicles that they have had
for sometime and both are unhappy because these vehicles
are not what they had been ( not so great anymore ) and
both are short of money to get these new vehicles.

Well, one decides that he will get a part time job to
afford this new car.  The second individual thinks, well
I really don't need a new car, I just want to drive a new
car and so he looks for a job with a taxi company that
uses new cars.  Now we don't have to decide who is
conservative and who is liberal, because as it turns out,
these two individuals are the previously introduced
Josh and Jocelyn and they are married.

Well, now we have an issue as to how this will be solved
and we can assume one of 6 possible solutions,

1)  they both get part time jobs
2)  they both go to work for cab companies,
      maybe the same, or maybe different.
3)  one gets part time job
4)  one goes to work for cab company
5)  one could do one and the other do different one
6)  no solution

Okay,  it doesn't matter what decision is actually
made, it only matters how Josh and Jocelyn get
along " after " the decision.

So to sum this up, moral compass, very helpful,
also necessary for sovereignty for various reasons.


   

Moral Compass and Soveriegnty

Well, this may be just an aside, but I was fascinated by this video,
of Paul Simon, in New York:   9 / 11 Sounds of Silence

as well as listening to these descriptions of a new film about
Martin Luther King, Jr.   :   King in the Wilderness

note: the link above is just a conversation about the film,
on Democracy Now and not the film itself.

But to the point,

it seems as some commenting on our current situation would
say, it seems we have ourselves in a real " pickle ". 

Difficult times.  The issue of moral compass seems to
have moved to the forefront, and that I would suggest
is similar to the arc of the Universe referred to by
Dr. King.

As I have mentioned before I believe we have a defacto
moral compass based on the notion that a correct moral
position is generated by the notion of being somewhere
between the opposition of liberal to conservative.

Unfortunately, I can't buy into that because that disturbs
my notion that a person is capable of being conversative
and / or liberal in the course of  a single day.  Now the
key notion here is that your perspective might change
but that does not affect the compass itself.  The compass
should always point in the right direction, but we
are capable of viewing the compass from different
directions for different reasons.  Second issue is of
course that within an individual the compass is always
evolving, ideally always pointing more toward justice.

The issue is how we resolve our various views and
our varying reading of our own moral compass.

So I wish to give some examples of this notion,
but I believe I will continue with examples in a later post.

Some items related to sovereignty

  I could not fail to be aware of the government closure
which has developed recently, kind of like a Ford Fiesta
crashing into a concrete barrier it's never a pretty sight.

I am always reminded at times like these of two special
quotes:

that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain—
that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom—and 
that government of the people, by the people, for the people, 
shall not perish from the earth.


more context here:  Gettysburg Address

also this one:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a 
more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic 
Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the 
general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to 
ourselves and our Posterity,  ....

more here:  preamble

Sometimes these crashes motivate us to point fingers at
others.  I guess it is a normal reaction.  But honestly,
by the people,  I think, means all of the people, so who do
you point the finger at ?

Now, I belong to that group which is somewhat uncertain
about putting our shiny, or maybe not so shiny Ford Fiesta
back together and getting it on the road again,  but
I am pretty sure we need to do it together or even if it
does get back together, it will probably not be long
before we find ourselves back in the same situation.

Sovereignty, Democracy, Justice, and Chance

I should of started out with this post and used the above for the name of
the blog.  Well, you know. live and learn.

So Democracy or democracy, right away you can see there is a problem.
Big D or little d.

But I'd like to go immediately to Bob and Alice, but since they are
pretty much used by the physics community and they would
immediately be suspect for having one or more black hole devices or
at least parts, so we'll go with Jocelyn and Josh because they need
to go to a voting place.

Now they enter and they cast there ballots.   There are all kinds of
possibilities for what could happen when they exit, and if they
meet or perhaps knew each other somehow and they converse.

Well, I think one extremely fundamental notion of democracy how
ever you spell it is that no matter what they did in that voting
place, they can still get along and agree with each other on
a vast variety of subjects.

What does that mean?

In terms of sovereignty it mean you can have it.  In terms
of justice it means we can achieve it, and in terms of
chance, well we don't know what was on those ballots
from Jocelyn and Josh, and by my thinking we will
never know.

To sum up, it's about relationships.