American Sodom & Gomorrah

 

 

‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑--‑‑‑‑----------------

=== SODOM & GOMORRAH |
=== WHERETO, AMERICA ?
=== CIVILIZED DECADENCE

=== AN INCREDIBLE INFAMY
=== FAMILY ROTTING AWAY

‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑‑------------------

 

SODOM & GOMORRAH

 

Popular representations of the Biblical Sodom and Gomorrah imagine the Sodomites and Gomorrites boisterously devoted to orgies of vices and turpitude...

 

It is hard to believe that people devote themselves to something evil as such.

 

Most probably, those people were somehow honestly convinced that holding anything sacred was bigotry, that family hierarchy ties and duties were antiquated, justice was merelta competitive strife of professional debaters, reasoning no more than rationalization, religion an obstructive social ritual, free sex and promiscuity desirable, homosexual aspirations legally enforceable, patriotism an obsoleted attitude...

Almost the same as we experience now in the U.S.A.

 

It is remarkable how unaware the general population is of what is creeping into our American morality.

 

The erosion begins in the family values.

First, we had the subtle destruction of the father image.

One could say that all was originated by the profitable need of the media and the popular arts (especially movies) to criticize whatever dominates the public scene, for controversy generates interest and high TV‑ratings, which generate profitable advertising.

 

Everybody was sure that the father image could not be hurt by anything; therefore it was safe joking at it.

The self‑satisfied male promoted the "harmless" anti‑man and anti‑ father fictions to prove his sophisticated tolerance.

 

Then, marketers saw great financial gains in flattering the female public in primitive ways, at the expense of the "invulnerable" male, who took it with condescending amusement.

 

This insinuated an anti‑male attitude that found its way in the very feminist movement that males themselves had made possible.

The equal‑rights movement can not get rid of it either.

 

The anti‑male attitude lurks, seen or not, subconsciously or not, in most who promote the feminist or equal‑rights movement.
The consequence is an almost irreversible poisoning of the atmosphere between male and female.

That poisons marriage and family.

The lurking sex fantasies of many male legislators found it convenient to promote anything that would make the Biblical "neighbor's woman and "ass" more available to them.

With due exceptions, of course, of their own women and asses.

Of course, this boomeranged.

 

The press and the arts, as above mentioned, must feed on easy and safe targets, when they have no higher inspiration, which is most of the times.

Thus, simple goodwill and society's solidarity protects them becomes the breeding ground of the press and popular art.

Ridiculing or accusing ‑rather than supporting‑ the authorities, living institutions, family, sex, vices, crime... attracts more readers, viewers and money.

And the public's faith in the demanding traditional principles is slowly eroded.

 

The government itself contributes to the disaster through its bureaucracy. Government agencies don't function like industry or commerce.

Inefficiency in the private sector ends up in failure, bankruptcy.

In government, inefficiency is rewarded with additional funding.

Indeed, whenever a government agency succeeds, it obviates the problem for which it was created and cuts costs. As a consequence, the projected budget for the following year is cut. If success continues, the bureaucrats end up eliminating themselves...

Therefore, it is in the interest of those bureaucrats to increase their own inefficiency ("needs") in order to receive increased budgets.

 

The unions function in a similar manner.

Initially needed to improve the workers' welfare, they succeeded so well, that they ended up making themselves first unnecessary, then burdensome.

Now, they can only function as parasites:

 

They create discontent (otherwise they are not needed), inefficiency, overpay, superfluous and extremely costly work rules. They force industry to take a defensive attitude toward incessant demands by workers who are convinced they are entitled to demand more and more from employers they are incited to mistrust...

 

As a result, no employer of unionized workers would be foolish enough to offer raises, benefits or any cooperation unless they are angrily demanded by the union.

And such demands must be opposed, or the union feels accused of doing the employer's bidding.

This makes the union/employer hostility a sick symbiosis that is as useful to our economy as incurable cancer.

 

As to the management, its competence decreases in proportion of the belief that they are constantly the best in the world. The more they freeze in that delusion, the less they realize how incompetent they are becoming.

 

Therefore "others" learn to outperform, outproduce and undercut us almost any way they please.

With the self-perpetuating union/management hostility between workers and employers, and with the management's narcissism, our society's economic future remains under siege for generations.

 

From another perspective, our tendency to over criticize  our government and institutions on the basis of fads has cost us enormously.

 

One example is evident from my experience in Europe under the Fascism and Nazism.

I remember, -when I was in Italy- a reported Mussolini statement that a Martian invasion was more probable than America's entering the war against Germany and Italy...

Consequently, it was safe to go ahead in the various aggressive ventures, such as joining Hitler (rather than becoming his victim) in World War 2.

 

Well, if Roosevelt, American Congress and Senate had shown a firm attitude in time, Hitler and Mussolini would not have dared what they did. It could have averted World War 2. Historical evidence favors this theory.

 

We have not learned the lesson yet. Reagan's policy was aimed at preserving the peace, because the world is still as it was toward waging war: strength and firmness are more likely to deter than to provoke. Now, we have politicians with a vociferous anti‑overnment attitude that in other countries and times would have been branded with "high‑treason".

 

Another poison is the enforcement of the racial equality principle, which has become rampant, unashamed pro‑black racism.

It may be a form of justice, but merely attacking the symptoms has never worked and never will.

History shows it like a law of nature.

 

We cannot presume to change reality just because we don't understand it.

 

We are mesmerized by artificial concepts of "equality", "equal rights" just as much as by "superiority", "dominance", yet, we don't understand them.

 

Love is good, but we know too well that it is counter producing to force people into it.

Similarly, integration is good, but we force people into it, instead of facilitating the premises for it.

Thus, we can only increase hostility, or create it where it did not exist before.

 

When I came to USA, I was asked whether I wanted to settle into a German or Italian neighborhood, due to my family background.

I refused both, because I wanted to live in an American‑English speaking environment, in order to integrate as fast as possible.

If they had tried to force my neighbors and me to integrate, it would never have taken place the proper way. Resentment on both sides would have tainted it forever.

 

Equality and integration are hardly more than fads. Furthermore, "superiority", "inferiority" are distorting oversimplifications for differences.

We must operate on the substance of our thinking, not on the symptoms of our intellectual inadequacies.

 

Competition itself ‑which we worship‑ disproves equality, equal rights and integration.

Religion differentiates between meritorial actions, beliefs or virtues.

Schools give grades, promotions, degrees, certifications and other selective rewards.

To many, it sounds like “elitism”, which seeks to be a dirty word.
So, we have continuous pressures to eliminate examinations, grades and… what?

Politicians are afraid to take a position in merit, like the fear of displeasing some vociferous majorities or minorities.

 

Business has hierarchy, meritocracy, competition, reward, pecking order, dictatorship and other values that are fought by the very social system that is based on them.

 

Bureaucracy is the very contradiction of equality in the name of "equality".

Taxation discriminates in inhuman fashion.

 

Love, courtship, mating are selective in opposition to equality.

No two drops or snow‑flakes are equal.

Primitive "superiority" and "inferiority" are forced upon us by misinterpretations of differences and merits.

 

Opposing those realities because we cannot fit them in our incompetent views of "reality" is like activating a time‑bomb.

 

Today's oversimplified equal‑rights, unisex, welfare and integration fads are of the brainwashing type, operated by media, teachers and politicians who are utterly ignorant of the consequences.

 

Finally, we have the teaching establishment.

Teachers used to be underestimated and underpaid. Then came the reaction. It began with the hippies in the 60's. It was liberal, humanly concerned, noble... But it was primarily an anti‑ establishment reaction by those who failed to succeed in it.

 

They fought anything that could be identified with government, family, authority, demanding law education and self‑discipline requirements.

 

They convinced themselves and were believed.

They succeeded in a culturally shallow society.

They became the new "intelligentsia"

 

LAW IS REPLACING MORALITY,...

 

Nothing could be more nefarious.
Now, the new laws are the natural enemies of the family, of the traditional virtues, of cultural and historical awareness themselves. Many are the "sophisticated" ADVOCATES OF PRIMITIVE MISCONCEPTIONS who misunderstand the French "constructionism", "deconstructionism", "post‑modernism" and other fads dear to the new tenured leftist academics.

They hide behind an obscure and exclusive intellectualism. In reality, they are perpetuating a traditional American anti‑ intellectualism. But with a difference. The traditional anti‑ intellectualism was an attitude of pioneering doers. They were suspicious of theories that could interfere with their urge to get things do--ne.

The crypto‑anti‑intellectualism of today's tenured academics display a virulent form of the typical defensive and parasitic posture of today's unions or bureaucrats.

Genuine teachers, true intellectuals and doers ‑let alone the traditional family‑ feel ominously menaced by this insidious phenomenon.

With these premises, the solid fabric of American standards menaces to become a torn rotted cheesecloth.

Duties, merits, responsibility, hard work, virtues are being analyzed out of existence by those who are afraid of the call to meet the requirements.

They feel secure in recognizing only the validity of their interpretation of reality, not reality itself.

 

Family is too much trouble, so is work, responsibility is a source of blame, virtue is unrewarding...

TV's serpent in our Garden of Eden says to any jerk, bum and weakling: "You deserve the best... ".

The only thing to be expected from life is lights without shadows, pleasure, relaxation without toil and suffering...

 

Love, wine, music, "highs", "trips" are to be cultivated and enjoyed.

Some who understand have the function of keeping those pleasures and refinements alive, of refining them for posterity, for safekeeping in our culture...

Others have the function to produce the wealth that supports the high‑priests of the pleasure‑temples...

The high‑priests will surely know how to use the wealth for more refinements, more pleasure to transmit to the new generations...

Until someone will come with some ominous trumpets and blow some sense into us.

  KKK

Probably they will colonize us...

 

 

WHERETO, AMERICA ?

 

When I immigrated into USA, 1955, I was impressed by some patterns that dominated the American movies:

 

Blond people always prevailed in virtue, talent, dominance, leadership and other desirable attributes. Non‑Anglosaxon women or men involved with Anglosaxon Americans were destined to lose in any contest against their Anglo Saxon counterpart. If any non‑Anglo conquered the viewers' sympathy on account of heroism, sacrifice, love or other virtues, and there was conflict of interest with an Anglosaxon wife, husband or friend, the plot simply caused the non‑Anglo to die or disappear otherwise, so that no controversy could arise about why the nice person would not be rewarded in favor of the Anglo.

 

Evil people were dark, mustachioed, or somehow visibly non‑white‑Anglo.

Evil men were mostly dark‑haired and mustachioed, or both...

 

The American soldier was a simplistic example of impossible combinations of super‑human qualities, humility, heroism and genius in disguise.

Black people were mostly servants or ridiculous cowards.

 

Now, we have the reaction:

A movie or TV producer shows his sophistication not only by avoiding anything that may describe the white man in favorable light, but one must endeavor and contrive to show:

 

‑ Women in leadership positions, far beyond what happens in the real world.

‑ Stupid military leaders and cruel American soldiers endanger not only America, but the whole mankind (or personkind).

‑ Greedy entrepreneurs destructively interested in money.

‑ Evils of world‑wide proportions caused by American redneck patriotism.

‑ American industry that causes pollution and poverty, if it is not controlled by hippies and unemployable people with remarkable low-crotch pants, hairdos or non‑hairdos.

‑ Black scientists, black leaders, judges, heroes, sophisticated thinkers (whose sophistication never goes beyond furthering the black racist cause), in such blatant contradiction with reality, that cynicism and belief in the opposite becomes an automatically-induced reaction.

‑ Black people too obviously placed in commercials and movies for no other reason than being black, and everyone is supposed not to notice it.
As a consequence, a boycott backlash creeps into the viewers' attitude.

 

A remarkable consequence of these incompetent reactions is that their long‑term main victims are the very women, blacks and workers they want to protect, especially the women and blacks who believe in the new fetishes.

Producers and directors are unable to show blacks as they are: basically like and unlike anyone else.

 

Interracial marriages for normal reasons other than “political”, for instance, ought to be an obvious step for evolutionary integration.

With the present attitude, their disastrous results are among the loudest "proofs" against integration, because the participants expect the solution by treating the symptoms with wishful assumptions, rather than attacking the discordances that cause segregation.

 

Workers are kept from realizing that they are led to understand only their rights, not their duties.

Many have become corrosive enemies of the very enterprises that created their jobs.

 

American industry is afflicted by narcissistic delusions, as well as by labor or management evils.

If we remain convinced that American technology, skills, science, know how, inventiveness, creativity, work ethics, dependability and merits are  invariably better than anyone else's, we will never believe that we have serious reasons for improvement.

That alone may become responsible for the decay of the American automobile, steel, electric, electronic and almost all "high‑ tech" industry.

 

This very attitude can cause both the American labor and management to deteriorate to a point that any ambitious country can outperform us so far that we may need 20‑30 years to merely catch up to their level.

 

Furthermore, we will never be able to catch up with them if we don't overcome our arrogant belief that all we have to do to achieve it is to do what we already can.

It won't be enough: we must improve ourselves, for our best has to be improved by more learning, responsibility and self‑ discipline.

 

In our blindness, we still delude ourselves that the rest of the world is still waiting outside of the sacred American temple of knowledge, management, ingenuity, science, technology.

 

We don't realize that the sacred American temple is already in danger of becoming the servants' quarters.

Like many stereotyped servants, all we understand are petty squabbles of pecking order, or legal rules, not the substance problem only our masters will be able to resolve for us...

 

The question will soon be: how can we prevent someone else to become our masters?

By ignoring our pecking‑order squabbles and concentrating on knowledge, productivity, real integration, competence, creativity... and let the chips fall where they may in the process.

That is what made America. 

 

‑ The rejection of a hierarchic structured society, the corroding of authority and worship of the "rugged individual" has erupted into a new worship for continuous, never‑ending fighting without surren­der, without agreement of the "wrong" party with the "right" one.

The right to disagree and to persist in disagreement, the right to defend and preserve... to the extent that, in anyone wins, the victory can only be complete with the destruction of the opponent who lost. The defeated will never accept defeat or subservience. It becomes a matter of pride and dignity to defend one's own position and conviction at any cost.

The relentless, unquenchable strife is the new status quo.

Peace is therefore only then possible, when the adversary is annihilated, enslaved, killed or deprived of his freedom of action and expression.

Doesn't that settle into a structured society of winners and vanquished first, and then a hierarchical one?

Thus: full circle back to the authoritarian society?

 

‑ Free societies survive by making laws to limit freedoms. The process continues until freedom is so limited that rebellion and revolution ensue to restore freedom and start the freedom‑ shrinking process all over again.

 

‑ Social justice is not achieved by taking from the rich and giving to the poor, but by raising the poor to the level of the rich without letting the rich lose anything in the process. That, however, would neutralize any incentive toward competition and progress, because one would expect them from the government, rather than bother with the fatigue of the ascent.

 

Revolutions have failed because the rich/poor, oppressor/oppressed disparity was left as before by making the rich poor, the powerful powerless, handing riches and power to the incompetent, and so on.

We have seen blacks, women‑libbers, love cultists becoming anti‑white racists, anti‑male chauvinists, anti‑social freaks... The cure is then worse than the disease.

 

‑ We can commit crimes protected by legal technicalities like privacy, 1st or 5th Amendment, press freedom, right to worship or to bear arms... Police or anyone have no right to intervene to save a life or secure justice, if the necessary evidence was not obtained from a court according to known or unknown rules. So, let the innocent die or the vicious murderer free to commit more crimes for the sake of legality worship.

We don't know what justice is. So, we make a game of it, to be played according to carefully thought (but ultimately incompetent) rules we call laws.

 

‑ Justice should be made accessible to those who cannot afford very expensive law suits deliberately imposed by those who can afford them. The number of such cases is astonishing. It seems that lawyers do nothing against this disgrace because they profit great­ly from it. Whenever I asked lawyers about it, they answered with abominably correct technicalities that substantially affirmed that the disgrace had to persist and people were to be sacrificed to it.

 

‑ If it is true that we are reaching the virtual solution to our social problems, that may be the end of human evolution.

One cardinal characteristic of the American approach is that our duty is to treat persons as ends in themselves.

In this ambient, and in coherence with equal rights and supreme individualism, we have no way to induce parasites, illiterates, criminals, drunkards, and all other kinds of misfits to fit. They have their sacrosanct rights. We also cannot prevent our decay caused by the totally unhindered spawning of the unfit progeny.

Evolution used to eliminate the decay sources in the procreation sequence. The sick, the deformed, the "repelling" and misfits would lose in the mating competition and could not transmit to the progeny. They simply disappeared either by extinction, or absorption, or merging.

The stronger, healthier and "better" transmitted their genes and traditions to the following generations. In the long run, mankind evolved.

Christianity and other Western beliefs have impeded the limitation of misfit multiplication by coming to the degenerating help of the misfit.

 

‑ Equating legality with morality is a trap into which the American and several other societies have fallen.

As usual, legislators have a far too high opinion of themselves.

 

‑ There are just a few leaders and significant people.

The rest of mankind is granted hardly more than reproductive significance, in spite of the reassuring claims by public figures.

 

‑ "The young know less than we, but they understand more" is a strange statement by those who follow the fad of praising the youth.

The young have a tendency to expect and demand the impossible, for their premises are based on wishful thinking not yet refined by proven wisdom.

 

If it were not so, we would have to admit that we understood the answers when we were young. Then, for some mysterious reason, we lost it all as our experience increased...

 

No one likes to hear that our present systems have no solutions for many evils afflicting our society.

Experienced people in the public eye are afraid of warnings that many idealistic solutions cause far more evils than the problems themselves.

What do we tell the youth outside of the old: "Act from knowledge, not merely from feelings.

Learn first..."

We have heard that before, haven't we?

 

‑ The American reluctance to issue a general identity card is a prejudice and an unjustified fear that causes more troubles than those it tries to prevent.

Whenever a crime is committed, the absence of an identity card protects the criminal, not the victim.

Finding a lost person would be enormously facilitated by identity cards that are constantly updated, as in many free countries.

People who are afraid to be found are obviously against an identity card.

People who want to be always reachable would welcome a general identity card.

Also fingerprinting should be a general practice.

Both identification systems would save us from untold losses of time and money, crimes, confusion and many complications.

The hush-hushed enormous percentage of unresolved crimes and murders is astounding for lack of the necessary data to find justice, protect the victims and contain crime.

 

‑ In underdeveloped countries, the leader always seems to be the bad guy. The nice guy cannot hold things together. Therefore, those countries fall pray of dictatorship, military juntas or paternalistic regimes. They seem to be a necessary phase from primitivism to democracy or some better form.

 

The populace in underdeveloped countries is terribly misinformed and often eager to promote trouble, because they see in it possibilities for the realization of all their naive hopes.

As they lack talent and self‑discipline, they prefer revolution for the troubles they intend to profit from.

Their revolutions, however, don't do them any good, for they are a burden to any society or government.

Therefore, their revolutions cause only victims among the dispossessed.

Those are the ones (often willing victims)on which socialism thrives.

 

‑ The ideal society is the one in which laws are not necessary.

The more laws we have, the more artificial, unstable and unreliable life becomes.

The legal complexities make the artificial structure of legislation so complex, that society becomes more fragile with its intricacies.

The solution would be in incorporating the useful laws in the subconsciousness of our society, as it happens with the internalization of the "parent" educational pattern in the subconsciousness of the children. But it doesn't seem to be happening outside of the internalization of prejudices.

 

‑ When I first arrived in USA, I was shocked by the continuous mention of the dollar measure of any action or item.

It sounded too vulgar, almost insulting.

Only later it dawned on me that the dollar‑evaluation, as imperfect as it is, ends up being far more impartial than judgments based on our questionable ideas of justice, merit and reward.

 

Dollars are the most unbiased method to indicate who is pleasing one's neighbor the most.

We may have ‑as it too often happens‑ exaggerated ideas about the worth of our deeds and products, misled evaluations based on misconceptions that look like eternal truths. These misjudgments may be damaging, until we open our eyes too late.

 

Dollar‑rewards in an open market are not necessarily an indication of good taste or flawless evaluation, but they have the advantage of being relatively impartial, not righteous or sanctimonious. They are not punitive.

They respond to acceptance by those we are able to please. In fact, they are a direct measure of our ability to please others, whether with products, services or entertainment.

 

No culture, no philosophy, no economic or social system were ever able to devise a less prejudiced system of rewarding the ability to please others, based on the unqualified satisfaction of the recipient of the advantage.

 

‑Progress keeps raising the lowest socio‑economical levels so far that we end up calling "poverty" and "starvation" what in the past was considered comfortable.

 

‑ Growth... grow... There is a ceiling. And there is a new definition of the loser.

Total prosperity is impossible: there is always the discarded who loses in the competition. He is the non‑prosperity. He is at the "poverty" bottom, even if fed, housed and provided for. The very fact that he has or achieves less than the others is intolerable. If it were not so, competition, progress and even maintenance would subside. Life itself would come to a halt.

 

‑ Statistics: Work‑related stresses. Facts: stresses caused by one's attitude toward work, not by the work itself.

Statistics: Kidnapped or missing children. Facts: children living with the "other" parent against court order.

Statistics: Sex harassment or even rape. Fact: sex‑teasers in many of the occurrences.

Statistics: popular opinion. Fact: hapless public opinion created by uncontrolled news media.

 

-       "Work to live" and "live to work" are often compared in favor of the former.

But then: live for what? Logical question, but it remains a question.

 

‑ Our society grants man the pursuit of happiness but endeavors to prevent its realization.

 

‑ We are a nation dedicated to asserting our rights and to avoiding mention of our duties. This may be comfortable, but it has created a righteous generation of militant hedonists demanding their rights to be handed undeserved benefits that they call "opportunities". Some other societies do the opposite: they are too busy developing their talents and merits to waste time bickering about their rights.

Talents and merits are better than money. Rights are a volatile matter of accepted abstractions, no matter how important, even if they encompass life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

 

‑ The more laws we make, the more crimes we generate.   

 

‑ Society needs crime prevention and punishment. If all present crimes were eliminated, we would create new ones (simple: make new laws) and the corresponding punishments.

 

‑ Trade, professional and labor organizations, as well as parties, ethnic, religious and other organized groups, as well as nations, ultimately result in conspiracies against the rest of the world.

 

‑ Pursuits of many of our goals obtains opposite and negative results because of our ignorance of the nature and meaning of our goals.

Typical examples are welfare, racial integration, feminism, equality, love, justice, freedom.

We pretend to understand freedom because we know the word "freedom"; our definition of it is similar to operating brain surgery because we know the word "brain surgery".

It is thus that acting on our beliefs can produce results opposite to our goals, or at least surprising consequences: the brain is damaged in brain surgery, liberty and integration are destroyed or at least impaired in the implementation of liberty and integration based on our presumed knowledge of them.

These blunders, on the other hand, generate compounded misunderstanding and rejection of ideas that would by themselves deserve dedicated study.

Atypical example of the latter is our crude misunderstanding of free and planned economy. Planned economy is rejected because of its failures. This rejection is justified, but not the conclusion that planned economy is wrong as such. It would be like rejecting the idea of a house or airplane because the ones we built collapsed or crashed.

Our very pursuit of free economy is conducted in a way that plans and measures are continuously sought, tried, modified, adopted. This is ‑intentionally or not‑ a gradual implementation of the planned economy we dogmatically condemn.

The very inefficiency of the free economy is its weakness and strength at the same time. Weakness because it retards improvements and evolution. Strength because it retards degeneration caused by incompetence and callousness.

‑ From Nov. 5, 1989 Elgin, IL "Daily Courier News":

"The Japanese... are flops when it comes to marriage. Otherwise they wouldn't need a... school to learn how to (be husbands)"..

If the Japanese wrote: "The Americans are flops when it comes to driving. Otherwise they wouldn't need a school to learn how to drive", we would consider it a bizarre statements.

The Daily Courier's statement is no better. First, if we recognize we need driver instructions, and not instructions to learn how to be husbands or  wives, we should stick to driving, and leave the marriage to somebody else, like the Japanese or the Martians. Second, the Daily Courier's statement reveals an arrogant obtusity to the fact that America has the highest divorce rate in the world.

Thus, the most unsuccessful husbands in the world disdain schools to learn how to be husbands and call the Japanese husbands flops because they set up marriage schools. Great.

Isn't it enough that they already outperform us in business, industry, science and education?

 

‑ Our experts' condescending admission that we have courts of law, not of justice, prevents us from focusing on the very fact that we are trapped in a Constitution and laws away from right and wrong, true and false.

Intellectual recognition of this fact induces us first to surrender to its presumed inevitability, then to become blind to it. Moreover, it becomes patriotic to believe in the fiction that our society provides honest vision of the true and the right.

Our Constitution and laws define a game and its rules, not reality and justice. The most we can say of the Constitution now is that it was the best one could think of at the time. Indeed, it was the best available for some time. But we evolve and progress.

If the premises don't change, the Constitution becomes a crippling distortion, like the science of centuries ago, if applied today as it was.

Our presumption that democracy is better than dictatorship is misleading, for a good dictator would be far superior. The only trouble is that we don't find a good dictator. Democracy is ridiculous, but it can hurt us less because its very inefficiency gives us the time to see the blunders in time and undertake defensive remedies.

Inability to handle a sailboat should not give us the notion that swimming goes farther than sailing.

Communism fails because we don't know enough about social and economical planning. We are enticed into the delusion that democracies know better about sociology and economy. If they did, the would make plans and centralize as much as possible, for nothing could be more efficient.

We have come to worship a progressive ideology and made it a religion. We created our gods like other cultures before us. Like other religions before, ours was an inspiration at the start, and a straitjacket afterwards.

 

‑ In our society, justice is a financial matter.

First, we must calculate how many dollars it costs to suffer injustice and how many to obtain justice. We can obtain justice only if it is cheaper than suffering injustice.

Second, no attorney is going to help us ‑and we need one to go to court‑, unless he finds financial gain in representing us. And he will do not what is best for us, but what produces the most money for him, as long as the law allows it.

Third, in any court dispute between a rich and a poor party, the rich can force the choice of the most expensive course of action, so that the poor cannot afford to fight... Our laws have no provision to protect anyone against such abuses, except in cases in which the skillful attorneys of the rich commit blunders they are unlikely to commit...

Justice for pay is no better than the abuses of a totalitarian system.

The observation that poor people get free legal services is a sham, considering the quality of help they get and the abject indigence which is allowed such help. After all, rich people don't squeeze people who own nothing.

The main victim of the rich is the "middle class", that backbone of America where 90% of American productivity lies. They are the ones who receive no real protection from the law and are the constant prey of the lawyers and rich vultures.

 

CIVILIZED DECADENCE

Whenever I experienced the feelings and customs of a culture less developed than another, I noticed that the higher culture left its guard down on dangers that had been eliminated by the higher development.

USA is a good case where all the above is easy to observe.

It is unthinkable, in Russia and East Europe, to park a car without locking it and without removing the windshield‑wipers from it. So, a Russian or a Bulgarian think the Americans are as easy to fool as innocent children.

An Ethiopian or Nigerian finds the American shops, especially the department stores, incredibly incompetent in shop‑lifting protection measures.

 

Astone age man would find the American ‑and not only the American‑ incomprehensibly helpless against any assault on the street.

What about the fragile entrance doors into American houses, as well as windows and other means of entrance? How could the American be so... incompetent and stupid?

The degree of evolution of a prosperous and sophisticated society eliminates the temptations to commit some crimes that are more typical of societies where hunger, poverty, scarcity and unavailability are a continuous oppression.

 

Underdeveloped and primitive societies I have visited abounded with tales about "American stupidity" or "American immorality".

Some who would preclude marriage to a non‑virgin consider the American woman hardly better than a whore. It is alright for them to rush into the bedroom where the first newlywed copulation takes place, wipe the deflowered woman's crotch with a white cloth and display the blood‑stained cloth to the waiting crowd.

Where deception is an art, roaring laughter is caused by tales of how an American has been sold a worthless item for the price of a treasure.

The present wave of terrorism is another consequence of the development disparities.

If we were more primitive, we could kidnap a dozen hostages of the approximate nationality of the terrorists and kill them for every single American victim. That would speak very clearly to the terrorists, and would have an immediate effect.

This is a case in which our sophistication has a paralyzing effect against the savages. When sophistication works to our detriment, it becomes  decadence.

 

‑ Liberals have a Rousseau streak: individual man is basically good. Poor people are not poor from competition; it is injustice which makes them poor. Given a chance, they would work, create, compete.

Let's try to understand: the competitor wins against the competitor who loses and becomes poor. So, give man a chance to succeed, and he'll become bad.

Thus: successful man is "bad".

Success is money and/or power. Politicians have power. Therefore, they are likely to be or become bad.

So, bad men run good men who become bad if they succeed.

Both the interpretation and the remedy are based on premises disproved by disastrous results.

To help the poor and to tax the rich are glib conclusions from ruinous misunderstandings based on primitive interpretations of: "good" and "bad", what really helps or not, and whether help as we know it is really useful.

 

‑ From William J. Bennet, of "The Heritage Foundation:

 

"In 1940, teachers named the top problems in the public schools as: talking out of turn, chewing gum, making noise, and running in halls.

In 1990, teachers named the top problems as: drug abuse, alcohol abuse, pregnancy, suicide, and arape".

 

‑ Society can be man's counter producing defense against nature. It looks beneficial, but it is unnatural, as it can set man against its own nature, but it cannot change nature; it can only damage it.

 

============================================================================

 

AN INCREDIBLE INFAMY

 

060925      [260]   [published Oct.. 17  as:
PROGRESS OR DECAY