Tuesday, August 30, 2011

Stuff Happens

Re: Stuff Just Happens

The Libertarian perspective seems to be things “just are,” “stuff just happens,” and civilization “just is.” In moral value, as opposed to economic value, so long as the people at large are availed wide latitude for socially libertine activities, Libertarians suppose that there is little difference in the “civilization” of (1) a democratic republic that is inviting of assimilable immigrants (America), versus (2) a racially insular society (Japan), versus (3) a despotic society (China), versus (4) a trading society that buffers more gigantic national neighbors (Singapore, which is ranked “partly free” by Freedom House).

For Libertarians, it appears there is no natural principle that justifies “just is” for governmental intrusion (even though, obviously, governmental intrusion occurs within Nature). Rather, the only over-arching, moral principle of Nature appears to be “don’t harm and otherwise don’t interfere.” Well, then, does this universal principle also apply to children, adolescents, and the physically and mentally handicapped? Apart from “don’t harm,” there appears to be little in the Libertarian philosophy by way of affirmative duty to God, Country, or Family. Rather, a sort of Invisible Hand is supposed to sustain civilization, wealth, decency, ... indeed, all of natural society.

Although the fundamental difference in the supernatural nature of the faith of Libertarians versus Christians seems not as substantial as may commonly be noticed, there is reflected a difference in actions and concerns. A Libertarian, once rationalizing his proclivities, feels little need to put flesh on his duties, little need to consult parables and traditions of old, and little need to commune in respect of any actively reconciling higher guidance. Rather, he tends to prefer a new logos, ungrounded and freed from all traditions and parables of yesteryear, viewing communications in respect of yesteryear as being retrograde, silly, counterproductive to the pursuit of pleasure and profit, or worse.


For a Libertarian, God tends to be less than air, merely an imaginary spaghetti monster. Yet, he takes it on faith that a principle of “don’t harm” somehow still abides, unifies, and permeates the universe.

Conveniently, a Libertarian's “moral faith” in this Flying Universal Principle (FUP) avails him mainly to do as he otherwise wilt. Thus, he would earnestly admonish Americans to follow, lest dreaded social conservatives should somehow play into the hands of those who are ripping the flesh from America's economy ... as if the unraveling before our eyes of decently assimilable and sustainable mores had nothing whatsoever to do with our economic plight.

Does not the view by Libertarians seem Unbalanced? Libertarians profess a Heavy “right,” under some kind of supernatural, pagan, law of nature, not to be subjected by others to harm, but only a Light duty, which is not affirmatively to harm others (sort of like the anti-good-Samaritan last episode of Seinfeld). This proclivity among Libertarians, at least in what they profess, is readily noticed by those whose empathies rather put pursuit of happiness for their families on at least an equal plane with happiness for themselves.


Does it really appear that a Libertarian philosophy of “things just are” offers anything of meaning to the sustenance of decent civilization? Does it not rather appear that such philosophy is simply a supernatural justification for “do as thou wilt,” offered up by those who have not yet accepted familial or social responsibilities or apprehended how beholden they are in their faith system to that which is supernatural (i.e., beyond merely substantive or empirical formalization)? Or is “don’t harm” supposed to be some kind of universal, science-based value, which is accepted by every human, animal, and vegetable?

Whatever the Source of empathetic moral sentiments, it seems to be one-of-a-kind, and not reducible, explicable, or approachable in measurement, science, or wishfully libertine notions. What tends to be stubbornly resisted and under-appreciated by faux "scientific moralists" is that the Source is obviously, based on "inside information," approachable in a quality of communal good faith.

Why is this important? Notice how Libertine Libertarians fairly shout at social conservatives not to allow concerns about mores to grease the way to re-electing Libertine Liberals, while then acting offended when social conservatives point out that the slide in decent mores obviously has much to do with the economic crisis that Libertarians feign to wish to save us from. Is not the rampant unraveling of mores as obvious as it is poisonous to our economy? What is the opportunity COST that necessarily drains us and accompanies our society's rates of: loss of respect for higher and assimilable values; celebration of drug use and flamboyant lifestyles (White House promotion of "Common"); disrespect for the institution of marriage; divorce; single parent families; abortion; feelings of entitlement; resentments against country; and rush to sell out family and country?

From A.T. --- If I recall correctly, a Libertarian had previously commented in order to list Singapore as an example of a civilization that does not rely on religion to assist in assimilating itself.
Interestingly, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Singapore, “The Government has banned the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Unification Church. The Government does not tolerate speech or actions that it deems could adversely affect racial or religious harmony.” “According to a 2000 government survey, 85 percent of citizens and permanent residents profess some religious faith. Of this group, 51 percent practice Buddhism, Taoism, ancestor worship, or other religious practice traditionally associated with the ethnic Chinese population. Approximately 15 percent of the population is Muslim, 15 percent Christian, and 4 percent Hindu. The remainder is composed of atheists, agnostics, and adherents of other religions including small Sikh, Jewish, Zoroastrian, and Jain communities.” “The Government plays an active but limited role in religious affairs. For example, the Government seeks to ensure that citizens, most of whom live in government-built housing, have ready access to religious organizations traditionally associated with their ethnic groups by helping such institutions find space in these housing complexes.”
Question: Precisely how does this suggest that Singapore preserves its civilization without reference to religion, or to a core of assimilable values?


REGARDING "THINGS JUST ARE":  To moralize that “things just are” is to conceptualize that our guiding mores are ephemeral derivatives of derivatives, manifestations in respect of epiphenomena, not representatives of any high principle, not expressions of feedback of a Reconciling Consciousness, but merely accidental accompaniments of whatever may abide as Inanimate Originating Cause, not partaking of any lasting reality, but subject to the evolving, phasing shifts of sand. Our mores are not quite real; rather, they “just are.” Our Creator came and went, is no longer interested in us, we need not be interested in our Creator, and, apart from ephemeral interests that “just are,” we have no reason to be interested in the well being or feedback of one another. On this head, the Libertarian would rationalize and celebrate immediate gratification so far around the bend as to turn it into self-defeating faith and prophecy. On this “foundation” of base consciousness, the Libertarian expects he should establish a lasting and decent civilization. Lol!


Like language, a culture’s fables, myths, parables, and figures of speech have much to do with how it, as an assimilated society, helps its citizens communicate unfolding concerns in light of shared traditions, values, and aspirations. It would make little less sense for an American to adopt Standard Hindi as his language to communicate with his neighbors than it would for him to adopt Hinduism to try to communicate his everyday moral concerns. Each of us needs to communicate with neighbors in respect of a prevailing, assimilated culture. It does little service to jettison our language and shared parables in trade for generalized moral formulae that have little to do with everyday flesh and blood decisions, but much to do with simply rationalizing whatever each proponent wishes to justify ... which is much the same as having no moral code at all. This is why Libertarianism tends to be the faith that is adopted by people who are so wrapped in individual wants as to have established few social roots. I suspect Libertarianism tends to be the faith of men of 30 or older who have by and large failed to involve themselves in everyday, responsible society. I can see the use in learning how to communicate with other nationalities, as a secondary concern. But why should any longstanding or successful society consent to have its politics largely hijacked or diverted by proponents who, apart from capacity for drawing attention, are at best of marginal significance to everyday concerns?


Given Conscious well being, there is such a thing as moral illness. It tends to be found among those heedless souls who over indulge in short term pleasures. When their coasters hit a down side, they blame it, circularly, on illness: addiction to too much pleasure. Often, the more fundamental cause is social disease: disease of moral confusion.


In a way of thinking, it is not the taking of a measurement by a perspective of consciousness that collapses and gives expression to the rest of the world; rather, it is the holistic expressing of the rest of the world that collapses and avails each perspective of consciousness.  The Holism and each Perspective of it are engaged in perpetual feedback, in a dance of "I sense you."

Thus, all our work is deeply indebted to some aspect of religious or spiritual Faith. Every apparent form that avails expression to consciousness expresses capacity to: Interpret the rest of the world, apart from such form's perspective of consciousness; Inject or communicate aspects of that interpretation into the information or experience of surrounding forms and beings; While remaining synchronous with, and respectful of, some reconciling Aspect ... which Itself can never be comprehended or mapped ... except in respect of limited perspectives ... which IT, in unlimited appetitie, simply encompasses and consumes ... and therewith avails multiplications upon multiplications of new perspectives.

The perspectives we happen to share regarding Forms of Substances do not define or limit the Reality of the Potential that presents Substances before us. All of our communications are related in respect of Things, Signs, and Forms that we conceit to comprehend, but which are mere bubbles, fluxes, and expressions of a synchronizing Agency that we cannot bound. As we tirelessly measure and quantify the relations of such forms as appear before us, we often take it on conceit or Faith that our measures are "Real," and that Reality is bound to "Laws," which Laws, however, concern only the expression of ourselves. From more holistic perspective, we are only communicating about the tiny slice of Potential that happens here and now to be expressing us. All our work is deeply indebted to some aspect of religious or spiritual Faith.

We mortal beings do not relate, one to the other among us. Rather, each of us relates, one to the other of all that remains. It is only via the Whole that we are ultimately reconciled in reality. When I at the end of mortal time apprehend my own situation, then may "I" apprehend all other perspectives. Except in respecting all of The Other, I am less the able to respect its aspects among other individuals. To adequately respect other persons is to respect the universe that abides in them.


Our electorate has been suckered by cons shilling for international corporations, selling penny lick sugar highs. We have traded lousy jobs for low consumer prices; we have traded good jobs for cheap third world labor. After the sugar high, comes the crash. Obama is either the chief shill for international corporatists, or he is their number one sucker. In any event, he has passed the point of being able to change, without nailing himself to the point. The Story of O (and of every Dino and Rino) is a farcical tragedy for America.

Saturday, August 27, 2011

Approaching Civilization and God

I have been unable to see how secular or religious philosophies, whether of Liberalism or of Christianity, can reasonably claim, in themselves, to represent either Righteousness or God. That said, I do sense a significant difference: Liberals and other secularists tend to express that there does not abide any Source of higher values, so they tend not even to try to foster coherent moral philosophies, or to try to draw or enforce lines against the slippery slope to social disintegration. Thus, it becomes immediately incoherent for them to prescribe or mock any choice or purpose. For them, all is HYPOCRISY (and most of all, themselves). Christians believe there does abide such a Source, and do seek to appreciate appropriate limits for guiding behaviors and aspirations. For them, all else is VANITY.

I am more comfortable with most Christians. This is true, even though I often wish more Believers apprehended that their sacred books are models for guiding an evolving and unfolding search for enlightened decency, dignity, responsibility, and freedom. (Except upon contrivance of wordplay, such books do not, any more than "the book of contextual experience," describe or prescribe life for a perfect mortal. They "only" lay out an approach for people of good will to respect in context. And that is enough.)

Before one can hope to explicate any possible consensus for that which is needed to sustain decent civilization, one needs first to believe or apprehend that there abides a Source against which to measure, discuss, and reconcile what is meant by decent civilization. To have no such belief or apprehension is to make peace with the deconstruction of civilization. Such deconstruction may temporarily relieve the stress of hard living, but it strikes against the heart of what is intuitively obvious (what C.S. Lewis called "inside information"): We are thrown together as shareholding participants within a field of consciousness. I doubt there is any way out; not even in death.

Consciously, we experience our models. We don't "approach" our models, as things in themselves, but as experiences unfolding before the sensations of our consciousness. Our consciousness avails itself of forms by which to sense and experience Information, which we model --- qualitatively, quantitatively, fuzzily, transitionally, and incompletely --- as if the Information we sense and interpret were Substantive. Some aspect greater and more encompassing than us synchronizes in feedback to engage us in an unfolding dance of apprehensions and choices. In respect of that dance, we assume, signify, and communicate --- as if the Reality of the context that presents and unfolds around us were just and only as it appears and presents to our senses. Yet, everytime we try to approach and capture that which we experience with our consciousness, we find it consists only in relationships, including relationships with our consciousness, so that a Complete comprehension of it recedes from our capture, sort of like a rainbow, rather than like a thing in itself.   We don't really "approach" "things" in dimensions of space-time. Rather, we experience perspectives of them.

How do we "approach" civilization (or God?)?  I doubt that we "really" or dimensionally approach any substantively measurable thing in itself.  But I do believe that each perspective of consciousness lives, chooses, and reconciles in respect of a Higher Source.  If there is no real, substantive, thing-in-itself for us to "approach," then may there abide a qualitative or enlightening purpose for us to aspire towards, by our feedback as we acknowledge appreciation of that which has been, and is being, availed before us, by a synchronizing, reconciling, holistic aspect of Consciousness?

NOTE:  Do Secular Humanists (and fellow traveling socialists) mean to advocate that there abides a moral principle that is common to every perspective of human consciousness, but that such principle is not guided by any common, perspective of holism (i.e., God)?  However, if this common moral principle abides to interfunction with us, to guide the good will of every decent and empathetic perspective, and if it does not abide in measurable Substance, but only in qualitative Information, then what is the morally purposing Source of such Information, if not "God?"  When Secular Humanists ridicule notions of God, while wishing to substitute a notion of a unifying principle of Empathy (or Love), are they confused about, or really making, any distinction that makes any difference?  Aren't both notions (Spiritualist vs. Humanist) equally challenging to a survival-of-the-fittest notion of natural science (Top Predator)?  Are they saying we "should" be decently empathetic only when being so is conducive to our survival?  If so, except upon intuition, belief, or identiy-investment that my consciousness may in some quality be connected beyond the mortality of my body, WHY should I or WE or Any Individual CARE whether anything is conducive to the sustaining of human civilization?  And if one does so intuit or believe, isn't that necessarily religious or spiritual?

Thursday, August 25, 2011

Liberals v. Coercers

It’s amazing how the labels “Liberal” and “Libertarian” have been bastardized. That happens when crises loom and opportunities beckon. One might expect that “Libertarian” should appertain to an advocate for that system which best sustains liberty through the ages, rather than partying to a demise. That is not, however, the usage in modern parlance. Now, being Libertarian connotes advocacy for governmental enforcement of equal entitlement to every class and age, to every imaginable behavior — so long as the behavior does not immediately harm anyone else. Therein lies the rub. Of course, a smoker more likely sees little harm to others within the vicinity of his smoke. A nudist more likely sees little harm in everyone parading around schools in the nude. An illegal alien sees little harm in taking jobs Americans seem less inclined to do. An Islamist sees little harm in leading other nations to adopt incredibly expensive and intrusive measures so that transportation terminals can accommodate the non-profiled movement of Muslims. A Communist sees little harm in substituting the State for parents in the detailed education and conditioning of the next generation of good little communists. (If it takes a village, is the family an institution of tyranny?) Gay Inc. sees little harm in requiring taxpayers to equally fund, teach, and promote all fabulous and alternative lifestyle choices, for all children, from birth. Atheists see little harm in conditioning children to believe that all higher morality can be adduced from science (“pure substantive objectivity”), free from respect for any subjective apprehension of a higher source for reconciling the morally qualitative. Thus, it would seem more correct to refer to modern Libertarians as confused Libertines, or simply “Libertines.”

Or, perhaps, it may be even better to refer to Libs and Libertines as Flash Mobsters, Gang Coercers, Forebidders, and Ridiculers.  As in:  It is forbidden to discuss non-communist, non-quantitative values in the public square;  It is intolerant not to respect Islam as a religion;  It is parochial to advocate for marriage in terms of one man and one woman; It is hate speech to advocate for traditionally "White" values or against minority values; It is narrow minded not to experiment with drugs, sex, and same sex; It is chauvenistic to try to defend American borders and industry; It is ridiculous to advocate for smart trade as opposed to free trade.

However, how much more can we afford to tolerate the allegedly “non-harmful” extravaganzas of Illegals, Gays, Muslims, Communists (and Libertines), while still evading a final drop into the circling drain?   Libertines would have it that our economic issues are now so perilous that we cannot afford to focus any resources on social issues. Is that so? Well then, ask: How much of our economy has been degraded on account of expenses added in the care, feeding, recruitment, and extravagant tolerating of Illegals, Gays, Muslims, Communist Dupes, and Corporatist Lickspittles? (Aren’t those detriments to economics related to social values?) How much have we lost by denying American society the right to accord preferences and incentives to values more assimilating and sustainable to individual freedom, dignity, and opportunity?

How much can we afford not to worry about “free trade” that is inveigled for the benefit of extra-national corporatists? How much can we afford to deliberately allow American labor to be reduced to compete against foreign sweat shops and still preserve opportunity at home for the individual freedom and dignity of American workers? How much can we afford to enrich and send our technology, industry, and jobs abroad, to entities that seek to reduce all of humanity to the entire control of elite despots?

So then, how much of the Libertine Agenda consists in incoherence? Consider the incoherence of an entire facade of Lib and/or Libertine political philosophy:
- Advocating that the derivation of moral values should be restricted to pure science (or objective reason);
- Conditioning kids from K1 to post doc to take it for granted that the only moral ideas worthwhile are reducible to pure objectivism, and that the spreading of equal wealth and equal pleasure are objective entitlements;
- Pretending to test for when “harm” is done based on “objective science,” rather than on subjective values;
- Acceding to governmental proscribing against “hate speech;”
- Advocating that society, if it chooses to fund any behavior, must tolerate and fund all alternative behaviors equally (as a matter of “right”);
- Redefining marriage in order to bootstrap or force equality in tax availed “rights” and incentives to every conceivable relationship;
- Advocating that equal distribution of tax incentives to gay unions is a “constitutional right;”
Undermining one-man one-woman unions for the legal recognition of parental responsibilities;
- Pretending to support small government while creating a vacuum in the allocation of familial responsibilities (a vacuum that will necessarily be filled by big and expensive government);
- Arguing that taxation is a form of charity, thus entirely appropriate for the complete expungement of religious ideas and charities from the public square;
- Conditioning people to believe that a system that forces belief and oppresses over half its population qualifies for equal respect as a “religion” rather than a form of tyranny;
- Advocating for “free trade” based on competition for sweat shop labor;

Libertarians? I think not. More like Libertines. Adolescents, telling grown ups to “eat their peas.”

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

Soulless Corporate Succubi

In the time of Alexis de Tocqueville, why did so many American states cling to the institution of slavery, even though states without slavery thrived with industry and material abundance? Evidently, some populations and cultures learn to love power over others more than freedom from material wants. According to de Tocqueville, white southerners came to despise doing manual work for themselves. Perhaps this is why a slave almost instinctively prefers that his immediate master have less by which to exert control, more so than that he, the slave, should have more. Igor, being conferred one wish, learning that Ivan has a goat, wishes first for Ivan's goat to die.  Hence, the natural flow of  peculiar societies towards ages of poverty and darkness. A better society, a society that desires to maximize republican freedom for all, needs to guard against the natural tendencies amongst sociopathic parts of its population. Because America has not guarded enough, the same sociopathic tendencies have perfected means of exploitation in the form of the international corporation — which is loyal not to country or freedom, but only to profit and power. Thus, in place of enforced servitude, corporatists have learned how to impose the same condition of servility, merely by adverting to “free trade” and various tricks for convincing callow desires to yoke themselves to gross wastage and indebtedness. Simultaneously, release via bankruptcy is to be squeezed off. While people of good will have rested under an assumed, general prevalence of good faith, now draws nigh a general return to poverty and servitude, which will be controlled by a new and “benevolent” aristocracy of the most dark (and therefore the “most fit”) corporatists, with their elite sociopaths and succubi in trail.
What is the cure to the elephant that presses us? Our Founders knew (and drafted our Constitution not to be inconsistent with) most of the cure: (1) General support for the inculcation of a belief in higher, spiritual values; (2) transmission of sustainable and civilizing values through the agency of the family; and (3) a small and carefully checked federal government, to maximize freedom of expression and enterprise for all citizens of the union. Necessarily implicated was defense of the union’s borders.
What did our Founders miss? They failed to check against sociopathic attractions in the form of the international corporation, which, by skilled artifice among the most fit for ruthlessness, has now rendered our borders irrelevant to the cannibalization of our industry, infrastructure, resources, economy, currency, and general standard of living. How can that failure now be rectified? Only if enough Americans and members of the Tea Party awaken to the fact that our Dinos and Rinos, alike, are owned and operated by non-loyal, international corporatists, interested in little more than their sociopathic maximizing of power over all others. Otherwise, against the one-party rule of international corporatists, the notion that we have loyal and benevolent competition among businesses within a two party system is naught but a delusion, and the days remaining for the American ideal are closely numbered.

Before our eyes, as Rinos and Dinos do nothing, the soul of America is being sucked away by international corporate succubi.  Few political candidates even raise the issue.  Probably because it is dangerous to prod the elephant in the room.  At least Ron Paul calls for auditing The Fed.  But The Fed may only be a puppet of the real problem:  A network of soulless international corporatists.

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

Suicide by Toleration

Of Tolerating The Intolerable Because It Starts Small: Cancer always starts small. Then cancer feeds on its host; it does not tolerate its host. For a host to try to tolerate cancer is to try to tolerate the intolerable. To try to tolerate that which will never tolerate you is to volunteer for your own demise. There are peoples and cultures that are amenable to living in a Republic that facilitates freedom of expression and enterprise, and there are peoples and cultures that are not. Islam is a culture that is intolerant of all that do not submit to it. To host and tolerate Islam in the midst of one’s society is to try to tolerate that which will never tolerate its host. To try to pacify that which cannot be pacified is to exhaust one’s resources in pursuit of that which cannot be done. To try to reason with those who are beyond reason is a kind of insanity. To try to derive communal morality from science (“ought from is”), based purely in economic pricing and quantification, devoid of innate moral intuition and insight, is another kind of insanity. To try to legislate in order to accommodate a small outbreak of Communist or Muslim Insanity is to avail a base from which to spread and subvert. To continuously undermine those laws that regulate a host system in order continuously to accommodate that which will never accommodate itself to the host is continuously to weaken the host.

A belief is that which one comes to accept as a result of one’s own free will. Islam is not a religious belief. It is an unrelenting, forcing subjugation, that requires pretense of belief, regardless of one’s true thoughts. It is a mind cancer that is bent on producing subjugation and enslavement. Communism is a belief system that many come to accept of their own will, but only after extensive indoctrination — either forced by crazed militants, or funded and guided by duplicitous, international corporatists with motives ulterior to economic or social equality.

Communist thought control is exercised in a Pavlovian manner. It begins with state trained teachers in Kindergarten, and proceeds all through college, under tutelage of cloistered profs, whose support and research are funded by Big Gov, which itself is guided by international corporatists, bent on duping all others to believe the government they run means well and aspires to equality in economic distributions among all. To pave the way for Big Gov to function as our only savior, we have the spreading of poverty, the deconstructing of families, and the banning of spiritual-based notions of common decency from the public square.

Human susceptibility to envy and greed, united with the corporate form, actively disloyal to individual freedom and dignity, lies at the root of the communal evils of all attempts to subjugate human liberty, either under Islam or under Communism. Economic Aristocracy has learned to insinuate its rule, not with force, but with taqiyya and duplicity. Once the noose is set, and the economy fails, then there will be a return to the fear factor. Once again, we will then be forced to learn to love the ideas of Big Mullah and Big Brother, which will rule us mercilessly. Thus, communalists hope to change and pull America back down into the lowest common denominator that has afflicted the rest of the world for ages. It’s not the economy, stupid. It’s the destruction of all decent, assimilating fundamentals and the redistribution of goods that is being accomplished by cannibalizing America under the guise of the corporate form. While we worry about physical boundaries, we are tolerating the intolerable:  soulless international corporations that are sucking away the spirit of America.

@Thus spake Dlanorrenrag@

Monday, August 22, 2011

Oz Corp

It is not just the industry of America that is being undermined by international corporatists (who are at best indifferent and at worst actively disloyal to the idea of America). At worst, international corporatists seek to substitute the rule and worship of themselves for traditional institutions of family and spiritual assimilation.  They tend to intuit and be inspired by little more than individual greed. To that end, they find the ideals of ordinary Americans — freedom, family, and spiritual fulfillment — of little value. To dethrone the American ideal and to cannibalize it to their own interests, international corporatists seek not merely to sell our currency, economy, resources, and industry out from under us. They seek also to badger us into sacrificing ideals of family and spiritual fulfillment to falsely fabulous fun of Gay Inc. and worship of the State.
Of course, behind the curtain of the State is where Oz-Corp operates (whether by conspiracy or by natural confluence of interests among like minded corruptocrats), where it never tires of pretending that morality can be reduced to scientific quantification and that God should be replaced by secular humanism (i.e., front for Communism, i.e., front for Oz-Corp.). Thus, minions of Oz-Corp, having surrendered all notions of higher familial and spiritual values, continuously and synchronously work to undermine and replace all three legs of the ideal of America: (1) American freedom of expression and enterprise ("hate speech" codes and global warming carbon credit exchanges), (2) American families (governmental intrusion bent on consciousness bending control over children), and (3) American spirituality (banning spiritual based values from the public square).
As worthy as our Founders were, they failed to foresee the need to check and balance against the use of the international corporate form as a tool for selling all legs of America (Free trade, don't you know!) out to Wormwood, to the most indifferent or corrupt of ideas and personages. Each time Americans notice, Oz crisis managers wag their fingers and say, Don't dwell on 2 or 3, because 1 is most important. Evidently, we're supposed to believe America can seat her constituents and Constitution on a 1 legged stool. Ask: How on earth are a mess of mal-educated Jay-walkers going to sustain the idea of America beyond this generation, based merely on economic issues and free trade among international corporatists?
America's Founders failed to provide a Constitutional check against the corporate form, which is being used to convert American investors into abettors of treachery, to undermine and sell out America. So, the only check remaining is for sufficient numbers of Americans to apprehend the problem, the imminent danger it now poses, and to propel action fitted to the need. However, as things stand, we are so morally adrift and divided that we have little hope of uniting to see and do what needs to be done.
If the American Idea is not to be divided and drowned, the better part of the people need to move to: (1) internally, replace the corporate tax with only a consumption tax on individuals; externally, tax corporate expenditures that are made from America to go abroad; (2) stand up to academics who are preaching to replace spiritual, qualitative, higher values with short term pleasures and worship of faux redistributionist elites, who are bought by, paid for, or turned into pavlovian lickspittles for, international corporatists.

@Thus spake Dlanorrenrag@

It's The Redistribution, Stupid

What anarchist really believes zero government is possible, except for the purpose of transitioning to a different form of government? As to transition ("fundamentally changing" America), isn't that the goal of so-called liberals? Isn't creating crises in order not to waste them an expression of politically motivated anarchism? Where are radicals, socialists, and communists on the political spectrum? 100 percent government can be used to try to redistribute per capita, regardless of merit, and can also be used to try to obtain 100 percent control by elites over serfs. But there is no such thing as 100 percent equal distribution, because then no one would work. To incentive people to work, there would have to be employed the attractor of unequal redistributions. If an incentive attractor is not employed, the alternative would be a fear factor. This would not entail benevolent rule under elites, but tyranny under Stalins and Vlads. Big Gov, whether by printings of money or by points of swords, leads to a miserable state of being. Either way, the only time Big Gov can risk relaxing its grip is when the masses begin regulating themselves, by raising spiritual consciousness. That, too, brings a cycle, as consciousness raises to a tipping point --- a point where the masses realize just how non-elite and corrupt are those who regiment and regulate every breath and every sneeze. Points: (1) anarchism used for political purposes bends the political spectrum into a circle; (2) con artists will always abound who are bent on temporary gain at the expense of decent civilization. Few are those who truly seek a system that promotes freedom, dignity, and decency. Our Founders were, in main, among such rarities. However great their foresight, they did not foresee how our (1) industry, (2) families, and (3) spiritual assimilators would be so suddenly vulnerable to being stressed and undermined by (1) international corporatists, (2) international libertine gay activists, and (3) international communist destablizing redistributers. Collapse any leg and the seat of our Constitution cannot stand. Presently, all three legs are being simultaneously collapsed. It's not the economy, stupid. It's the redistribution. The redistribution of money, family mores, and spiritual death.

@Thus spake Dlanorrenrag@

Sunday, August 21, 2011

Of Non-import to Ancient Mariner

Yes, Dinos will eventually be replaced. But, not to worry, Ancient Mariner, for they'll be replaced by Rinos. It's clear that the economy of the ship of state is being deliberately rotted, so hordes of ratfinks, bent on fundamentally destroying the state, can clambor aboard. It's clear that morale concerning the fundamental values in respect of which the ship was Christened are being undermined by assaults that ridicule and conflate the worthiness of Christian values with illogical literalisms of dogma. It's clear that those invited to the party of destruction believe their adolescent understandings of illogic of dogma supremely qualify them to say America is a "downright mean" country that needs to be replaced. It's clear that the culture that applied capitalism to bring civilization, technology, and industry to their apex, i.e., the Christian White Anglo Protestant culture, is being conquered and milked by cultures bent on once again reducing the world to collectivist societies under the rule of elites. It's clear that crises are being deliberately exacerbated, so that all who oppose the variously scurrying ratfinks can be accused of minding things that, taken individually and considering the impending destruction of the state, are relatively unimportant distractions.

So, what are some of the individually minor things ratfinks are doing, while the economy of the ship sinks? Well, they are saying America lacks economic means: to enforce borders; to deport aliens; to develop energy and industry without upsetting the climate; to pay heed to the Gay Agenda; and to stop sell outs to China (the society most admired by the ratfinks). Once all the "unimportant things" are safely ignored, what's left?

Except as needed to keep ratfinks in line, the Soros-Obama Aristocracy of Adolescent Elites could care less about fixing the economy! Economic jealousy and crises are central to how Soros-Obama Inc. expect to convert all "downright mean" countries of the world into statist-religion socialist dystopias --- all under the collective thumb of an international cabal of elite corporatist know-it-all's, who intend to regulate our lives and to govern us out the ears. Hear the creak of rotting wood? Not to worry, Ancient Mariner. It's "minor."

@Thus spake Dlanorrenrag@

Saturday, August 20, 2011


TRIADS -- of Trivalent Logic and Circular Meta Relationships:

Random -- Determined -- Guided
Chaotic and Evolving Unfolding -- Synchronously Predetermined -- Caringly Guided
Substance -- Consciousness -- Information
Correlator -- Cause -- Synchronizer
Equation -- Translation -- Transcendence
Territory -- Correlation -- Map
Object -- Subject -- Verb
Essence -- Relation -- Representation
Conscious -- Appreciative -- Will
Initiative -- Equality -- Fairness
Emotional -- Rational -- Meaningful
Spirituality -- Dignity -- Freedom
Context -- Perspective -- Purpose
Uncertain -- Potential -- Manifest
Transpositive -- Quantitative -- Qualitative
Fuzz -- Particle -- Wave
Phase Shifting -- Discrete -- Continuous
Ambiguous -- False -- True
Becoming -- Been -- Being
Zero -- One -- Infinity
Unbounded -- Finite -- Circular

Thursday, August 18, 2011

Fundies and Elitists

A problem with literalist, fundie religionists is that elitists tend to "misunderestimate" fundies' actual apprehensions of the real world. Elitists never get past the illogic of literalisms of fundie belief systems, in order to apprehend the wealth of wisdom in Judeo-Christian parables, figurative meanings, and traditions conducive to sustaining decent civilization. Being cocky of their superiority in seeing contradictions in religious logic, elitists assume their understanding of what should be done in the political world is also superior. This is a dangerous assumption, not uncommon among adolescents --- especially adolescents who never grow beyond their ivy, academic halls.

Unfortunately, presuming elitists, bless their hearts, really do tend to believe they know what is best, often to the point of being willing to deploy all means necessary to their ends --- even when their ends entail no more vision, experience, or understanding than a short sighted reach for all that seems most immediately gratifying. Economics tends to be at the heart of their every political concern. Print more money. Let everyone marry everyone else. Ban, burn, or erase all comments and all discussion of old or religious values in the public square or on discussion blogs. Don't allow anyone to caution anyone else from making immediate demands for all that may be hankered for.

Apart from Marx and Alinsky, our post modern, adolescent thinkers have little experience, judgment, or understanding of history or philosophy by which to apprehend their limitations. Having no basis for understanding their limitations, they believe they are qualified, perhaps even "chosen," to give the law to all who are less blessed with their "intelligence." Thus, we have child-men like Obama, with no notable achievements, actually believing they are called to "fundamentally change" society and the last, best hope for freedom on earth. Choke our energy supplies. Render our industry non-competitive. Replace our currency. Substitute bureaucrats for charities. Grease the way to define marriage so that it no longer means anything. Replace parents with teacher drones. Let them teach why it is right that Johnny should have two mommies.  Deploy our military to serve international Bilderbergers. Seek to build democracies where it is impossible, in order to bankrupt democracy at home. Avail a pathway to equal rights for every desire, every alien, and every antithetical culture. This is the road our "elite" leaders deem to be in our best interest. Mommy and Daddy have elected their toddler, bless his elite heart, to rule them ... even to decree that marriage is no more to have meaning. Rather, marriage is simply a public committment to love. Charity is something done by government, using other people's money. Sustenance is something the government owes you. Industry is what other countries do. Money is something the government prints. Values are what you want, which other people should respect.  Our modern college graduates are so smart!

Bottom line: Fundies need to think more about why the Bill Mahers and Obamas of the world really believe they are superior, and why they are so wrong. The Bill Mahers and Obamas of the world need to think more about what is actually needed to sustain decent civilization. It's about more than money.

@Thus spake Dlanorrenrag.

Wednesday, August 17, 2011

Assimilating Decent Civilization

Fundamental confusion about freedom abounds among adolescents:   Freedom does not mean that everyone should be entitled to every pleasure he wishes for. Freedom does not mean that everything that is possible is desirable. Freedom does not mean that it is morally possible to tolerate every depravity. Simply put, there can be no sustainable freedom without restraints for the sake of decency. No one is morally entitled to force a government that is more, nor less, intrusive than is necessary to sustain decent civilization.

Insofar as choices must be executed, either by mankind or by nature, it is but a truism that not all that abides in potentiality should be made to stand in what is manifest. If we would seek fulfillment in pursuing anything that is manifestly and decently sustainable, we must focus on what is necessary in order to sustain anything that is worth being communicated to civilization.
TEST: What triad is essential to sustain decently unfolding civilization? I say there are three main components or legs: (1) Land that is kept safe for the free exchange of ideas and enterprise (AMERICA); (2) families for inculcating and conveying appreciation of such ideas and initiatives through the generations (the institution of MARRIAGE), and (3) a shared spiritual notion that each of us is but a perspective of a more encompassing and unfolding field of higher values and purposes (GOD).
To try to sustain or tolerate everything is to sustain nothing. We need a triad:  To sustain decent civilization for the free exchange of ideas and commerce among beings whose minds are not imprisoned, (1) {Father} we need a Land that enforces its borders, protects its infrastructure and industry, and respects the freedom and dignity of its citizens. For citizens to govern such a land through the generations, (2)  {Son} sustaining values need to be inculcated to each new infant, above government, and communicated among Families. For families to value their shared land and initiatives, above themselves, there needs to be inculcated and respected (3) {Holy Ghost} an assimilating ideal of a Source of higher values. When any one of those three legs is rotted or broken, the seat of liberty for the pursuit of happiness is toppled.
The road to the rotting of decent civilization is paved with a philosophy that God loves everyone and therefore expects mankind to tolerate everything. There is no rot that such a “Code Pink” philosophy will not “justify.” A better philosophy, to put structure in civilization, is built on considering what is necessary to the sustenance of decent civilization.
Obviously, it is not necessary, even counterproductive, to decent civilization to foster governmental intrusions that try to force people NOT to form, or discriminate for, decently sustainable values. Such intrusions include:
1) Laws that so divide society as to avail no hope of civilizing assimilation (choking domestic energy production in order to enrich jihad religionists who are bent on financing cultural invasions by proponents for replacing civilizing law with Sharia law);
2) Precursor Laws that will eventually lead government to preclude incentives to sustainable demographics (forcing states not to protect their borders from alien intruders);
3) Precursor Laws that will push families not to extol family values (turning any non-tolerant disparagement of alternative life styles into “hate speech” or ground for removing children to state-facilitated foster homes);
4) Laws that push subordinate governments to disparage any ideal of marriage or family values over any other (requiring third graders to learn why it is equally wonderful for Johnny to have two mommies);
5) Laws that force government to give equal incentives to non-sustainable demographics (requiring equal tax incentives for same sex “marriages”);
6) Precursor Laws whose effect is to “educate” children to ridicule any notion of higher assimilating values (justifying the indifferent sell out of national infrastructure and industry by indifferent international corporations that are loyal to no sense of decency and to nothing above profit).
Such intrusions and failures by government are designed to “fundamentally change” America, away from a land that encourages the free exchange of ideas and enterprise and into a land that fosters a black hole of indebtedness to those rotters whose brains never formed insights above adolescent, selfish wishfulness.

The entire structure of America — behind the walls, in the attic, under the foundation — at the borders of its Land, among the children of its Families, and in respect of its Source of values — is being sacrificed, rotted, and digested to the short term pleasure of invading barbarians and termites of no higher vision than to beat the competition to a feast of destruction. Will we in time peel back the superficial outer layers to sear the seething rot within?

@Thus spake Dlanorrenrag.

Monday, August 15, 2011

America, Marriage, and God

Everyone who wants to justify whatever he wants to do anyway tends to preach that God loves everyone and therefore endorses everything. Of course, this is unprincipled, anarchic insanity. Still, what should one expect of those who, for years upon years, have justified doping their way through reality? Some libertarian dopers do manage to earn livelihoods beyond the dole. Believing self justification is the highest value, they tend to believe all problems are solvable merely by applying proper economic principles. They want their trade to be as free as their self justification.

However, is decent society sustainable merely by preaching and promoting free trade? Does free trade encompass the free hiring of serf labor in order to rot out the non-serf competition? Does free trade encompass the free importation and camouflauging of jihadists for the enforcement of crazed religous rules that reduce half the population to subhuman status? Does free trade encompass the free monopolization of media by gangs of international corporatists for the purpose of mesmerizing and controlling all who are most easily reduced to moral zombies? Just how is it that any intelligent person should believe that the good life would rain down on everyone if only all would adhere to a universal creed based purely on everyone justifying his economic interest?

How is it that putting lipstick on a creed of kill or be killed should be deemed decently civilized? How is it that any pretended believer in moral empathy should adopt as a moral pose a notion that there is no reconciling source of morality above individual self interest? Should even familes, as the basic unit of civilization, teach that there is no higher basis for inter-familial empathy, beyond "Make your best deal?"  Should "marriage and "family" be redefined as meaningless, the better to pave the way for gangs animated by nothing higher than pure self advancement to divide and rule?

Unfortunately, we are beset by a mudstorm of post modern philosophy for deconstructing America, Marriage, and God. If we lose our grip on those guideposts, the philosophy of pure economic self interest that replaces them will collect and usher us to a polar opposite of utopia. The cure to collectivist hell is not pure economic self interest. The cure is enlightened respect for America, Marriage, and God.

@Thus spake Dlanorrenrag.

Sunday, August 7, 2011


UNFOLDING EVOLUTION OF INTERESTS OF CONSCIOUSNESS:  There seem to be niches of perspectives of consciousness.  Some niches support evolution of perspectives that communicate feelings of empathy and that seek to preserve decent civilization for membersOther niches mark the cannibalizing demise of decency.

Whether a niche or society is on a rise, unfolding along a sustainable path, seems to flux with the sharing and raising of consciousness, both among members, and in regard to members' respect for their common Source.  While members respect decency, civilization tends to enhance decency.  While members remain interested in God, God seems to retain interest in members.  When members lose empathy and spiritual interest, and turn instead to seek fulfillment exclusively by pursuing short-term material wants and transient pleasures, thus sacrificing empathy and spirituality, then empathy and spirituality seem likewise to sacrifice interest in such members --- even in entire civilizations and niches.

It is charitable to try to help a basically good person to recover his or her sense of purposeful empathy and spirituality.  However, many recipients of good intentions cynically manipulate and abuse such efforts, thinking supporters misled, impotent, ridiculous, and worthy of being conned.  It becomes hard to help such people (Rinos and Dinos?) out of their spiritual hole without being pulled down into it.

The less one's resources and the more fallen and depraved the person one would help, the more it becomes important to appreciate when to let go.  There are people and nations whose salvation, even in terms of material wants, is best left to God.  To restore some derelicts to spiritual health requires miracles of intervention beyond capacity of the best of human intentions.  To linger too long to try to restore spiritual health to those who have allowed themselves to become spiritual zombies can lead one to lose the spiritual path for helping those who remain committed to it.  Such is not an empirical judgment, but necessitates a quality of spiritual insight, intuitively best accompanied with prayer and receptivity to Higher Consciousness.  Such receptivity is needed, if one is to acquire experience and skill to detect when the habits of others have fallen too deeply into grooves of anti-spiritual, material cynicism.  Absent such skill, one can hardly recognize when it becomes necessary and important to abandon spiritual zombies to the existential despair they have worked to put themselves into.


Pin ball mechanics and post modern deconstructionists often join and ingratiate themselves with those scientists whose expertise and egos tend to be single-mindedly devoted to reducing everything to the materially quantitative. Of course, religion, spirituality, and moral values are derived more in respect of the qualitative than the quantitative. Yet, one whose mind or faith is bent to believe that all that is qualitatively worthwhile can and should be reduced to the scientifically quantitative will soon deconstruct and find that nothing, and no value, can be shown to be worth preserving or defending. Nowadays, professors of deconstructionist philosophy and reductionist science have united to ridicule and rout all who would defend any assimilating values. Thus, the mass of people find themselves being pushed by elitists, who know nothing of any qualities that are worthwhile, to value only the value of nothingness. (Of course, valuing the nothingness of no values is the supreme confusion and hypocrisy of modern elites, and it trumps all their epithets of “hypocrisy” against everyone else who at least strives but always falls short.)

Thus, our elites prefer to believe or model as if our universe arose out of a singular bubble from an otherwise mindless void of nothingness. Our "elites" prefer that no one should be entertained to intuit or believe that any eternal Source of spirituality may yet mingle with us. For them, God is departed, dead, or never was. They prefer that all talk of spiritual and moral intuition should be driven from the public square, eventually to be politically decreed a form of child abuse. They wish politically not merely “to wall away” an establishment of religion, but politically to nullify every religious, spiritual, and moral view.   The road “the wall people” want to divert us to is a road to perdition, where all Christian, spiritual, and charitable basis for the Golden Rule is denied and ridiculed, to be replaced by a politically enforced equality for all, where the distributors of “equality” will be those Napoleons who most fervently believe in the moral value of no moral values, excepting this: some are more equal before the government than others.

Of course, America's Founders, as well as everyone with insight above that of a rebellious child, knew this to be a prescription for moral Babel. Yet, “elites” of such hatred for the moral authority of any spiritual intuition cannot be cured of their blindness or ferocious devotion to moral anarchy.

There are true incorrigibles.  For example, a "religion" that gathers adherents by force rather than by attraction based on the intuitive goodness or reasonableness of its doctrine is not a religion, but a recipe for thuggery.  A "science" that pretends to know, and that ridicules all who intuit otherwise, that there is no basis for moral values apart from those "values" "reasonably" taught by elites is not a science, but a language for "wise guys," posing as "moral scientists."  Such thug religionists and faux scientists mean to ridicule, rout, and push all opponents from the field of toleration.  For non-adherents to tolerate such intolerant know-it-alls, who claim to know that which cannot be known but only intuited, is to tolerate the destruction of all those who refuse to adhere to insanity.

Instead of reasoning with incorrigibles, they need to be let go, quarantined, banished, or cut off — like gangrene. That is, if any semblance of decent civilization is to be preserved. There comes a point where you just can’t fix know-it-all stupidity. Many of these people act so incorrigibly to logic and common decency that they believe there actually exists --- and not merely as a mathematical function or model --- an ultimate, actual, inanimate, dumb, particular “thing” — which they reverentially call the Higgs boson (or family thereof). I suspect the truly faithful among the a-theists will find this "Thing" nestled close to the Easter Bunny or the Great Pumpkin, right next to the Bible of the Morality of Nothingness.

@Thus spake Dlanorrenrag.

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

New Beginning

GOOD FAITH DIVISION OF LABOR:  A society increases its wealth as its members divide their labor, wishing to do important work well, and to love doing it, enhancing their self esteem and building wealth, good will, and charity among all. Detailed regulation and oversight by rote and force does not enhance the pursuit of happiness. That sort of counterproductive oversight can occur in numerous ways: by lords forcing serfs; by monopolists killing opportunities for laborers to compete in selling their labor; by governments erecting quagmires of restraints against new competitors; by oligopolists bribing and buying up government and its favors and muscle; by dissimilation and dissolution of assimilating mores, to such a point that no one believes the social system will any longer avail good faith in individual initiative; by science and technology becoming so big and intrusive that no small company can access it to compete; by putting systems of corruption in concrete; by spreading fear of all unwatched and unregulated persons.

ECONOMIES OF SCALE:  America has ventured far from a society of arms length, small business, free enterprisers. America is now filled to overflowing with government, regulations, fat and uncompetitive corporations, competition for the buying and selling of politicians, disbelief in assimilating mores, and general "use and be used" corruption and visionless hedonism. America will not easily be restored to a system that promotes self esteem and the individual pursuit of fulfillment. Not by by governmental spreading of wealth. Not by replacing government with fat, uncompetitive corporations, that preserve their positions by replacing American workers with cheap foreign labor. Not by busting businesses down to sizes that cannot meet modern standards and needs. Not by destroying jobs and means of disseminating money by replacing workers with machines. Not by mocking spiritual empathy and notions of charity and running them out of all institutions of education. Not by replacing notions of charity with notions of entitlement. Not by quick-fix tinkering with laws or printing of money. Not by opening borders to be swamped by cheap labor from entitlement-minded cultures. The spirit that had resided with America is departing. Unless leaders arise, with inspiring and right vision, America is lost.

CORPORATE CHECKS:  While Montesquieu and Madison were thinking about how to design systems of checks and balances that could protect ordinary citizens, they apparently failed to foresee the need to check and balance against “corporate citizens.” Lacking checks, international corporations simply eat out America from within, and then deposit the waste and remnants amongst other nations. Thus, our infrastructure comes eventually to be owned by foreign or disloyal corporatists, as our industry and jobs go to foreign labor markets. Thus, “Citizen Corporation,” being unchecked and without loyalty apart from profit to the most power lusting, simply buys governments and reduces people to serfs, worldwide. So long as our law facilitates the corporate form as it now operates, it is insane to believe the people will find relief — either in more governmental regulation of corporations, or less. When there is less governmental regulation, corporations simply take over the role of our governors. When there is more, corporations simply invest in buying the government that regulates us. Corporate interests have now come to run all our institutions of significance and to own our Rinos and Dinos. These interests will not quietly pull in their horns. The solution, if any, will require a pincer attack: (1) educate and inspire the people at large to a reasoned, spiritual system of counter mores; (2) formalize that system in law by redefining limits for how citizen-corporations are allowed to do business. Tariffs and penalties, not internal taxes on corporations, are part of the solution. To tax American corporations internally, like taxing our government, tends simply to pass such taxes on to consumers or citizens. If not already too late, America needs to fundamentally check and change the way it allows corporations to organize and operate within our boundaries and through our banking system. Otherwise, there is simply too much temptation for the lowest denizens among us to use the corporate form as cover for selling America into debt slavery in exchange for fast bucks. At the center of the black hole that is destroying the American economy is the corporate form, as it now stands.

SUGGESTION TO PRESERVE A DECENT DISTRIBUTION OF POLITICAL AND ECONOMIC POWER FOR AMERICANS: Provide safety net and spread opportunity to make wealth, not by printing or redistributing more money, but by making American corporations American. Have the federal government require that all corporations doing business in America must participate in a public securities fund comprised of voting stocks. Require that this public fund consist of 5 percent of all the corporate stock of each and every corporation. Twice a year, the government should distribute, per capita, a portion of such public stock to each and every citizen (or guardian of a citizen).  Allow such stock to be freely traded one time, among Americans, for other voting stock in American corporations.  Penalties or tariffs should be extracted upon the exchange of stock of any American or American corporation with non-citizens. In this way, incentive every American corporation to see to general charitable purposes, welfare, and productivity of American citizens. As corporations increasingly transition to robotics to replace human workers, a mechanism will be needed to avail Americans with opportunities to preserve their voices regarding the political and economic direction of the country. Otherwise, corporatists and machines will create an upper class of Morlochs to rule Eloi.  Place to start: Inspire new mores and redefine old legalities for functioning in the corporate form.


EVOLUTION:  Yes, a corporation would be better at running its business than the government. But what is a corporation's business? When the niche proximately shaping evolution becomes a world without trade barriers or effective national boundaries, how much will conditions render most fit those corporatons that are least scrupulous of common decency and most zealous of quick predation, reducing all others to a lowest common denominator, as prey? In those conditions, would not the business that rises to the top of the food chain tend to become the business of buying and selling politicians and governmental influence, worldwide?
One should guard against being distracted by smooth hoods, as they take turns picking one’s pockets. One ought not swallow or become apologist for the line of the corporatist juggernaut that, in fact, has come to own our government — whether directly by Dinos, or indirectly by Rinos. Did not the most monied of corporatists contribute primarily to the election of Obama over McCain? Ought we trust them, then, when they now say we should move from more direct regulation by government to more freedom for international corporations, beholden to no principle higher than the easiest buck and the greatest accumulation of influence and power over all others? Before America drowns under free trade and open borders, ought Americans not at least pause and consider whether the fundamental form of incorporation needs itself to be reformed? Ought we not cease turning first one cheek to more governmental regulation and then the other cheek to more freedom for corporate marauders? Before growing another day older and deeper in debt, ought we not notice whether the left fist and the right fist are connected to the same straw boss punching for the same company store?
As near as I can tell, most Conservatives and Libertarians bounce back and forth within strait jacketed walls, inside a cube, never dreaming they could reform and wear the cube, instead of bouncing off the walls of the cube. The walls of the cube consist of inventions of adherents of religions of secular particles versus religions of spiritual math, adherents of national boundaries versus adherents of free trade, and adherents of governmental regulation versus adherents of corporatists who own the government. To move beyond knocking our heads against walls, all we have to do is to redefine the inside of the cube — so that we wear it, instead of it wearing us. Instead of boxing Americans inside a trap, reshape the box so Americans can return to pursuing their happiness.  Redefine the form of the American corporation so it serves the American vision of individual freedom and dignity.  Avail decent civilization by apprehending a better definition for the form of the corporate suit. That’s all.

Re: "Take away the regulatory corruptors, and corporate power is diminished."
Problem is, one man's corruptor is another man's saint. I think the problem is more one of structure than one of finding ways to distinguish corruptors from saints. When American corporations do business in America, no tax. When they wire or send money or resources outside America, tax the hell out of it. Let corporations contribute to political campaigns, but impute that money as wages paid to whomever on the corporation authorized it, and tax it to them. Etc.

@Thus spake Dlanorrenrag.