Finally --- An Article That Tells It Like It Is.
MY TAKE: If Repubs are soulless greedbags, ever wonder why so many billionaires support Obama? I received this heads up from a good source. I applaud this article. Wonder why Gentry Politics has not more often found its way into the nation's discourse? It's like a throwback to Southern Gentry Plantation Life: De-claw the bothersome middle class and monopolize media and academia so most serfs hear hardly anything other than that they are being ruled for their own good. Reduce Americans to perpetual children. This is neither fish nor fowl. It's false communism, i.e., the "infantile-izing" of the middle class, with the collective forever tied under the supervision of elites. "For their own good," of course.
The Gentry (Rino and Dino movers and shakers in both parties) are entertained by exploiting this meme. Reagan's trickle-down ideas were nothing compared to the torrent-down ideas of new elites, posing as comrades. This is great entertainment for the Gentry. Sort of like watching a bull and bear fight, with the Gentry hedging about which animal (party) to bet on, depending on how the entertainment unfolds. As the Gentry find themselves cycling back and forth to the same watering holes, the threat to the middle class soon passes conspiratorial levels. The middle class may yet wake up, but it will take a miracle.
Regarding Quantum Decoherence: I have suspicions. I suspect those who want to shunt the notion of a City of God aside, in trade for a City of Self, tend to be embarrassed when it's pointed out how circularly convenient are their "many worlds" and "multiverse" notions for modeling how it could be that consciousness "just happens" to abide, ex nihilio, in our world. So, now we have a notion of "Quantum Decoherence." I suspect many proponents (Materialists) prefer to use the notion to rationalize for a City of Self, by presuming countless possibilities of other universes do not actually manifest in space-time existence, but only in potential. However, I remain unconvinced that such a notion should not be equally consistent with a City of God.
From what I gather, the notion seems to be that, in potential, all that abides that is not manifested is entirely "coherent." It's only when a manifestation bubbles or leaks out (of meta space-time?) into an expression in manifest space-time that there is experienced, in reference to it, a "decoherence." However, this technique for applying-labels-to-whatever-may-result ("stuff just happens") does not explicate much concerning why or how any particular result was actually synchronized, caused, apprehended, guided, or chosen. Nor does a notion of Quantum Decoherence, in itself, avail much help for deriving "ought" from "is." To derive "ought from is" necessitates a quality of consciousness, which abides superior to, or at least on par with, quantifiably correlative substance.
Regardless, the potentiality of our universe somehow "chooses" to manifest only one, from among all possible sequences of potentiality, to our commonly synchronized and unfolding experience of consciousness. In all our varieties for experiencing and measuring the unfolding manifestation of our universe, we are unable categorically or quantifiably to prove answers to the questions we wrestle with as being of most import. At most, we seem only to feel, intuit, divine, or rationalize such "answers." The questions include the following:
- After we label that which results from a fundamentally unknown process (such as "Quantum Decoherence"), how do we meaningfully explicate the quality of that process?
- May that process be consistent with the abiding of a universal field or quality of Consciousness?
- Is the holistic, synchronous, unfolding of each "choice" of universal expression reconciled in respect of feedback in the quality of appreciation of each particular, mortal perspective?
- Does any meta quality of consistency, purpose, or feedback guide each judgment or choice regarding which among the possible states of universal expression should be unfolded to the next successive appreciation of variously encompassed perspectives of consciousness?
- Ought we to be concerned about what qualities of appreciation may please God, or does God merely reconcile how God is to be pleased, regardless?
- Even if there may abide a contemporaneous quality of holistic consciousness, may it, itself, be entirely preset?
- What visions or delights may such a holistic consciousness be learning or practicing to avail and sustain?
- What is the quality of "my" connection or subservience to any holistic "I-ness"?
- Does decent civilization have any reasonable hope or chance to sustain and communicate itself, absent reverence towards some meta Source of decency? Can it make sense to speak of "higher values," absent respect for some way to intuit and reconcile them? Stated another way, if higher values abide without a Reconciler, then what are such values reconciled in respect of?