 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back |
Previous on Jeremy Bosch Memorial HOF |
Next on Jeremy Bosch Memorial HOF |
dc9
(68.207.173.131) on 9/21/2007 - 12:20 a.m. says: ( 29 views
)
|
"a few thoughts before I take a nap"
|
Edited by Author at 9/21/2007 - 12:20 a.m.
As it is, I have been conducting an ongoing research since my retirement and many of my long held beliefs on what has been the course of the history of the world have changed. I have come to believe in an ongoing conflict between two separate ideologies/theologies/philosophies (total gestalt of the opposing conflicts. I refer to these two as the Individualists vs the Collectivists.
The Individualists I call the thesis and the Collectivists the antithesis in accordance with the Hegelian construct.
The Individualists grew out of the hunter-gatherer construct and emphasised the developement of the individual - he who was stronger rose to the leadership. But this leadership was tempered by a realisation that leadership could only take the people he led to where they wanted to go. A good example of this type of construct I found in a study of the Great Sioux Nation and the way their cheifs were selected and how they could be removed. The loose pattern of decentralized authority amongst the Lakota Dakota, Ogllalah and others shows the basis of the ideology that becomes a historical reference for the beginnings of the gestalt of concept that resulted in the Constitution of The United States. I also find reports of other similar basic constructs with the decentralized structures of other native american peoples. I consider that the ultimate statement of what the individualist construct is, is contained in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence.
The antithesis construct comes with the developement of agriculture and the ability of man to concentrate himself into cities. With this also came a wholesale change in theology as a state church was established as in Babylon and Egypt. The concentration of people into small areas of this caused problems such as crime that gave rise by the pack tighted people to establish a more centralized authority. The need for a medium of exchange gave rise to the advent of the banking system which evolved that came to exercise techniques to concentrate the wealth in the hands of the state. In Babylon, these banks were run by the Priests of the Temple of the Sun God who used clay tablets as their fiat currency. (Though there is a growing body of evidence that the Sumerians first developed these techniques of banking and were copied by the Babylonians) Now, since the state was run by the priesthood and their high priest was the King (whose word was law), then you had all the essentials of the state in one neat package. The emphasis in this construct is the good of the group and freedoms of the individual are often curtailed. This is why I think of the Federal Reserve as a tentacle of the Whore of Babylon. not out of any particular religious conviction, but because I like the deragatory nature of the term.
Now, out of this is supposed to come a systhesis which combines the best of both constructs. As yet, I haven't found it though I continue to search. In the meantime, I'll adhere to the individualistic construct.CONTEXT ADDED BY ADMIN:
END OF CONTEXT
As it is, I have been conducting an ongoing research since my retirement and many of my long held beliefs on what has been the course of the history of the world have changed. I have come to believe in an ongoing conflict between two separate ideologies/theologies/philosophies (total gestalt of the opposing conflicts. I refer to these two as the Individualists vs the Collectivists.
The Individualists I call the thesis and the Collectivists the antithesis in accordance with the Hegelian construct.
The Individualists grew out of the hunter-gatherer construct and emphasised the developement of the individual - he who was stronger rose to the leadership. But this leadership was tempered by a realisation that leadership could only take the people he led to where they wanted to go. A good example of this type of construct I found in a study of the Great Sioux Nation and the way their cheifs were selected and how they could be removed. The loose pattern of decentralized authority amongst the Lakota Dakota, Ogllalah and others shows the basis of the ideology that becomes a historical reference for the beginnings of the gestalt of concept that resulted in the Constitution of The United States. I also find reports of other similar basic constructs with the decentralized structures of other native american peoples. I consider that the ultimate statement of what the individualist construct is, is contained in the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence.
The antithesis construct comes with the developement of agriculture and the ability of man to concentrate himself into cities. With this also came a wholesale change in theology as a state church was established as in Babylon and Egypt. The concentration of people into small areas of this caused problems such as crime that gave rise by the pack tighted people to establish a more centralized authority. The need for a medium of exchange gave rise to the advent of the banking system which evolved that came to exercise techniques to concentrate the wealth in the hands of the state. In Babylon, these banks were run by the Priests of the Temple of the Sun God who used clay tablets as their fiat currency. (Though there is a growing body of evidence that the Sumerians first developed these techniques of banking and were copied by the Babylonians) Now, since the state was run by the priesthood and their high priest was the King (whose word was law), then you had all the essentials of the state in one neat package. The emphasis in this construct is the good of the group and freedoms of the individual are often curtailed. This is why I think of the Federal Reserve as a tentacle of the Whore of Babylon. not out of any particular religious conviction, but because I like the deragatory nature of the term.
Now, out of this is supposed to come a systhesis which combines the best of both constructs. As yet, I haven't found it though I continue to search. In the meantime, I'll adhere to the individualistic construct.
|
|
RON PAUL for President 2008 