What To Be Thankful For?

What if the government is designed to perpetuate itself? What if the real levers of governmental power are pulled by agents and diplomats and bureaucrats behind the scenes? What if they stay in power no matter who is elected president or which major political party controls Congress?

What if the frequent public displays of adversity between the Republicans and the Democrats are just a facade and a charade? What if both major political parties agree on the transcendental issues of our day?

What if they both believe that our rights are not natural to our humanity but instead are gifts from the government? What if they both believe that the government that gives gifts to its people can take those gifts back?

What if the leadership of both parties give only lip service to Thomas Jefferson's words in the Declaration of Independence that each of us is "endowed by (our) Creator with certain inalienable rights, (and) among these is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," and that the purpose of government is to protect these rights? What if the leadership of both major political parties dismiss these ideas as just Jefferson's outdated musings? What if Jefferson's arguments have been enacted into the federal laws that all in government have sworn to uphold?

What if the leadership of the two major political parties believe that due process permits mothers to kill the babies in their wombs out of fear or convenience? What if the leaders of both major political parties believe that the president should be able to kill whomever he wants out of fear, because due process is an inconvenience? What if President Obama killed Americans and claimed that he did so legally, relying on the convenient arguments of his attorney general, who falsely told him he could kill? What if the Constitution requires due process whenever the government wants someone's life, liberty or property, whether convenient or not?

What if the congressional leadership and most of the membership from both political parties believe in perpetual war and perpetual debt? What if the history of America in the past 100 years is proof of that nearly universal belief among the political classes?

What if the political classes in America believe that war is the health of the state? What if the leadership of those classes want war so as to induce the loyalty of the voters, the largesse of the taxpayers and the compliance of the people? What if the political classes use war to enrich their benefactors? What if the government has been paying for war by increasing its debt?

What if the political classes have been paying for prosperity by increasing the government's debt? What if those classes have controlled the cash-creating computers at the Federal Reserve and the free cash the Fed creates is to bankers and traders what heroin is to addicts? What if the $17.5 trillion current federal government debt has largely been caused by borrowing to pay for war and false prosperity?

What if the silent damage that the artificial creation of cash causes has not been manifested in price inflation but in equity and savings deflation? What if the manifestation of equity deflation is that too much of everything we own secures too much debt? What if the folks at the Fed who create the cash have kept interest rates so low that there is little incentive to save?

What if we all own a smaller percentage of what we think we own because the value of what we own has decreased as the debt on what we own has increased? What if the banks have borrowed the money that they lend? What if the stock market is soaring on borrowed money? What if mansions and shopping malls are popping up, but they secure more debt than they are worth? What happens when the plug is pulled on this temporary artifice as those debts come due?

What if the government demands transparency from all of us but declines to be transparent to us? What if the government fosters the make-believe that it exists to serve us? What if it has access to all of our communications, bank accounts, health and legal records, and monthly bills? What if the government knows more about us than we know about it?

What if the government stays in power by bribery? What if it bribes the rich with bailouts, the middle class with tax cuts and the poor with welfare? What if the courts approved this bribery?

Thank you for posting!

We can be thankful that the framers of our Constitution and early justices understood that Constitution's purpose and wrote volumes explaining its underlying principles and ideas. Those writings are there for us to read--if we care enough to do so!

Excerpted below are the concluding paragraphs from Justice Joseph Story's "Commentaries on the Constitution. . . ."

The final paragraph of that powerful document serves as a cautionary warning for today's attacks on its principles and limitations on government power.

" CHAPTER XLV. CONCLUDING REMARKS.
§ 1903. We have now reviewed all the provisions of the original constitution of the United States, and all the amendments, which have been incorporated into it. And, here, the task originally proposed in these Commentaries is brought to a close. Many reflections naturally crowd upon the mind at such a moment; many grateful recollections of the past; and many anxious thoughts of the future. The past is secure. It is unalterable. The seal of eternity is upon it. The wisdom, which it has displayed, and the blessings, which it has bestowed, cannot be obscured; neither can they be debased by human folly, or human infirmity. The future is that, which may well awaken the most earnest solicitude, both for the virtue and the permanence of our republic. The fate of other republics, their rise, their progress, their decline, and their fall, are written but too legibly on the pages of history, if indeed they were not continually before us in the startling fragments of their ruins. They have perished; and perished by their own hands. Prosperity has enervated them, corruption has debased them, and a venal populace has consummated their destruction. Alternately the prey of military chieftains at home, and of ambitious invaders from abroad, they have been sometimes cheated out of their liberties by servile demagogues; sometimes betrayed into a surrender of them by false patriots; and sometimes they have willingly sold them for a price to the despot, who has bidden highest for his victims. They have disregarded the warning voice of their best statesmen; and have persecuted, and driven from office their truest friends. They have listened to the fawning sycophant, and the base calumniator of the wise and the good. They have reverenced power more in its high abuses and summary movements, than in its calm and constitutional energy, when it dispensed blessings with an unseen, but liberal hand. They have surrendered to faction, what belonged to the country. Patronage and party, the triumph of a leader, and the discontents of a day, have outweighed all solid principles and institutions of government. Such are the melancholy lessons of the past history of republics down to our own.
§ 1904. It is not my design to detain the reader by any elaborate reflections addressed to his judgment, either by way of admonition or of encouragement. But it may not be wholly without use to glance at one or two considerations, upon which our meditations cannot be too frequently indulged.
§ 1905. In the first place, it cannot escape our notice, how exceedingly difficult it is to settle the foundations of any government upon principles, which do not admit of controversy or question. The, very elements, out of which it is to be built, are susceptible of infinite modifications; and theory too often deludes us by the attractive simplicity of its plans, and imagination by the visionary perfection of its speculations. In theory, a government may promise the most perfect harmony of operations in all its various combinations. In practice, the whole machinery may be perpetually retarded, or thrown out of order by accidental mal-adjustments. In theory, a government may seem deficient in unity of design and symmetry of parts; and yet, in practice, it may work with astonishing accuracy and force for the general welfare. Whatever, then, has been found to work well in experience, should be rarely hazarded upon conjectural improvements. Time, and long and steady operation are indispensable to the perfection of all social institutions. To be of any value they must become cemented with the habits, the feelings, and the pursuits of the people. Every change discomposes for a while the whole arrangements of the system. What is safe is not always expedient; what is new is often pregnant with unforeseen evils, and imaginary good.
§ 1906. In the next place, the slightest attention to the history of the national constitution must satisfy every reflecting mind, how many difficulties attended its formation and adoption, from real or imaginary differences of interests, sectional feelings, and local institutions. It is an attempt to create a national sovereignty, and yet to preserve the state sovereignties; though it is impossible to assign definite boundaries in every case to the powers of each. The influence of the disturbing causes, which, more than once in the convention, were on the point of breaking up the Union, have since immeasurably increased in concentration and vigour. The very inequalities of a government, confessedly founded in a compromise, were then felt with a strong sensibility; and every new source of discontent, whether accidental or permanent, has since added increased activity to the painful sense of these inequalities. The North cannot but perceive, that it has yielded to the South a superiority of representatives, already amounting to twenty-five, beyond its due proportion; and the South imagines, that, with all this preponderance in representation, the other parts of the Union enjoy a more perfect protection of their interests, than her own. The West feels her growing power and weight in the Union; and the Atlantic states begin to learn, that the sceptre must one day depart from them. If, under these circumstances, the Union should once be broken up, it is impossible, that a new constitution should ever be formed, embracing the whole Territory. We shall be divided into several nations or confederacies, rivals in power and interest, too proud to brook injury, and too close to make retaliation distant or ineffectual. Our very animosities will, like those of all other kindred nations, become more deadly, because our lineage, laws, and language are the same. Let the history of the Grecian and Italian republics warn us of our dangers. The national constitution is our last, and our only security. United we stand; divided we fall.
§ 1907. If these Commentaries shall but inspire in the rising generation a more ardent love of their country, an unquenchable thirst for liberty, and a profound reverence for the constitution and the Union, then they will have accomplished all, that their author ought to desire. Let the American youth never forget, that they possess a noble inheritance, bought by the toils, and sufferings, and blood of their ancestors; and capable, if wisely improved, and faithfully guarded, of transmitting to their latest posterity all the substantial blessings of life, the peaceful enjoyment of liberty, property, religion, and independence. The structure has been erected by architects of consummate skill and fidelity; its foundations are solid; its compartments are beautiful, as well as useful; its arrangements are full of wisdom and order; and its defences are impregnable from without. It has been reared for immortality, if the work of man may justly aspire to such a title. It may, nevertheless, perish in an hour by the folly, or corruption, or negligence of its only keepers, THE PEOPLE. Republics are created by the virtue, public spirit, and intelligence of the citizens. They fall, when the wise are banished from the public councils, because they dare to be honest, and the profligate are rewarded, because they flatter the people, in order to betray them."
- Justice Joseph Story - "Commentaries on the Constitution. . . ."

...God is my source.... Once you come to the same understanding, you start to make decisions in a different way.... So thats what we are thankful for, not what comes from government, but what matters. Family, love, the breath in our lungs, the food in our mouths, the doors that open, the doors that close, and the hand that guides our steps.

On Judge Napolitano's presentation, it is clear that the government is making a bid to be "the hand that guides our steps" — indeed, all our "steps." Which is why it is making a ceaseless, not-so-covert war on Christianity these days: They seek to exercise what formerly were regarded as divine powers — the power of command over each and every mortal in every particular of his life. There is nothing in the "private sphere" that cannot be politicized. Indeed, the private sphere has been practically abolished — along with God and man and what Christians call sin.

According to the Humanist religion — and have you noticed that, nowadays, a whole lot of atheists describe themselves as Humanists? — there is no such thing as "sin." There is only Crime....

But as Robert Hugh Benson put it, "Humanity-Religion could only be true if at least half of man's nature, aspirations, and sorrows were ignored."

Christianity expressly recognizes that man has a given nature; that he — made in the image of God — has reason and free will to shape and give scope to his personal aspirations; and that he suffers. Suffice it to say this is the human existential position. Thus, the single most important relationship that a man can have is his relationship with God — the Ground of his being as well as all of Creation; and also of logic and reason itself; the universal laws of Nature; and the very Source of the eternal, universal moral code.

Of course, the Humanist denies all this: He is a lover of Man (in the abstract, of course), and a hater of God. But the "Man" he loves is not such as you and I are. We are just so many criminals in prospect, that have to be restrained for our own good; or told what to do because we're too stupid to take care of ourselves and our families and our communities properly.

To me, such an understanding represents the ravings of a lunatic. Has such a person any knowledge of history???

And so sane people who wish to preserve their sanity at a time when madmen are running the show could make no better start than to consider your suggestion, to entertain God's Truth: That He is our Source, Alpha to Omega and at every point in between.

That Truth surely will make you free. No other "truth" can do that.

Thank you, dear brother in Christ, for your beautiful meditation!

Although I agree with all you expressed, this was particularly gripping...throat-grabbingly true:

“They [government] seek to exercise...the power of command over each and every mortal in every particular of his life. There is nothing in the “private sphere” that cannot be politicized. Indeed, the private sphere has been practically abolished — along with God and man and what Christians call sin. “

Immediately, I thought of the famous quote attributed to Dostoyevsky: “Without God, everything is permitted.”

No God, no Law, no Savior, no Cross, no FirstFruits Man, no Pentecost, no Truth, no Grace, no New Creation.

Just raw depraved power, serving itself.

Romans 1

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; 19 because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21 because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

This to me, dear thouworm, is the very touchstone of God’s Logos — His truth, His wisdom made manifest in the world of created Nature.

Of course, not everybody would agree with me here. For not everybody would agree on what is meant by “clearly seen” in the above passage.

The problem is exacerbated by the seeming fact that the meaning of the ideas of “sight” and “vision” — the means of “seeing” in the fullest sense — have been relentlessly reduced in the post-modern world. Today such words commonly are taken to refer to direct observation by an observer, as technologically aided, of self-selected, intended objects, processed via the optic apparatus thus to provide data for “the brain.”

In short, people who use these words in this way are entirely captured in the world susceptible to human direct perception. Which is clearly the material world, wherein “matter” [I’m still waiting for the definition of that word] is absolutely fundamental; it “evolves” by chance, that is, randomly, over practically infinite time. It is constrained only by the very un-random physical/chemical/mechanical laws of Nature. [I’m still waiting to hear where these laws come from]. Then the great leap into total irrationality (IMHO) occurs: What is not susceptible to “direct” perception on the basis of this abstract reduction does not exist.

And yet, what a desecration of the historical meanings of these words “sight” and “vision!” They do not omit “direct perception” within their meaning. But it is only a fairly minor part. The main thing is “sight” and “vision” historically [ever since Athens and Jerusalem] have implied the existence of another, qualitatively different — call it self-transcendent, or spiritual — extension or dimension, wherein the acts of perception and also of apperception — interior movements of the mind engaged in rational thought — can be reconciled as human reason. And can be validated as such by correspondence to Romans 1:20.

Howver, while I find Romans 1:20 thrillingly liberating, I gather others may feel that, as a criterion of truth — which just naturally entails moral considerations — it is far too constraining on their own ambitions and purposes.

You were so right to cite Dostoevsky on this very point: “If God does not exist, then all things are permissible.” The statement has been attributed to Ivan, in Brothers Karamazov — who is the narrator of the chapter, “The Grand Inquisitor.” His brother, Alyosha, who was in praparation to become a monk under the tutelege of Father Zossima, was stunned by Ivan’s “poem.” Indeed, it is a harrowing experience to read it even today. But Dostoevsky rebukes Ivan’s very nasty piece of business in a subsequent chapter, “The Marriage at Cana.” This chapter is replete with wondrous epiphanies…. But I digress, and must wrap up.

In closing, it is my belief (FWIW) that persons who deny God are in a very strange existential position: In their denial of God, they do not “kill” God; they just put Him in “eclipse” WRT their observational position — i.e., into a position where they can no longer “see” him. Somehow, they find this exercise “liberating.” But what they are really doing is cutting themselves off from the ground of their own Being, Truth, and Justice.

God does not cease to exist just because Man has lost faith in Him.

The faithless declare themselves to Him:

21 because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

Thank you so much for writing, dear thouworm! It’s good to hear from you, it’s been a while.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.