Thursday, August 28, 2008


28 August 2008

To believe without evidence or proof is an act of ignorance and folly. The credulous man loses himself in a labyrinth of contradictions; the man of sense examines and discusses that he may be consistent in his opinions. The honest man will bear contradiction because it gives rise to evidence. Violence is the argument of falsehood and to impose a creed by authority is the act and indication of a tyrant.
(C. F. Volney, The Ruins of Empires, 1792)

Beginning with my last posting on 22 August 2008 I am now going to undertake a extensive discussion about "security"- national, homeland, and personal.

America’s probable future with Humanistic Equalism: Philosophy for Ethical Government will be drastically different and greatly improved compared to the discomfort, division, and inevitable decline anticipated by the continuation of our conditioned reflexive habit of opposing extreme and fundamental change. The human tendency toward ‘habit’ is, I believe, as instinctive and natural as our fear of the unknown or always seeking the path of least resistance. It is reasonable to conclude that the human proclivity to ‘habit’ is related to self-preservation, the survival instinct. Therefore logic dictates that on some level within the human psyche habit equates with security.

What exactly is ‘security’? Is security a feeling? Is security tangible, verifiable? Can one buy security, or guarantee it? How much might security cost? Who or where would one pay? Is it a concept, a principle, a condition? From what does security arise? Is it an end or a means? Is the argument or question of security with regard to the United States actually about security? Is there a difference between personal security and national security? Is national security even possible? For that matter, is personal security possible? If asked, "Are you secure?" or, "Is the experience of your daily life one of security?" What conditions would have to exist and what process would be used to enable one to respond, "Yes"? What is security?

I submit that ‘security’ in America is a fallacy; that is, a false notion with the quality of being deceptive. Consulting the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 3rd Edition, ‘security’ is defined in a number of ways relevant to the context of this examination.

For example, one definition of security is ‘freedom from risk or danger." A person or nation can never achieve freedom from risk or danger. Another definition is "freedom from doubt, anxiety, or fear." This too, is unattainable. Other definitions state that security is "something that gives or assures safety; such as building or body guards, measures adopted by government to prevent espionage, sabotage, or attack; and finally,security is defined as measures adopted by businesses or homeowners to prevent a crime such as burglary or assault."

Neither guards nor measures or laws are capable of providing or assuring safety to individual persons or a nation. At the very most ‘security’ is a desire, a goal, like perfection, to be striven for but ultimately never achieved. Therefore, within the context of this inquiry and analysis, ‘security’ is a fallacy. Security is false because it is always something "we need." It is deceptive because it can never be shown to exist, it cannot be accurately verified or measured. Think about that. Look back through our history. You will find that defense and security is always something we need more of. Ironically, we always need more precisely because how much we have (or do not have) cannot be demonstrated. So, the power of the idea of security to manipulate populations of citizens arises out of the fact it is unknown and unknowable, a condition rife with fear.

Security is a fallacy with primordial power. It is the kind of self-interested and manipulative notion that is perfect for inclusion in American mythology and exploitation by machinery of the elite Status Quo minority faction – America’s ruling class. The most obvious purpose of security is to safeguard and sustain control of wealth and power. Security, especially ‘national security’, is the language of domination and subjugation, of capitalists and corporatists, and of aristocracy and privilege. If this seems incredible, start listening, look back through history; security is always the purview of wealth, power, and authority. And it is always the poor and common people that pay for it and die for it.

Cultivating the myth of security in America is the means to command, to control, and to profit. Defenders of the Status Quo insist that they are the main source responsible for our nation’s mythological quest for security. A closer reading of America’s traditional historical myth regarding its actual security achievements is instructive. It reveals the fallacious and deceptive nature of security for the protection and purpose of special interest. Our security is perpetrated and inflicted by government agencies upon citizens, rather than safety and protection that is actually provided for the people. Security predicated on Humanistic Equalism: Philosophy for Ethical Government is far superior to the current model.

Our examination of "security" will continue next time. Make a comment if you like and please tell others about this blog. Give Peace a chance.
James B. Tinsley, B.A.

Friday, August 22, 2008

Gaza-Denver-Democratic Convention-Joe Biden-How Many Houses?

21 August 2008

What is the case for citizens of the United States rufusing to accept chang and fighting with all their might to keep the Status Quo in place: because it is familiar and convenient; because it will be really hard, confusing, and scary to act otherwise. To challenge the power structure of the Status Quo would interfere with our comfort. Rather than only being concerned about some selfish special interest, getting what we want when we want it like spoiled children, citizens will have to think of our nation and act like mature adults. Citizens believe, for the most part, they must not upset the Status Quo, but instead manage it with compromise so as to protect the property, profit, power, and position currently held and manipulated by the elite minority faction. I have also presented the basic philosophy, system, principles and process of Humanistic Equalism: Philosophy for Ethical Government, its desired ends and the means to achieve them. Do we choose people and progress, or the Status Quo in order to achieve the greatest degree of security for our nation and ourselves?

“National Security” by the Status Quo only exists as statistics and delusion. It is a conceptual or virtual product. The need or demand for national security is stimulated among citizens by the president, congress, and media, which use fear and terror as the core of its marketing strategy. By continually terrorizing America’s general population and creating a demand, our Status Quo government is free to divert an endless flow of taxpayer dollars and public wealth to private sector corporatists and disaster complex capitalists.

To be sure there is lots of flash and bang and bodies contained in the security product manufactured by government, media and capitalist interests but it is nothing more than propaganda and show. As a tangible measurable and verifiable substance security in America is not apparent, and it cannot be demonstrated to exist. The entire national security manufacturing procedure, from creating the demand to selling the conceptual product to citizens, is just another method of protecting and sustaining the position and domination of the super rich and religiously influential; the Status Quo.

The United States is now spending nearly half its annual federal budget – more than one Trillion tax dollars – to manufacture and sustain this delusion of so-called National and Homeland Security. The Status Quo, in full support of the elite minority faction, keep telling us we can get even more security by invading and occupying some nations and by threatening others. Pretending that America is safe and citizens are free, we are neither.

It is more than a general consensus in 2008 that security in the United States is doubtful. In spite of all the borrowing and spending by congress and the executive, in spite of the U.S.A. Patriot Act, war, torture, degenerating civil rights and liberty. In spite of a vengeful fundamentalist unitary executive who acts like a king, issuing decree by executive order and legislative signing statement, the United States is impotent against terrorists and terrorism.

Not even by eliminating due process, habeas corpus and keeping people imprisoned for years without justification or charges, or funding American companies to create mercenary security forces that oversee a growing franchise of torture facilities around the world is able to make us truly secure. Nothing being done or supported by the existing power structure is making the United States, its citizens and its interests, any safer today than we were on 10 September 2001. In fact there is every indication that our nation is more vulnerable and likely to be attacked now because the only thing about security the Status Quo is interested in is its earnings and profits.

Based on the evidence and our experience thus far, it must be concluded that there is not and cannot be any security by keeping the Status Quo. America’s future security, if left to the Status Quo, will not improve or, for that matter, change. It will remain as it is; the Status Quo. Our nation’s ominous security outlook was captured earlier in the 2008 presidential campaign. One of the candidates was fond of saying that the security challenge for the United States in the foreseeable future is a transcendental one; it is the very real and serious danger posed by radical Islamo-fascists.

Nearly all the presidential candidates of both major parties, to some degree or other, expressed a belief that our future security at home and abroad is threatened by this fundamentalist element. Simply stated, this is the position of those that support and defend the Status Quo. Our biggest and most serious security challenge is not transcendental, nor is it radical Islam or terrorism. The obstacle to real security and peace is American citizens refusing to demand that the forces of government and institutions of authority make progress, prosperity, and the condition of citizens lives the focus and objective of all government action and function. Our only real obstacle is American hubris, ignorance and cupidity.

More soon. Give Peace a chance.
James B. Tinsley,B.A.

Thursday, August 7, 2008


7 August 2008

Since 16 June 2008 I have used my postings to define, explain, and demonstrate Humanistic Equalism: Philosophy for Ethical Government. Next, I intend to begin a long term exploration as to how its adoption as the foundation for legislation and policy will transform the nature of government. That is to say the meaning, function, and purpose of government. In the course of this expanded and more detailed discussion I will strive to apply the philosophy of Humanistic Equalism, as well as, the Three-question Test process to current and on-going conditions and events.

But first, I want to establish some context, construct the proper frame through which this blog- SHIFT OF POWER - its contents and my assertions should be received, perceived, and considered. By this I mean that I want to clarify and separate my personal feelings and desires from what I am proposing. Or, to put it another way, make it as clear as possible that what I would to change things and fix things if I had the power is quite different from what will be the result of a system and process of government based upon Humanistic Equalism: Philosophy for Ethical Government.

For example, I would make soliciting money by any religion or ministry a crime of fraud with very harsh punishment. If people wish to contribute or tithe that is not a problem; but for a priest, preacher, minister, Pope or any religious authority to ASK for contributions, tithes, or suggest in any way that a believer must or should give money to any religion or church or ministry is something I consider to be fraud by deception. Why? Because what is being done, either explicitly or implicitly, is believers are being told that by giving money they will in some fashion or other gain some degree of favor and consideration by the God-figure of that particular religion. Whether that God-figure is believed to be a god of substance with a body and physical attributes. Or, is thought to be a force such as a "universal force", " cause and effect", or "supernatural creator". But, as I said, this is my personal feeling and desire and has absolutely nothing to do with Humanistic Equalism: Philosophy for Ethical Government and my presentation of it.

Humanistic Equalism, as offered and presented in my manuscript and subsequently at this blog-site, concerns government - power- ruling authority - what it does and how it's citizens, the people, are treated. It is about changing government, not people. That is, Humanistic Equalism: Philosophy for Ethical Government is NOT about trying to change the way people treat each other, what they believe in, why or how they worship. People are self-interested, self-promoting, self-protecting animals that are in some ways and to some degree more intellectually developed and advanced than other animals. And it is for precisely this reason that an ethical government institution should be the ultimate arbiter for promoting human progress, prosperity and happiness, and guarantor of absolutely equal status, privileges, and rights for every citizen.

It is very important that readers know and keep in mind from this point and going forward, with respect to religion in general, and Christian orthodoxy in particular, that in my daily life, my interaction and dealing in business and society, I recognize, as well as, practice what I believe government should do. While my most primal instinct in conjunction with my observation and informed reasoning lead me to conclude that religion, specifically orthodox Christian dogma, doctrine and creed, is the scourge of humanity; nothing would make me happier than to see it disappear from all but the account of history. As a citizen of the United States of America I am willing to give my life so that every citizen, every other person, has the right and opportunity to believe and practice whatever they wish. That is, as long as it is kept strictly outside of the law, function, and purview of government.

In other words, every citizen, every person should have this, and any other right that I claim for myself. I believe that every individual must freely give to every other person any and all rights they would claim for their self. I do not DISlike or believe that most Christians are intentionally cruel, mean, evil and nasty. They are only doing what they have been taught and accepted as true and correct. What I ABHOR and do believe is that the dogma, doctrine and creed established by any orthodoxy, but especially Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, is a lie that teaches its adherents intentionally cruel, mean, evil and nasty behaviors.

These particular religious beliefs instruct believers to murder non-believers, support and justify slavery, and view humans as subservient creations, playthings, children to be controlled, reprimanded, smited, and damned to eternal suffering. All at the caprice of some supposed supreme being, creator, force or God. Orthodox religion teaches that Humans are less-than. Whereas, I believe, and the credible evidence supports my belief, that human beings are the highest intelligence and the only source of power, hope, and salvation that exists in the known universe.

The point is, please do not take anything I say about religious orthodoxy personally. I do not care what you, or anyone believes; nor do I have any feelings about or when, where or how a person may choose to worship or pray. My work- this blog - as well as, Humanistic Equalism: Philosophy for Ethical Government, everything I am now doing and will most likely do until my death is what little I can to advance two fundamental causes.

First, to expose and prove through clear reasonable evidence the fraud of
religious and Christian orthodoxy, and its destructive effect on humanity and citizens when integrated with government.

Second, to change the meaning, purpose, and function of government so that it is ethical, existing to support and promote progress, prosperity, and happiness serving the needs of the people by establishing and maintaining absolutely equal status, privileges, and rights for all citizens. That is to say, ethical government is one that puts continual improvement in the condition of all citizen's lives and advancing civilization ahead of, and over the protection of profit, power, position and property.

Our current government is corrupt, ineffective, dictatorial and broken beyond repair in its present form and system. If the human species is to evolve, advance and develop we must realize and acknowledge that people - human beings - humanity - is, as far as we know, all that is truly important; that the rights of people - Human Rights - is the only thing supreme enough to be envisioned and thought of as God.
James B. Tinsley, B.A.