We have talked alot about the notion of Freewill (Defined here), but we are not here to debate the notion of and existence of Freewill, from a Federalist 2.0 perspective the idea and implementation of Freewill is real and true. There are folks in the world that are making a living off of convincing others that there is no such thing as Freewill. Those philosophers are noted below:
'Trick Slattery - Breaking the Free Will Illusion
Jonathan M. S. Pearce - Free Will?: An investigation into whether we have free will, or whether I was always going to write this book
We can contrast this with the philosophers that do argue for the existence of Freewill, this includes Plato, Socrates and Aristotle. If you are interested in the notion of Freewill and its history, this piece, The History of the Free Will Problem, was one of the best I could find.
This description of Freewill and the necessity for the discussion to be within the "Deterministic" causes and how one suffers in the nature of the world, from a Federalist 2.0 view, is that the nature of mankind, when not under undue suffering with means to stop it, will continue down the same path as they are accustomed. But if given the knowledge and the means to stop such suffering (Oppression of the Mind and Soul to do what we don't want to do and the Oppression of cutting off or eliminating options or Opportunities) we will change the course of our existence. Enforcing the notion that we CAN determine our government from reflection and choice and in doing so, inadvertently providing a proof that a Higher Power exists.
For the past several weeks I have been contemplating this concept and needing the extra time to further outline these thoughts when a friend passed along this piece from one of the conservative bloggers named Charlie Kirk. He was interviewing John MacArthur (a Pastor for Grace Church in California) on one of his shows and Pastor MacArthur came upon something that resonated with the notion of the Federalist 2.0 perspective that we should bring to bear in our current discussion.
Please listen to the entire piece here, you may not agree with all the items noted on this broadcast, but there are some threads of truth here that we should consider given we have a NON-secular point of view and are trying to tie political decisions and how they directly impact Freewill.
The conversation covers a number of topics the most interesting from the Federalist 2.0 perspective are these three perspectives:
A brief focus on what the Bible says about governance, particularly in Romans 13.
There are four different constraints as viewed by Christianity as a method to control moral behavior.
The impact of current cultural norms around nihilism and some of the consequences of this perspective within society.
Let’s address the first piece they discussed, where it is relevant to our Federalist 2.0 philosophy, that is the notion and understanding that there is a set of moral rights or moral justification for the notion of government and within a moral perspective within that government it should have a responsibility for two things:
One to protect those that are good
Two to be a terror to those that are bad or those which do evil
From this perspective we begin to see the true purpose of a government or a group of people that are in a position to provide protection for those that are good citizens. Where if we go down this route then we need to define what is the notion or idea of good. The second aspect of the governing body is to be able to understand how a government can use their power to punish those that are evil which means we have to define what it means to be evil.
From a purely philosophical standpoint we can spend many lifetimes debating what is the definition of good and the definition of evil in regards to human behavior. But this isn’t our objective, the objective is to better understand how we can be or create a government that allows the greatest freedom to the citizens of that country where those that are "good" rise to the top and those that are "evil" are minimized and marginalized. In doing that we can only really pivot off of our first set of posts around and discussions around the notion of Freewill.
Within these discussions of Freewill we defined the notion of Freewill as something that is given to us by a Higher Power and through that gift there’s two aspects that need to be managed; one is the oppression of Freewill and the second is the constraint of the options we have within Freewill. As such, from a Federalist 2.0 point of view, you then need to define "good" as anything that occurs within the governments perspective that prevents oppression of Freewill and protects and expands the options or opportunities that one has within a society.
So what this does for us is it SHORTCUTS the discussion around what is "good" and allows us to not get entangled in the question "who is God" and how do we define "good" within a religious perspective. Mind you, these are great questions from a theology perspective, but for the purposes of governance, we are focused on ensuring that religion is orthogonal to the governance of people. We will explain later, in another blog post, why this is so.
Now let's turn to what is "evil" from a Federalist 2.0 perspective. We must focus in on that which we know to be true, that we are all citizens and that no citizen has the right or responsibility to oversee another citizen nor do they have the right to constrain or limit the opportunities that citizen has no matter the cost or intent.
So this may cause severe angst and may be a great concern for those of you that are predominantly secular in nature. We must believe and understand when given the opportunities and when given the need that humans citizens will rise to the occasion. The best example personally that I can provide an example for is the notion and rules and laws governing recycling. It is true that myself and many other people would continue to recycle even if the laws and constraints around recycling were lifted within the county or city.
From this discussion with the Pastor, we come to the pinnacle of the understanding that we have a responsibility to provide government to the citizens such that it is done in such a way that will protect the "good" or "Right Minded" citizens from those that hold the notion of evil in their minds and actions. This is the notion of protecting those that "do" good or those that we can call righteous for those that are right minded is paramount to the existence of the society, and as such necessary for the existence of the government. This is why the notion of "Justice" is directly rooted in the notion of "Righteousness" or "Right Minded" thinking.
"1 Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities,for there is no authority except that which God has established.The authorities that exist have been established by God.
2 Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted,and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves.
3 For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and you will be commended.
4 For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.
5 Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also as a matter of conscience."
This conversation that we see with the pastor in this video really sheds some light on the concepts that I’ve been worried about, it is my concern rooted in trying to better understand what does it mean to implement the notion of government properly and what should we do to have it be implemented properly. So, how can one be able to make a decision that government is imposing on the rights and responsibilities of citizens? And at which point can we say we no longer have allegiance to the government? From this discussion we see this concept was even written in a religious texts (Romans 13) and we need to believe and understand that when that government no longer is protecting those that do "good" (Or are Right Minded in Character) or those that are righteous and seek the betterment of their fellow man, that government looses their authority. Additionally, when the government no longer punishing those that are "evil" and in fact when the government ensures those that do not seek the well-being of another, those that seek to destroy that which has been built, are set free to harm again; one can see it is REASONABLE and NORMAL for an INDIVIDUAL to long for the end of such government and can see that this kind of government no longer has the authority to oversee and manage the Freewill of its citizens.
How does this really allow us to stitch together some defining points and give us a framework in which we can discern and make those kinds of decisions? We can discover this with the conversation with the pastor, in that they covered a number of topics which, for the most part, are interesting from the Federalist 2.0 point of view would be the following 4 Barriers to immoral behavior as described by Pastor MacArthur:
"Barrier number one is the law of God written in the heart with the weapon as the conscience.... Where these restraints are currently being attacked in a society that looks like the Jerry Springer show."
"Barrier number two is the family with the family passing righteousness from one generation to the next. with the weapon being the stick for use with the children to teach them there are consequences to bad behavior."
"The next barrier (3rd) is the police and the punishment of the sword, where they try to keep and maintain civil order." through the use of force.
The last barrier (4th), "The final restraint is the church, The church is the salt and light in the world and has the ultimate challenge is not punishment but transformation through the word of God."
Pastor John MacArthur
Here at the Federalist 2.0 it is important that we are clear that we are not a secular perspective movement; we believe that there is a need and understanding of the role and notion of a Higher Power of the idea of God in the world and with that idea resulting consequences that have to follow in how we govern the citizens of the country. Hence we need to be clear that we’re not advocating for a specific religion we are only utilizing those religious perspectives to help best frame the world in which we can become the best version of ourselves and follow the true intentions of a higher concept other than our most primal needs and desires.
With that we then must take these four barriers and or constraints as described by the pastor discussed above and use them with the lens of the Federalist 2.0 to have perspective that we can better define within the concept that political power does impact Freewill. With that we are able to conceptualize the following aspects of moral alignment that impact Freewill as descried above:
The first aspect of moral alignment, as humans on this planet we have innate sense of right and wrong and within that sense of right and wrong, when we do wrong, we have the concept and understanding that we have done something wrong.
Particularly when we do wrong against another individual by lying cheating stealing and/or verbally abusing and/or physically harming someone it takes a toll on our conscience.
This capacity and understanding that there is a moral compass that lies deep within us is an important feature that needs to be considered within a political construct.
Such that when a political government that enforces and recognizes the construct of doing right and wrong and supporting any sort of penalties that might accompany the doing a wrong is important for the overall sanity of an individual.
Therefore if a government takes action and puts in policies and efforts to eliminate this dynamic this can lead to unintended consequences that encourage others to do additional harm.
We can see some of these policies play out in the form of banning the notion of God from school as well as the encouragement and determination that bad feelings of guilt should be ignored and understanding that there shouldn’t be any consequences for those behaviors that negatively impact another human' s Freewill, this puts the general population ill at ease.
The second aspect of moral alignment is managing a moral compass which primarily resides in the family and when we live amongst other siblings within the context of a father and mother we directly are impacted by our behaviors which may be positive or negative.
Overtime if we are guided appropriately we can best assign and understand what our behaviors that are considered good in a situation and then learn the negative consequences of behaviors that are bad.
This knowledge and understanding is rooted in the family and any structural political framework that seeks to destroy the family destroys that dynamic.
Policies that encourage the breaking of the family unit and the dynamic of positive and negative feedback to the poor souls learning to navigate the world impacts those children by not allowing them to grow and make mistakes, thus harming the character as those little adults grow into large adults and then have to seek to understand the world without the skills to tell the difference.
The third aspect of moral alignment is within the social construct that we call the justice system and the use of the police to enforce those laws. Where the police system's primary charge is to punish those people that are doing evil. The police charge is not intended to be a social experiment in guiding unruly individuals, these systems are needing to be external to the judicial system itself. (NOTE: We are not saying that we cannot try to help people within the system, but the effort to help can result in strange arrangements that endanger the broader citizens, and this should be expected when tried.)
Their primary focus is to understand who is harming other individuals based on the laws to find and bring in those people that choose to harm to justice or another words bring those people to a situation in which they can become right minded and how they think and in their character.
If and when the politics of the society intercede or twist the objectives for the judicial system where the police fail in enforcing and instituting objectives of a natural functioning for a society, such that the needs of the citizens are ignored, those which choose to pursue evil do so without any recourse by the judicial system, the police and the citizens.
At which point the citizens then live in fear and live with less hope that they can be safe and cannot move about their society with some sense of purpose. Some may become so desperate they by themselves turn to the acts of evil in order to operate within a chaotic environment with some sense of success.
The final fourth aspect of moral alignment is the necessity of a religious base and belief which can manifest itself in many different forms depending on the culture but in short we can refer to it as the sense of church.
The final constraint within a moral aspect is the necessity of a religious base and belief which can manifest itself in many different forms depending on the culture but I’m sure we can refer to it as the sense of church.
This is the purpose of the federal government intentions on the notion of God is to NOT advocate for a specific religion; it’s critical that we define the need in the utilization of a religious entity within the society as being given the capacity to alter the minds and hearts of individuals that have chosen the wrong path and have not sought forgiveness in their thoughts and deeds.
When the political powers move to eliminate and or destroy any pursuit by citizens to reconcile their hearts and their conscience within a religious construct these actions are going to be the last straw in which a society will not be able to suffer any longer.
If a political class moves to eliminate or constrain the beliefs and religious underpinnings of a society they do so at their own pearl since this mechanism is the last straw in protecting the natural rights of those citizens within a society. The moment this occurs, the general citizens may become unhinged and unexpected results will start.
It is critical to understand that as a point of view from the Federalist 2.0 we are in no way advocating for violence or uprising or any effective measures that impact another’s freewill and personal space. We are fortunate enough to understand that the founding fathers instituted the natural mechanisms to fight this natural tendency of groups of people to formulate and grow in conflict. This Constitution provides us with recourse to elect those into office such that these wrongs can be set right.
As long as there is a group of people where they believe that there’s a natural tendency for men and women to understand and know there is a right and what is wrong; with that natural tendency of conscience or call it guilt, it helps guide us in making the right decisions. As long as these people formulate into family units and properly develop and procreate to form a full family unit with children they will properly educate their young to the sense of right and wrong and how to conduct oneself and move about within society. As long as these individuals that have a conscience and desire to live within the family unit maintain their integrity and their character they will always seek a government with the purpose to support the good and punish the evil in doing so they will maintain a solid police force to be the mechanism for doing so. And as long as these people know there is a stronger Higher Power which can assist in helping some understand and grow with the knowledge of what is right and what is wrong and as long as they desire to live within a family unit and have their social interactions managed within a Judicial system that utilizes the police to enforce punishment to those that seek to do evil, these people will always have the desire to congregate and seek the natural expression in guidance from a Higher Power where within that desire people will formulate churches and religious entities to help facilitate that desire.
As such these four moral guiding posts are key and integral to success of a society and the implementation of these through the mechanisms of a church or religious group which is orthogonal to our overall Federalist 2.0 framework and structure that helps these entities live and breathe freely to address the personal ills of the citizens. Such that we can say it is truth and fact that Freewill is directly impacted by those that seek to use political policy to eradicate or disturb the natural sense of good and evil; to disturb the natural progression and ability to keep all individuals within a family unit to best understand how their normal behavior impacts individuals. As well when political Policies are implemented to eradicate and disturb the natural gathering of individuals within a religion, it is the last straw for the moral codes that humans possess within the human society.
Were the mechanism that the founding fathers provided to us is the wide distribution of power across many individuals whether it be the senators in the Senate or the representatives in the House of Representatives to the President of the United States; each one possessing powers to keep in check those people acting without the best interest of society as a whole. There may be times as the founders expected that groups of people find their way around the political system and do their best move and shape the population such that their desires and goals can be achieved, at the expense of society. But the founders knew at some point there would be oppression and the constraints implemented in the constitution could be implemented where someone somewhere in that society would find the courage and truth and present the truth to the citizens who have been affected the most to effectively make changes to best guide that society.
It becomes clear that there are multiple ways of looking at it and there may be ways to look at this approach in ways that need us to believe if you’re not able to support these four moral constructs, that there’s something else wrong with society that needs to be addressed, such as an individual's maturity. With that thought in mind I stumbled upon another video that discussed the notion of maturity within a political construct. The following post you see here describes what that maturity looks like:
This video discusses the five aspects / characteristics of a mature individual as discovered by Dr. Stephen Marmer. These characteristics as he’s defined show an individual would have the ability to successfully navigate in their environment and be a positive contributor to society. Those aspects of character are as follows:
This first aspect is deciding to take control of your life and when we talk about control we talk about controlling yourself as an individual to become a better person and not blame others for the happenstance or challenges that you face in life.
Seven second aspect is to take responsibility, and that means being responsible for the decisions that you make and being cognizant of the mistakes you make and making efforts to amend those mistakes. It also means taking on responsibilities such as a family and a job where people are counting on you and expecting the level of performance to help the group as a whole.
The third aspect of a mature individual is someone who has the knowledge understanding to be able to contain their emotions. In containing emotions it is the need to contain those emotions that may be negative; preventing ourselves from lashing out at those we may feel angry; being mature enough in directing our emotions to other things when an outburst or disagreement or argument would not be appropriate in developing and ensuring a relationship would grow stronger.
The fourth point of maturity is to have the capacity to have perspective, this is the ability to observe situations and events that happened to you in order to be able to see the events in a broader context, thus reducing their emotional impact on oneself. Those without perspective in their life will do or say things that short circuit their ability to grow and prosper for themselves and their family.
The fifth aspect of maturity is having ability to develop a deep understanding of another individual’s feelings and emotions and desires. This takes understanding to a much higher level and we reflect on another person's voice and how they feel in their story where they have emotions or feelings. We spend the time and effort to retell the story such that the other person has a sense and belief that you’re understanding what it is they struggle with. With this approach we can orient ourselves and determine what appropriate next steps we can take to help our friends or business partners be successful and in doing so we navigate the waters of life and society.
You may say to me, what do both of these lists have to do with the notion of Policy and it's impact to Freewill? It has everything to do with Freewill, the nature of mankind has its basis in individual freedoms and the nature of mankind‘s struggle on this place we call earth. Hence the lesson we learn is that no person gets out alive, that this time on this planet is best served through a social system that best supports this realization. That type of system minimizes the impacts we talked about before by supporting the barriers mentioned by Pastor MacAurther and the system must support the opportunity to mature that Dr. Marmer discussed. As such we see very real policy impacting both the ability of the barriers to function and the maturity to prevail.
As we mentioned before, as groups grow and become more powerful and more needy for the citizens to support the groups nonsense, the temptation to control these two mechanisms of BARRIERS and MATURITY becomes paramount to the long term success of that group. Why? The larger the political group and more freedom those groups have to oppress the smaller groups, these groups will indulge in their specific vices. Parties with deviant behavior with excessive drinking and use of drugs will become the norm for that group that wields their power with abandon. These actions lead then to movements to “change the government” with the most like goal to impose a permanent political class.
One might say, "How can this be?" What is the evidence to be able to convey such things and call them truth? As you may have noted, we did not finish the discussion with Pastor MacAurther around the impact of current cultural norms around nihilism and some of the consequences of this perspective within society. When we break down the BARRIERS for morality and when we eliminate the processes for MATURITY, we create individuals that have nothing to believe and nothing to live for, and in time become nihilistic in nature. When that happens, they have succumbed to the notion that violence is a real and natural solution to their empty souls. When that happens, these individuals find shelter in violence and pleasure in destroying those that have defined peace in their hearts and purpose in their being. If you have a chance, listen carefully to the last half of that piece and pay attention to the characteristics they discuss and results they see. They will hit a cord I am sure as they describe the trajectory we now face with the culture at hand.
The final say for this blog post is this, there MUST be the realization that the purpose of government is to be a GUARD to the mechanisms in supporting the BARRIERS to morality and it's cleansing effects and that the government must support and enhance the mechanisms for maturity, NOT BY PRESCRIPTION but by staying out of it. Not influencing it, not trying to guide it. Why? For there is a Higher Power and with the mechanisms for resolution (Justice) the citizens will figure it out in a peaceful manner. The advocation for NOTHING from a policy perspective is the stronger ADVOCATE for the right antidote to help the citizens heal their whoas and challenges.
In the creation of the Federalist 2.0, it is our goal and commitment to you the reader, to share with you the pieces of that original intent of the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and why it is critical that we claim this moral imperative to ensure the health and safety of our future generations and our capacity to continue as the Originally Planned United States of America. Once again, through that vision and goal, as Publius I do commit and declare from this day forward, that if myself or others that are deemed to be worthy representations of Publius, we will defend the BARRIERS to the cleansing of the citizen's moral journey and enhance and promote the MATURITY of the citizens through right mined policy and overall efforts.
Come join the Federalist 2.0 effort, help us resurrect the beliefs and understandings that made this United States of America the greatest nation on the planet to date. Let's make America great once more!
In the end, what do you have to lose?.... Maybe you can be Publius too?
- Publius
(C) 2020 Federalist2.org
(TM) Federalist 2.0
NOTE: In Our next post we will look at, "Political Power, unchecked, will lead to Tyranny", a deeper dive into the notions that when we destroy the BARRIERS and MATURITY mechanisms to promote a group's power, we marshal in the mechanism that will ultimately lead to Tyranny.
Comments