Irishone21
Well-Known Member
You don't have to read this... but if you have anythign to say about security, surveillance, an open society, privacy, reformation, ect... don't by shy.
Let the righteous be righteous, and let the children play.
Conservatism makes it harder to recognize God’s lessons. When man reprimands man it feels and usually is revenge, and the victim feels violated, and thus becomes resentful. When God reprimands man, the punishment or imposed ramifications some call karma is always justice, and one usually appreciates the guidance, after the initial anger subsides and the tears begin, which is called repent, especially once one comes too terms with the revelation that when God chastises us, it is a sign of His Love for us, as it is better to be reproached than ignored by our Almighty Father. The more elusively man reprimands man (i.e. the cloak and dagger tactics of bigbrother) the more difficult it is to decipher between the work of God and that of man. In addition, if society is governed too conservatively, people tend to live in fear of the law, as oppose to living in respect for the law. People, may, in effect, become apathetic or rebellious, as if they have abandoned or accelerated their fight for rights, and the value of society may deplete. Conservatives need to realize conservatism is a stepping stop towards liberalism. Once society loses control, their liberties, however, will subsequently be constrained, but the aim, for government, is to communicate with the people, seeking to grant them the trust they deserve, providing incentives and goals that will make law more lenient as society progresses. Keep in mind though, if law has gotten too complex or unjust, it must be simplified for the people have already lost sight of their values, or have become too pressured to be able to have the strength to apply virtues to everyday life, even if that is the desire of the individual. This cannot be done effectively without explaining intentions beforehand. All actions of the government, especially those involving legislation must be explicitly explained to the people. Now, law is so complex, people lost interest, creating a shockingly appalling dichotomy, which is why simplification of the law is a must. In fact, laws, and issues involving never ending debates should not merely be the responsibility of elected officials, but the responsibility of a properly informed public, no matter the population, as only vote can determine the real opinions of the people. There is a problem with each individuals capability to comprehend divinity, but in regards to war, those against it, must be giving equal if not, more power, attention, and leadership, than those for it, even if they are minority. Rarely do circumstances call for war, but when they do, we must make decisions cautiously, empathetically and decisively, assuring the rival we are not against them, we are merely defending the innocence. We must adamantly work towards amending hostilities and implementing the power of love to overcome evil and save, not defeat, the inflicted rival. We must respect all opinions equally, and always do whatever is in our power to help those in need, without imposing on anyone’s life uninvited. I will explain this further later. When more laws must be imposed, the society is in its earlier stages, regardless of the cycle. It is always better to achieve order by expressing value than imposing law, and this should be the goal of all government officials. Increased pressure caused by war, tends to initiate a policy that partakes in deception, becoming a product of fear. In such an occasion, assumption inflicts decision makers, to who may accuse others or as a result act prematurely, prior to achieving unity either with society or each other. Misinterpretation, over emphasis, and deceiving mechanization of past history and philosophy which invents an illusionary art of war; is the primary cause of flawed actions, without negating the importance of philosophy and past in guiding present. Often, whomever advocates primitive, yet magnificent documents such as the “Art of War,” or “The Prince” will do all that is in their power to subjugate the opposition, isolating them, draining their resources, attacking their beliefs, and weakening the subjects faith, until the subject feels despondent, and surrenders into humiliation. This is not a victory. It usually is only a postponement. In such a case further conflict can only be prevented by those who take blame for the flawed action of their past leaders, seeking clemency to abate any remaining grudge and attain reconciliation or peace, which is the only thing worthy of being called victory in war, or by merely recreating a reputation and separating oneself from past conflict. War is not a game, so it should not be treated as such. In war one must know himself, his enemy, and most of all God. Knowing and following God is most important, for in such a case; one can all together avoid war, as he will be gifted with the leadership skills and identity that demands respect, and thus achieves security. When a government is divided, and reluctant to compromise, political polarization may occur, and both sides may lose sight of their values, slipping into irrationality caused by the abuse of rationality, or causing those involved to contribute to extreme policies, corruption, mirror images, unnecessary condemnations or assumptions and judgments, all of which are regressive and blinding to the prudence of the pervaded organization. It is then the obligation of the remaining enlightened ones, often outsiders, to reunite the people and/or awaken the government to do so in order to restore value, and reform the government. This is called Revolution. Although I frequently propagate this, and reiterate the same truths, which people, unfortunately, have yet to react to accordingly. I am not a lobbyist; I just fear we have surpassed the point where in which we must take it upon ourselves to redirect the government we desire to consent to. However, even though I talk about Revolution, I do not stand against the government, I merely awaken them to the possibility of dissent to cause them to consider their actions, compelling them to mitigate a disconcerted society by abiding by the morally upright mentality, obliged to voice its opinion.
Is this contrivance proverbial?
Let the righteous be righteous, and let the children play.
Conservatism makes it harder to recognize God’s lessons. When man reprimands man it feels and usually is revenge, and the victim feels violated, and thus becomes resentful. When God reprimands man, the punishment or imposed ramifications some call karma is always justice, and one usually appreciates the guidance, after the initial anger subsides and the tears begin, which is called repent, especially once one comes too terms with the revelation that when God chastises us, it is a sign of His Love for us, as it is better to be reproached than ignored by our Almighty Father. The more elusively man reprimands man (i.e. the cloak and dagger tactics of bigbrother) the more difficult it is to decipher between the work of God and that of man. In addition, if society is governed too conservatively, people tend to live in fear of the law, as oppose to living in respect for the law. People, may, in effect, become apathetic or rebellious, as if they have abandoned or accelerated their fight for rights, and the value of society may deplete. Conservatives need to realize conservatism is a stepping stop towards liberalism. Once society loses control, their liberties, however, will subsequently be constrained, but the aim, for government, is to communicate with the people, seeking to grant them the trust they deserve, providing incentives and goals that will make law more lenient as society progresses. Keep in mind though, if law has gotten too complex or unjust, it must be simplified for the people have already lost sight of their values, or have become too pressured to be able to have the strength to apply virtues to everyday life, even if that is the desire of the individual. This cannot be done effectively without explaining intentions beforehand. All actions of the government, especially those involving legislation must be explicitly explained to the people. Now, law is so complex, people lost interest, creating a shockingly appalling dichotomy, which is why simplification of the law is a must. In fact, laws, and issues involving never ending debates should not merely be the responsibility of elected officials, but the responsibility of a properly informed public, no matter the population, as only vote can determine the real opinions of the people. There is a problem with each individuals capability to comprehend divinity, but in regards to war, those against it, must be giving equal if not, more power, attention, and leadership, than those for it, even if they are minority. Rarely do circumstances call for war, but when they do, we must make decisions cautiously, empathetically and decisively, assuring the rival we are not against them, we are merely defending the innocence. We must adamantly work towards amending hostilities and implementing the power of love to overcome evil and save, not defeat, the inflicted rival. We must respect all opinions equally, and always do whatever is in our power to help those in need, without imposing on anyone’s life uninvited. I will explain this further later. When more laws must be imposed, the society is in its earlier stages, regardless of the cycle. It is always better to achieve order by expressing value than imposing law, and this should be the goal of all government officials. Increased pressure caused by war, tends to initiate a policy that partakes in deception, becoming a product of fear. In such an occasion, assumption inflicts decision makers, to who may accuse others or as a result act prematurely, prior to achieving unity either with society or each other. Misinterpretation, over emphasis, and deceiving mechanization of past history and philosophy which invents an illusionary art of war; is the primary cause of flawed actions, without negating the importance of philosophy and past in guiding present. Often, whomever advocates primitive, yet magnificent documents such as the “Art of War,” or “The Prince” will do all that is in their power to subjugate the opposition, isolating them, draining their resources, attacking their beliefs, and weakening the subjects faith, until the subject feels despondent, and surrenders into humiliation. This is not a victory. It usually is only a postponement. In such a case further conflict can only be prevented by those who take blame for the flawed action of their past leaders, seeking clemency to abate any remaining grudge and attain reconciliation or peace, which is the only thing worthy of being called victory in war, or by merely recreating a reputation and separating oneself from past conflict. War is not a game, so it should not be treated as such. In war one must know himself, his enemy, and most of all God. Knowing and following God is most important, for in such a case; one can all together avoid war, as he will be gifted with the leadership skills and identity that demands respect, and thus achieves security. When a government is divided, and reluctant to compromise, political polarization may occur, and both sides may lose sight of their values, slipping into irrationality caused by the abuse of rationality, or causing those involved to contribute to extreme policies, corruption, mirror images, unnecessary condemnations or assumptions and judgments, all of which are regressive and blinding to the prudence of the pervaded organization. It is then the obligation of the remaining enlightened ones, often outsiders, to reunite the people and/or awaken the government to do so in order to restore value, and reform the government. This is called Revolution. Although I frequently propagate this, and reiterate the same truths, which people, unfortunately, have yet to react to accordingly. I am not a lobbyist; I just fear we have surpassed the point where in which we must take it upon ourselves to redirect the government we desire to consent to. However, even though I talk about Revolution, I do not stand against the government, I merely awaken them to the possibility of dissent to cause them to consider their actions, compelling them to mitigate a disconcerted society by abiding by the morally upright mentality, obliged to voice its opinion.
Is this contrivance proverbial?
