A casual study of the biblical narrative, along with a cursory review of multiple scholarly studies, allows us to infer a few things about the state of mind of Moses when he came down from the mountain, stone tablets in hand, and looked out over the children of Israel and the extent to which they were bathing themselves in sin, chaos, decadence, and disorder and appeared to be actively celebrating the depths of their disobedience of God’s laws.
At a time when Moses surely must have been overflowing with emotions, filled with pride and confidence and determined to save his people, reassured by his faith in his creator that he was fulfilling not only his own destiny but the destiny of an entire nation – the children of Israel’s Nation – ordained by God.
As Moses took in what was happening, he surely must have grown enraged and rebuked them as he threw the stone tablets to the ground, smashing them to pieces. There is no provable written account of what he actually said as he did this, but it is a fair assumption that not only was it unpleasant, it most assuredly was not soon forgotten. Despite the original tablets having been destroyed, the Commandments were eventually transcribed onto a new set of stones. This matters to us, going forward because it is important to keep in mind that no matter how many times you destroy the surfaces upon which words can be written, once they are uttered, and internalized by those that hear them and take them to heart, they can never be erased.
We don’t think that it is too much of a stretch to presume that, after victory in the Revolution was assured, and with a ratified Constitution and Bill of Rights in hand, our Founding Fathers surely must have felt much the same exhilaration and sense of pride, purpose, and destiny that Moses felt before he turned that last corner at the base of Mount Sinai.
We know from both the historical record and biblical allegorical narrative that, in the case of Moses, the next 40 years would be spent making the people wander around in the desert until the sins of God’s people were cleansed and several generations of sinners were allowed to age and die off before the “purified” generations of Israelites could return to the Promised Land. As it is written, the first imperative of the children of Israel, upon re-entering Canaan, was to conquer the inhabitants and establish control over the people and all of their lands.
We think readers should, for just a moment, take pause and reflect on the end of this chapter in the history of humankind, and what they did with God’s promise to them, nearly three millennia before America’s Founding Fathers likewise set about the business of doing precisely the same things that Joshua, and the 12 tribes of Israel, set about doing once they entered their own Promised Land.
It is our contention that, in the Darwinian context, humankind’s unquenchable thirst for siege and conquest can never be sufficiently slaked because it is innate in the human species and we have an inherently limitless capacity for it. The only difference between those who lived at the dawn of man, and those of us living today, is our so-called “culturally -refined “and “socially-enlightened” ability to rationalize the death, destruction, and elimination of those perceived to be weaker and inferior and therefore worthy of subjugation and enslavement.
One need look no further than the first three generations, give or take, of America’s own National evolution and her campaigns of siege, conquest, and subjugation. Nor will we attempt to twist ourselves into knots over any effort to inject any sort of “American Nation apologia” here regarding the obvious parallels between Joshua’s re-taking of the Promised Land and America’s taking of its own Promised Land; inasmuch as our modern-day history revisionists strive to weaponize the actions of our founders, we must remind ourselves that, fundamentally, Homo Sapiens continue to exist today singly because of our continued submission to the Darwinian primal imperatives of security, sustenance, and reproduction.
Consider the historical events of the infant American Nation in the early years after the Constitution and Bill of Rights had been codified on paper and emblazoned in the hearts and minds of her people. 12 years after George Washington was sworn in we bought the Louisiana territories from the French and 5 years later we abolished the Atlantic slave trade. 4 years after that we were at war with Britain again and this conflict would last three years. Over the next 40 years, we fought the resistance of the indigenous peoples, expanded our presence across the territories, bought a huge swath of Mexican land, added stars to the National flag, and brought in waves of immigrants from other countries, all of whom wanted nothing more than a better life in a land of promise that guaranteed individual freedom and liberty and the opportunity to pursue their own flavors of happiness.
Yet, for all the great, as well as all the accompanying, but necessary, evil that occurred during the first 70 years of our history, as it has been throughout the history of humankind, it was inevitable for our young Nation to lose sight of the elder wisdom of our forefathers and ignore the warnings they handed down to us generations earlier. We had forgotten the value of adequately sustaining thorough and well-reasoned reflection and most honest and vigorous debates. Within “only” 70 years or so of gaining our freedom and independence we had cast off or brushed aside the stark and stern warnings of Hamilton and others about the delicate balance that must be fervently and forcefully maintained between the competing interests of Federalism and Anti-Federalism.
The Founders understood, having experienced it themselves, the effects of tyrannical oppression, by the central monarchy and the elite ruling classes, on the lives, liberties, and freedoms of the individual. So, too, did they recognize, in the interest of assuring peaceful coexistence with coequality amongst and between the citizenry, that a balance between Central Authority and individual sovereignty and self-determination must be found and fiercely defended.
Further, they had warned us against depending “on accident and force for our political constitutions” and implored us to be wary of “views, passions and prejudices little favorable to the discovery of truth”. As well, while celebrating the idea that this nation must surely have been designed by Providence, in Federalist No. 2 they forcefully insisted that we “should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous, and alien sovereignties” while, in Federalist No. 6, they made soberly clear the very real probability that, given Mankind’s propensity for “ambitious, vindictive, and rapacious” behavior, only an efficiently run, minimally-invasive, and judiciously managed government would prevent its citizenry from being “subject to the impulses of rage, resentment, jealousy, avarice, and of other irregular and violent propensities.”
Nonetheless, 73 years after Hamilton published this warning, on December 20, 1860, South Carolina decided to ignore him and choose, instead, to secede from the union and prove Hamilton correct on the dangers to The Republic of dissension between the states and, on April 12, 1861, the first shots were exchanged between the Confederate States of America and the United States of America and by the time the smoke had cleared, more than 600,000 lives had been lost for essentially all of the reasons Hamilton had anticipated and implored us to, in all things and at all costs show restraint for the sake and safety of the Republic.
Volumes have been written, after the fact, about the history, costs, and consequences of that war. Letters, written by Rebel and Union Soldiers, have been published and movies have been made about the lives of soldiers and generals alike, along with the many stories about the freed slaves and their courage and commitment to being part of a renewed and revitalized Nation, set free from the darkness and evil of slavery, and redoubled in their commitment to our nation’s founding principles “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness”, and Abraham Lincoln will be forever recognized as the one brave man that made it all happen.
Something else happened as a result of the Civil war, however, that is widely acknowledged yet seemingly -intentionally downplayed and brushed aside; the balance of power between the Federal government and the “some several states” was, more or less, obliterated and the 10th Amendment to the Constitution was effectively relegated to the ash heap of National inconveniences contained in America’s Bill of Rights. This truth was little more than a minor detail in the early days after the war, but would eventually give rise to what ultimately became America’s modern-day Federal largesse that now symbolizes the very Leviathan that Hobbes anticipated in 1651, and Burke warned against around the time we declared independence from the King.
The American Nation in front of us, at the time of this writing, bears very little resemblance to either the one our Founders envisioned 244 years ago or the one Abraham Lincoln and his successors stood back up on its feet after the Civil War.
The Executive and Judicial branches are under relentless siege, both directly and indirectly, by the Legislative branch. As well, the Legislative branch has, by and large, usurped the powers of both the sovereign Individual and the “some several States” while allowing itself to be co-opted and corrupted by external special interests and an unfettered stream of lobbyist dollars that enrich Congressional members.
Arguably worst of all, from our perspective, and thanks to our technological advances since the days of Lincoln, we find ourselves overrun by an un-elected Oligarchy, comprised of obscenely powerful and wealthy Corporatists and monopolistic Media and Communications elites, which is effectively more powerful than the Federal government and has, more or less, taken control of our freedoms and our liberties and our ability to freely and openly engage the National conversation.
We find ourselves, today, living under the increasingly tyrannical thumb (and whimsy) of the one branch of government our founders designed explicitly to protect us from ever falling prey to a monarchical system of rule. As well, it seems breathlessly unthinkable that we could have ever allowed our elected representatives to corrupt themselves and our entire system of representative governance only to return us to the days of the corrupt British Parliament from which we demanded separation and declared our independence.
All the same, here we are.
With this in mind, and before we move ahead, we invite the reader to conduct a little thought experiment and consider the parallels and contrasts between the days of the Israelites begging for a king, the Founders sacrificing their lives and their livelihoods to be rid of theirs, and the modern-era oligarchy that has coronated itself as some sort of ruling Authority over our lives, ostensibly because they presume to know better how we should conduct our lives than we could ever determine ourselves if left to our own device(s). As such, it is our contention that, if these simultaneously divergent and competing dynamics are left unchecked, humankind’s social, cultural, and moral fabric will soon enough become irreparably torn and ultimately shredded into tattered pieces.
Working to develop just the right degree of discernible context, the authors discussed at great length, over a number of phone calls and a rather extensive email thread, what the best strategy might be for presenting this idea of a “Political Faith Triad” before settling on the three-legged bar stool analogy.
As we proceed to build our case in the matter of Humankind’s “faith” conundrum, consider the generic definition of a “triad” which is simply described as a “set of three things” and imagine if you will, a three-legged bar stool which likewise consists of a set of three things along with a seat beneath which each of these is attached. As lifelong users of both three-legged and four-legged bar stools, with extensive field study under our collective belts (and derrieres), the authors are of the same mind that four-legged stools are far superior in the latter hours of our use than are the three-legged variety although we acknowledge they can serve their purposes well enough in a pinch.
There is a critically important caveat that we must put forth as we begin, however, as it relates to both the three-legged bar stool analogy and the political faith triad we are preparing to investigate in greater detail; like the three-legged bar stool, our political faith triad can only work so long as excess weight is not shifted very far to any one side or the other, and will completely topple over if any attempts to dramatically change are made too quickly. In other words, sufficient support is readily maintained only so long as the fundamental physics of the design is not violated.
The larger message we want to convey here is that the very existence of the human race is, itself, a paradoxical dilemma and that humankind, in all its weakness and frailty, being never more than a few generations away from total collapse under the weight of its own seemingly-endless susceptibility to human vanities and self-indulgences, somehow lives on. With Millenia of self-inflicted near-extinction moments in Humanity’s rearview mirror, our flaws and imperfections seem to insulate us, somehow, from our own self-destruction.
We confess having these flaws ourselves, and we are routinely entertained by how much effort is put into denying them by so many of our fellow humans, most especially our so-called “thought leaders”, along with both public and elected officials, and are quite sure there must be some sort of Maxim out there that has already put this notion to a finer point. Absent the time (or patience) necessary for due diligence in finding such a maxim about Humanity, we created our own unwashed and “home-brewed” observation on the matter:
“The relationship between a man’s benevolence and the exercise of his power over others resolves to an inverse proportion while the measures of his freedom and liberty are tied, exponentially, to the depths of his humility and Grace.”
Moving ahead, now, with many thousands of words already committed to paper in this treatise, traversing that monotheistic history that began some amount of time after Homo Erectus and the Neanderthals passed the evolutionary baton to the Homo Sapiens in order to continue the human species, we have put forth a hopefully sufficient basis from which we can proceed to delve more deeply into the “other” mechanism of faith that drives modern Humankind; Political Faith.
Attempting to find a useful definition of the word “faith”, interestingly, resulted in quite a few search iterations that seemed to struggle to put it in simple terms. Honestly, the exercise only served to further our larger point about the efforts the so-called “Intellectuals” will put forth in order to keep the idea of “God” out of the conversation. The problem with this, simply, is that Faith isn’t exclusively a God vs. no God proposition; there are as many different types of faith as there are people espousing the belief that they “are little more than microscopic upstarts in a vast, incomprehensible eternity” and it is this humility, and lack thereof, that forms the nexus of modern Humanity’s Faith dichotomy.
For our purposes, “faith” simply means a belief and trust in something for which you can show no physical proof but for which you are willing to sacrifice your lives and your livelihoods to uphold and defend. This is easy enough to quantify, in a monotheistic context, with five millennia worth of both oral and written history on what it has felt like and looked like and resulted in, across all of humanity that espouses these sorts of religious and spiritual principles and practices.
More complicated than religious and spiritual faith, and in the modern era more woefully insidious, is the matter of “Political Faith.” We suggest as much because, even as spiritual faith puts the onus on the individual to abide by the doctrine(s) of the fellowship of which they are a part, passed down by spiritual elders, consequences for individual disobedience are faced primarily by the individual. Conversely, in the matter of Political Faith, doctrines are displaced by short-sighted and cynically devised dogmas, as malleable as the prevailing winds, and ill consequences are suffered almost exclusively by the broader collective, generally, with little to no personal repercussions for the most powerful and elite leaders of the ruling class(es) atop the pile of the general population.
It is worth noting at this juncture the extent to which infighting between sovereign Individual elements in the lower echelons of the Collective inevitably breaks out whenever there are perceived existential threats to the survival of the larger Collective as a whole, as determined – rightly or wrongly – by its leadership. We will reluctantly resist the temptation to go down a rabbit hole sidebar conversation about the fascinating world of group dynamics, but it is important to recognize the cannibalistic dynamics at play in the 2021 equivalent of the Bolshevik Revolution currently underway in America.
The greatest notable difference, at face value, between the Marxist rise in 1912 Russia and the one currently underway in the United States, is the obvious goal of replacing our founding system of Individual freedom and liberty with a system rooted in tribalism, isolating us into smaller and more manageable groups, and turning non-compliant elements against each other to fight it out on the streets.
Those elements that exist in American society who are willing to take up a fight, against their own National brothers and sisters if necessary, perfectly exemplify our point about Political Faith and the seductive nature of espousing a polytheistic worldview. In such a world, where the gods of power and wealth and greed and envy and avarice can be worshipped or shelved as necessity dictates, there are those who can justify their willingness to destroy the very things that got them wherever they are in order to receive some imagined greater personal reward… That never actually comes… Once America has ultimately been destroyed.
Notably, the fall of Jerusalem at the hands of Babylon, and the Book of Lamentations in which that event is described in painful metaphoric detail, are worthy of review and reflection in this context.
We can’t help but point out the extent to which, in the matter of the effort currently underway to “fundamentally transform American society”, any belief in the very existence of God appears to be considered a threat and must, necessarily, be bludgeoned out of the hearts and minds of the population in order to succeed. To be sure, we have come a long way from the monotheistic days of Abraham, Moses, and Jesus and our cultural and socio-political ways of life have dramatically evolved. What remains as true today as it was over five Millennia ago, in the Darwinian context at least, is our inherent free will and our limitless capacity to sacrifice our own lives in order to resist subjugation and enslavement at the hands of others.
As we have tried to consistently point out to readers, throughout this book, we have no expectation – one way or the other – that anyone “ascribes to, practices, or even disavows any particular faith, religion, or dogma”, but it is incumbent upon the faithful and the agnostic alike that everyone recognizes and understands the level of zeal and degree of commitment that exists in the hearts and minds of those seeking the new America that prioritizes faith in the central ruling Authority over any God, Spiritual Leader, or sovereign Individual.
It is our contention, regarding the insidious elements of this “transformational change” initiative currently underway, that the greatest threat to the survival of our Republic is now, and has always been, what Jesus referred to, in Matthew 7:15, as the “false prophets”, saying we should “b]eware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.”
Warned more than two millennia ago, by the deliverer of the final Covenant between God and man, and founder of a religious faith that is embraced by a third of the global population, the false prophets Jesus warned the world against have, none the less, set themselves upon us and are hard at work building their promise of a better world that will only be better for them and at the cost of each of us.
We maintain that, as we reflect on the time between the revolution and the present day, the generation of our Founding Fathers may well, indeed, have been the first last and only generation to sincerely believe in, and wholly embrace, the critical importance of inspiring the Political Faith of the Individual members of the citizenry. Further, it can be argued that they were the last to govern in such a way as to ensure they never became, themselves, the very ravening wolves they built the Nation, and her governing documents, to defend the Individual members of society against.
After all, they didn’t care what you believed in or what you didn’t believe in, in any specific religious context, but they cared very much about your faith in, and commitment to, the fundamental principles of Freedom, Liberty, Self-determination, and National Pride. It was the Bill of Rights that acknowledged and guaranteed our God-given rights to free expression and self-defense along with the tools necessary to make sure subsequent governments were never able to take these freedoms away from us.
We welcome arguments against this assertion, of course, but we encourage the reader to keep in mind the attitudes and convictions of the founding generation, building a new nation from scratch, versus the post Civil War efforts to stitch a seam in the self-inflicted tear in the fabric of American society, and put the country back together again. Even a cursory review, side-by-side, of both the Revolution and the reconstruction, will lay bare the dramatic differences between these two generations and the extent to which the latter had squandered nearly all of what the former had sacrificed so much to establish.
In the name of posterity, we think this is a good place to mention the striking parallels that can be drawn between the cannibalistic nature of the post-Reconstruction power grabs and what we see happening today. The country is divided more or less in half, just as it was 150 years ago, and the high-powered high-dollar elite class has burrowed itself, like a deer tick, deep into America’s hide and is sucking as much life out of our national will as it can while we are too weak to do anything purposeful and constructive about it. Soon enough, we will expand on this concept a few pages hence.
While tempted, early in the development of this concept of framing the “Political Faith Triad” in modern terms such as Republican and Democrat and Independent, we believe this oversimplifies the point we need to make because the complexities of the current American Body Politic cannot be pigeonholed into an either-or proposition along party lines despite the ruling classes having spent generations, between them, consolidating power in order to do precisely that. Our “Political Faith” systems are far more nuanced and subtle and do not always take into account, sufficiently, the potential for harm from the far more pernicious, power-hungry actors causing most of the damage to our Republic.
In the post-Civil War context then, peering through the Covid-19 lense and bearing in mind the warnings of Jesus, we contend that there has been a slow yet increasingly pervasive rise of two socio-cultural Leviathans since the Reconstruction whose impacts on American society are only just now starting to be rightly identified as the dangers to our Republic that they are.
Our allegorical barstool then, or triad, consists of Collectivism on the one side and Nihilism on the other while Individualism serves the purpose of keeping everything in balance and being the primary element that enforces the basic laws of physics inherent in the design. This will make more sense soon enough, but consider the basic definitions we have selected to wrap some modern-day context around these particular choices.
Collectivism is generically defined as the group being prioritized over the individual. Conversely, Individualism derives from the tightly held principles of being independent and self-reliant. Last, but certainly not least, Nihilism is defined as the rejection of all religious and moral principles, in the belief that life is meaningless. As you let these concepts swirl around on your brain’s palate, and swish them back and forth across its taste buds, we will kick things off with a fair-minded assessment of the Individual, and where he/she sits in the social and cultural “food chain” of modern-day American society.
Many studies have been conducted over the years attempting to understand the human psyche. Some of these have suggested that each individual has four unique “selves” and, although plausible arguments are out there to suggest this theory has merit and is worthy of your time to look into more deeply, there is certainly the possibility that there may be more or less. We won’t presume ourselves smarter than the experts, but for the purposes of looking at the fundamental Individual, as S/He relates to the Collectivists and the Nihilists, we are going to Focus on the two most important ones: the Public self and the Private self.
As it has been since we first stood upright in Africa, and later began to establish sedentary communities, the Individual is comprised of two very distinct yet disparate features, each of which fluctuates in its degree of power over the other; the primal and compelling need to socialize, and the oft-times overwhelming yearnings for solitude and isolation. And, as much as we like our peace and quiet, it is inevitable that, sooner or later, we will seek out human contact.
On a primal level, it is incumbent upon us to seek out others in order to sustain the species, but because we are inherently social creatures we are, by nature, compelled to interact with one another. We share stories about our experiences, we listen to the stories of others, we offer ideas to each other and we learn from each other and we form or carry forward our opinions about the matters at hand. As well, some of us teach and some of us learn and all of us improve, hopefully, our “human condition” while at least trying to help others improve theirs.
And yet, at those moments when we take the risk and step outside of our “Private self” bubbles and present our “Public self” personas to our fellow homo sapiens, depending on our unique sets of styles and personality traits and how these are perceived by others, we present as Predator/Prey (our Primal natures) or Leader/Follower (our Social natures). Once we are effectively “sized up” by the group and categorized accordingly by its leadership, we are relegated to this or that, oft-times arbitrarily decided, position in the hierarchy of the collective.
Over the course of the hundreds of thousands of years that we have wandered the globe, upright and aimless, it has always been our free will that has served as our traveling companion, and it has always been our Free Will’s endless struggle between the need to socialize and yearning for solitude and isolation that has determined our ultimate destination.
To be sure, the existence of the Collective in a civilized society serves the fundamental survival imperative of each Individual member… Strength in numbers and all that… Thus will we be naturally drawn to that Collective which promises to best fulfill our wants, needs, and aspirations. But when the leadership of the Collective allows itself to be corrupted by personal ambition to ends that countermand the imperative(s) of some, or all, Individual members, the usual result is the collapse of the entire system and subsequent “sin, chaos, decadence, and disorder” and active celebration of disobedience of the founding norms, principles, and practices that served to form the Collective at its inception.
Today’s elected political class (the representative Collective), in collusion with, and infiltrated by, the unelected corporatist, globalist, and media (corporate and social) classes (the Nihilists ), have been effectively tattering the edges of America’s national fabric since the 50s and 60s. Social and cultural norms have been slowly effaced and ultimately eroded, and our language, methods, and means of communication have been bastardized beyond all recognition. And, with all that has been done to weaponize our Constitution and Bill of Rights, turning them against the will of the Individual under the false prophecy of national progress, we find ourselves staring down a double-barreled national collapse at the hands of the very people we empowered to protect and defend our rights who now intend to strip them away.
It is our contention that this dynamic shift in today’s America is the direct result of what we like to call the “Devil’s Bargain” that was struck between the Collectivists and the Nihilists and began to take shape, in our opinion at least, at the dawn of the anti-war movement of the 60s. And while we recognize that the movement altered the dynamics of the activist social Collective, this period also marked the rise (or re-birth) of the activist Nihilist class as well. And the coming together of these forces has inflicted increasingly enormous amounts of pressure on the Individual which, in accordance with our triad allegory, is struggling to maintain balance against the shifting weights of this pressure.
Throughout history, cultural and socio-political upheaval is not unusual. What has changed in the modern era, and most especially with respect to the modern advances in technology and communications, is the effect these pressures are having on the Individual; ever since these modern-day false prophets joined forces, the Individual has increasingly become little more than roadkill carrion to be pecked at, torn and shredded into little pieces, and divvied up to sustain each other. Consequently, this power symbiosis self-sustains because, as one Individual is consumed, replacements are easily enough found by simply perpetrating and perpetuating new contrivances and false prophecies, repeatedly, until a new Individual is drawn in.
Many Americans might consider the current use of these treacherous tactics being employed by the Collectivists and the Nihilists, in concert against the Individualists, to be the very definition of treason, and we might be the first to agree except that the insidious underbelly of this contrived dissidence runs much deeper below the surface than simple activism naiveté.
Rather, it is our contention that the Civil War – lite being instigated against and between American individualists is, and has been for quite a few years now, a well-camouflaged subterfuge seemingly designed to essentially criminalize and dismantle Individualism altogether because, fundamentally, these external Collectivist and Nihilist influences genuinely believe America is irreparably corrupt and must be completely torn down in order to build up a new one, from scratch, with what they promise will be a glorious new Utopian Paradise That will replace our founding principles of “life, liberty, self-determination, and the pursuit of happiness” with a new system of socialized governance wrapped in the sheep’s clothing of “racial and financial equity, and Universal social and cultural inclusion.
The biggest problem with the theoretical Panacea slowly being inflicted on the Individual, and there are many, is that our God-given rights, as they were acknowledged and codified by the Founders, cannot peaceably coexist in any civilized society rooted in the premise that the highest ruling Authority is to be comprised of the fewest among us in possession of the greatest amount of wealth, power, influence, and control. Such a society is nothing more than an oligarchy comprised of smaller, and routinely disparate, groups of authoritarian tyrannies that aren’t interested in making America better… They want to “own” America as if it’s some sort of “thing” that can be possessed and manipulated, somehow, for personal gain or self-enrichment. This arrangement, by any number of different names, has been tried, and ultimately failed, each and every time because, sooner or later, the inherent Free Will of humankind will sooner or later rise up and burn it to the ground.
Like fingerprints, each individual member of the Human race is unique. Likewise is there no exact duplicate of our DNA when compared with the DNA of anyone else. And while each of us has some degree of shared or similar experience, our personal set of external influences and internal capacities to process and store these, ultimately shapes and defines us and ultimately guides our words and our actions. Further, it can be fairly suggested that the “sum” of these parts comprise both our public self and our private self and, as has been discussed, it’s when we dip our public self toe in the icy cold waters of the human Collective ocean that we become more or less forced into surrendering some amount of our individual sovereignty in order to peaceably coexist with our fellow human beings as a functioning member of our chosen Collective.
The larger Collective, or the overall human race, likewise consists of constituent elements, each with their own unique traits and capacities. A variety of words can be used to quantify this concept, such as tribe, community, culture, sect, etc, and each of these conducts itself in accordance with its traditions and belief systems. And each of these evolved over time and as the generations die off and new ones come of age.
Faith, bestowed upon a Collective by its individual members, presupposes the idea that there is a common goal, toward which the collective is working, that will sustain and improve the condition for everyone. We have opinions, politically, about the elements of our modern Political Faith Triad which will be coming up soon enough, but in the generic context we have put together here it is important that we leave you with something that bears repeating as it relates to the outlier most negatively degrading the otherwise well-intentioned goal(s) – religious or otherwise – of the American Collective: the Nihilists.
The fairly benign definition of Nihilist suggest that such a person “believes in nothing” but in the context of our Political Faith Triad something is missing; our modern-day nihilists believe very much in one particular thing: themselves, and the higher value they believe should be bestowed upon them because of who they are, what they do, or the ways in which they presume to make the world a better place than it would otherwise be without them. To be sure, there is a serious dose of narcissism in this self-image, but it is the root cause of essentially every social, cultural, and dynastic collapse in the history of mankind.
As we have said, when the leadership of a Collective allows itself to be seduced by the right Nihilists and corrupted by it, slaking the thirst of their own personal ambition(s) to ends that countermand the imperative(s) of that collective, its collapse is inevitable. With this in mind, consider the bevy of seductions Nihilists lay at the feet of politicians, celebrities, professional athletes, lobbyists, and so on… And it is not too hard to see how easily the Nihilists strike their Devil’s bargain with weak and susceptible Collectivist leaders.
Today, the bought and paid-for ruling classes, in partnership with the politically malleable elements within American society, are surreptitiously fomenting for fundamental transformative change, under the auspices of so-called “progress”, but the only beneficiaries of this transformation will be those who accumulate wealth and power over the rest of us and will only harm the “Individual” members of society.
Additionally, naked power grabs being what they routinely are, the redistribution of the sovereign Individual’s power into the hands of the Collective and its Nihilist cohorts will result in, first and foremost, the sinister perpetuation of half-truths and false narratives with respect to the political and socioeconomic living conditions of subgroups within the population and then dividing them up into smaller victim and protected entitlement classes before turning the rest of us against and between each other to fight it out on the streets or petition our infiltrated government for a redress of grievances.
Our bottom line here is that our well-enough corrupt representative body, infiltrated by power-hungry Collectivists and Nihilists whose primary objective is to dismantle the sovereignty of the Individual, stands poised to subjugate and enslave us more under their “Progressive” tyrannical rule. Perhaps this will come to pass, but also possible is the chance that the Individual will rediscover where his or her faith – spiritual and political – should be rightly endowed before it’s too late.