The national, state, and local elections are over, for the most part, although due to such changes in voting laws we see absentee ballots still being counted and the possibility of some seats being changed. We have entered that twilight zone where every race is closely scrutinized and statements issued about who is or isn’t at fault for the failure of candidates and parties. We face every excuse under the sun and every application of blame that could be applied. That maybe due to the nature of a winner take all system that tends to rely more on popularity that policy or issues. And if truth be told there are few members of any party who actually could articulate clearly what policies or basis form their party platform. Of course most of the platforms tend to be rather simplistic else problems would arise.
We may wish to be tough on crime and want longer mandatory prison time. We may want a three strikes and you are declared a career criminal and put away for life. Our prison system is based on our concept of justice that we remove an individual from our society and restrict his freedom of movement as a form of punishment. We seldom require restitution for the crime. We use to require an individual forfeit his life if he took the life of another by premeditation. Somehow that requirement was seen as barbaric and any number of excuses were argued against such a legal penalty. The problem is that we seldom think through our beliefs and see the consequences they engender. We are perfectly willing to kill any terrorist on the field of battle through the most gruesome of deaths, pain and suffering do not matter here. But let that same terrorist murder a child on one of our city streets and we become enraged if he is to suffer death by lethal drug injection. We consider it cruel and unusual punishment. We seldom ask what is the different between the two cases. Oh, some may be against war and any killing and they are welcome to such a belief even if it kills them. But generally we fail to assess our own individual and collective beliefs to see if they suffer from logical fallacy.
No child should should go unnourished, ill clad, and without adequate shelter, a most noble sentiment. And we shall call them innocent children until the age of eighteen. Of course if such innocent children are engaging in gang membership, theft, drug trafficking, drug use, prostitution, and murder, then we must rescue them from themselves. We must restore their individual and collective innocence. Such are our magical wishes and mythologies. So how shall we accomplish these feats of Hercules cleaning the stables? The child provides with with a few legal problems. Children are citizens but denied a number of rights the adult citizen has acquired. We do not allow children to enter into legal contracts nor to work, except and non paid slaves for their parents. Usually the state requires a child and her parents to fill out a form that may allow her to work for no more that twenty hours a week at a retail store or fast food restaurant. The child may not work part time in a steel mill or operate heavy machinery, unless it is on a family farm. Even then the parents are suppose to seek the state’s permission and follow all regulations. Ultimately the state is responsible for the child and may make him a ward of the state. If a parent or parents are judged unfit the state has the power of police force to seize the child for the child’s own protection and best interests. But how does the state now what is best for the child? The very laws that make the child property of the state make that child a slave of the state. Every child must attend a public school or an approved private school. Every child must be immunized with the required vaccines. Every child must be given the minimum amount of nutrition, the minimum amount of clothing, and the minimum standard of housing. Fail that, the parents must relinquish their child to state ownership. The state requires the child to be educated by its standards and not those of the parents. The state will define what are the correct belief system and what beliefs will be taught, not the parents. The state will decide what level of moral training shall be applied and not the parents.
Then we have the problem various individual rights. In any group there are majorities and minorities. I use the plural to demonstrate that a group may hold many different values and goals thus allowing individual to affiliate with those different values and goals. A majority may believe A while a minority believes B and another smaller minority believes C. In that same group a different collection of individual may be the majority that believes X, while another minority believes Y, and a still smaller minority believes Z. Thus, when we had the simple division between the two sexes, male and female, there was an even split between two these two groups. A union of one male and one female was seen as the norm and that union was a voluntary one. Not all eligible males and females entered into a union together. Now we have those who believe that somehow there are more than the two sexes, we call them genders in confusion to the science of sex. Gender is a social term. If a minority of men believe that they are somehow different in terms of XX and XY chromosomes then they must be right regardless of any scientific laws to the contrary. Yes, I see lots of studies that claim to find all manner of support and each claim falls on its face. Most of the results are subject to interpretation rather than proven fact. So now we have two men or two women engaging in what was once a sexual union of genetic male and genetic female and demanding that their sexual practice preferences are due to some genetic differences that cannot be confirmed by science. Well, after all, that union between genetic male and genetic female, while a basic biological function for the procreation of offspring, is very much a social behavior as well. There are no genes that cause our instincts to build nests and marry like birds. Humans have no real instinctual behaviors, that is, no biologically driven behaviors that cannot be ignored. But if this isn’t enough, we now have gender disorder. That is, the assertion that a biological male has a biological female body and vice versa. Funny how many more biological female are born in biological male bodies. Such individuals are compelled to be their true selves and seek their special rights. Actually, what we see is that these special rights are superior to the ordinary rights of a male citizen. Add in the rights of racial minorities and the white male is now a minority who supposedly holds the majority power in the collective group.
What we are witnessing is the reshaping of society into a manufactured society rather than a natural one. We must compel the correct behaviors dictated by a few at the freedom of interactions of the many. Utopia is an engineered society that ignores the realities of life and suppresses individual thought and freedom. John Milton gave us Paradise Lost in which every individual knew his or her place and behaved according to the correct dogma. The populace was ruled over by those of superior spirituality and guided by the spirit of god. It must have been deadly dull to live there. Karl Marx gave us that utopia of the worker’s paradise were all were equal and each gave to the society according to his gifts and received according to his needs. The spirit of true communism ruled that society. There seems to be a common theme running through these utopias. It is a belief in a true common spirit that rules over the populace. In each case we see the perfection of the group. Heaven is achieved by perfection of the individual but living in a utopian society is the perfection of the group. If my thesis is correct, then the ideals projected, believed, and propagated are much the same those who saw the utopian ideal society. The utopian society is achieved by compulsion and domination of the individual for his own good or in his own best interests. We are reduced to the legal position of children and told what our best interests are by a few selected for their ability to be guided by that spirit of progressive liberalism. The better term is totalitarianism.