 | ||||||||||
 |  | |||||||||
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | |||
| ||||||||||
| | |||||||||
| | | | | | | | |||
COPYRIGHT 1998
_____2. Our people are more compassionate and charitable than we were 30 years ago.
******
SUBLIMINAL ATHEISM
If a wealthy person promised
That they would make you rich,
If for one week you would slave
And dig for them a ditch,
Would you reject this offer,
Or start digging with zeal,
To be sure the work you did
Met the terms of the deal?
Most would accept this contract,
And work whether raining or sunny
Just to be certain that
They qualified for the money.
We know that in the Bible
God promises even better pay,
If we dedicate ourselves
To living a certain way.
But in these times we live in
Few people take god's deal.
This is because few people
Believe that god is real.
Many of the problems which threaten our society today are the result of our
declining morality. Such problems as: our high crime rate, neglect of the
environment, our growing poverty rate, our faltering schools, and drug
abuse are basically problems of morality.
Morality refers to a system of proper conduct. American morality, like the
moral standards of most Western societies, evolved primarily from the
principles found in the Bible. In the Bible are specific behaviors which are
branded as being either right or wrong. For unspecified behaviors the
Golden Rule stands as the measuring rod for moral conduct. If we would
want a certain action done to or for us, then it is moral behavior. If we
would not, it is immoral behavior.
Although the Bible and the biblical god were never able to stimulate
morality which came anywhere near perfection, these did serve as powerful
encouragements to behave in a moral fashion. Christianity, like many other
religions, can be a source of comfort and moral inspiration for those who
believe. However, a large and growing number of Americans are finding
the Bible to be unbelievable. Because of the advanced state of knowledge
which exists today, we have a different perspective on cause and effect.
When viewed in this new perspective the Bible and the biblical god seem so
illogical that they are not regarded as being realistic and true.
Because we find the Bible and the biblical god to be unbelievable, our
dominant religion is rapidly losing its power to give us comfort and moral
inspiration. Mankind has probably always struggled between the human
tendencies for selfishness, savagery and hedonism, and the need to conform
to the moral principles which allow cooperation and progress. As long our
morality was enshrined in believable religion, our religion served to help
morality triumph over our predisposition for evil. Because Christianity now
lacks believability for a growing number of Americans, more of us are losing
this classic struggle.
According to Funk & Wagnalls Standard Desk Dictionary, religion is defined
as "The beliefs, attitudes, emotions, behavior, etc., constituting man's
relationship with the powers and principles of the universe..." A religious
philosophy serves to guide our actions so that we might live in harmony
"with the powers and principles of the universe."
The Bible presents a religious philosophy based upon a living god of magic
and miracles. Scientifically skeptical subliminal atheists do not believe that
magic and miracles are, nor have they ever been, a part of our relationship
with the powers and principles of the universe.
Subliminal atheists do not believe that a god magically created the Earthly
environment in six days. They do not believe that a god made the sun stand
still. They do not believe that some god allowed Moses to part the Red Sea.
They do not believe that a man lived to be 969 years of age. They do not
believe that serpents ever talked, or that a rod turned into a snake. They do
not believe that a god sent an angel to kill the firstborn in all households
which did not have the "blood of a lamb" adorning its "side post" or
"lintel." They do not believe that a god turned the water of a river into
blood. They do not believe that a god punished people by sending plagues of
frogs, lice, locust, flies, boils, and hail. They do not believe that a god caused
quail and manna to fall from the sky... The Bible abounds with such magical
legends--things that do not happen today--things that a large and growing
number of Americans do not believe ever did happen.
But this is the Old Testament of the Bible and Christianity is based upon the
New Testament. However, the vast increase in our knowledge and
understanding makes believing the New Testament just as difficult. We
must believe in a virgin birth. We must believe that Jesus healed the sick,
raised the dead, walked on water, turned water into wine, cast out demons,
feed five thousand people with five loaves of bread and two fish, and arose
from the dead. In the book of Revelation we are asked to believe that many
things will come to pass which we find difficult to fathom.
If Jesus appeared on Earth and actually did these things today--under
scientific scrutiny, without mirrors and smoke--many would believe that he
is the son of God. But to ask modern man to accept the truth of this magic
on faith alone is asking too much of minds grounded in scientific cause and
effect. The accounts of Christ's life are almost 2,000 years removed from us.
In this age of scientific skepticism we have difficulty believing that such
magic ever really happened.
Subliminal atheists regard the Bible as little more that a loose historical
record that is riddled with myth. Subliminal atheists can imagine the
circumstances which gave rise to the myth of the biblical god.
They speculate that because man is an animal who seeks
understanding--who seeks cause--that when early man experienced such
happenings as: thunder, lightning, rain, volcanos, hurricanes, tornados,
earthquakes, eclipses, drought, flood, disease, and death, there was a need to
understand why these events occurred. Because of our egocentric nature,
there was a tendency to think that a being like us, but far more powerful,
was the cause of these things which occurred. If good things happened, this
powerful person must be pleased. If bad things happened, this powerful
person must be displeased.
If we must deal with someone more powerful than ourselves, we often
attempt to gain their favor with gifts (sacrifice), by pleading (prayer) and by
flattery (worship). Therefore, the idea of god as a magical tyrant came to be
because man did not know the causes of the things which occurred. The
biblical commandments for sacrifice, prayer and worship originated to
appease this powerful tyrant. Because these acts of nature were important
enigmas for the people of that time, these magical and tyrannical features
were born to explain, understand and cope with these mysteries. But these
things are not mysterious today. All of these are understood as events which
have natural causes.
So we have outgrown our religious philosophy. We are no longer enticed by
the bribe of heaven, nor are we frightened by the threat of hell. With each
passing day we are losing faith in the philosophy which has for centuries
guided us in our relationship with the powers and principles of the universe.
Because we no longer believe in the Bible and the biblical god, we no longer
have a religious philosophy with the power to guide our behavior in a
manner which results in cooperation and contentment. We no longer have
the conviction that the Bible accurately describes our relationship to the
powers and principles of the universe. Without a believable religious
philosophy we are becoming a ship without a rudder. If we cannot gain the
philosophical guidance which puts us in harmony with the powers and
principles of the universe, the consequences may be catastrophic.
A religious philosophy serves as an external motive to behave in a moral
fashion. Deep within the human brain are circuits for love which can
stimulate compassion, charity, empathy, fairness, caring, altruism, and
forgiveness. However, these circuits are competing with a darker side of
our nature. For our circuits of love to dominate our character, they must
not only be cultured during critical periods of our maturation, they must
also be reinforced by a credible body of external guidance and strength.
Today so many Americans lack a credible religious philosophy to serve as an
external stimulus for moral behavior. We lack this, but we want it and need
it. We need a religious philosophy which reinforces the subjective feelings
of love which can be generated within the brain.
So far the best substitute that we have come up with is the body of
knowledge which has been generated by the social sciences. In the last 30
years the social sciences have almost replaced the Bible as our standard for
moral conduct. If the social sciences have empirical or experimental
evidence which indicates that certain behaviors are good for the long-term
development of people, then we consider these behaviors to be moral. If the
social sciences have evidence that certain actions are bad for people in the
long run, these actions are considered immoral.
For many years in New Orleans we had a local television talk show which
was named for its hostess. The hostess was, and still remains, a very
popular and respected person. Almost all New Orleanians would describe
her as a moral person whose life reflects a genuine concern for the
well-being of all people. Several years ago this show featured four unwed
mothers.
All of these unwed mothers were facing their biological deadline for having
children. They were very successful people, and were financially and
psychologically stable. All of these women admitted to having searched for
a "right man" to be their husband and father to their child. Being unable to
find the right mate, they chose to have a child through artificial
insemination.
As these women related to the studio and viewing audiences their
experiences as unwed mothers, both the studio audience and the hostess
were very complimentary and supportive of their decision to have children
in this non-traditional way.
However, toward the end of the show a woman in the studio audience stood
up and expressed the opinion that these women were morally wrong to have
conceived children out of wedlock. Her opinion was based upon its specific
prohibition in the Bible. The hostess essentially told this woman to buzz off.
The studio audience applauded in agreement.
Empirically, the social sciences would condone the decision of these women
to become mothers using this technology. The women were psychologically
stable, financially secure, and they had much love to offer their children.
Yet, their behavior, having children out of wedlock, is immoral according to
the Bible.
We increasingly tend to agree with the morality of the social sciences
because this morality more closely fits our mind's idea of right and wrong
than does the morality of the Bible. The morality of the social sciences has
become an external force which reinforces the feelings of love that come
from our brain. For so many Americans today, our moral standards are
influenced more by the ideas of the social sciences, and less by what is said
in the Bible.
However, the social sciences do not operate under a unified, institutional
philosophy of living. They do not exist as an authoritative institution that
stands as an external source of motivation to strengthen our brain circuits
for love and morality. The social sciences are very fallible. Often they
progress by taking two steps forward and one step back. Consequently, the
social sciences exert a weak influence over our behavior. Our morality
would become stronger if those who have succumbed to subliminal atheism
had institutional religious philosophies which they could believe and
advocate with conviction.
******
If subliminal atheism is a philosophical reality in America and other
Western societies today, one would think that Christian clergy would be in
the best position to recognize this philosophical trend. While Christian
clergy probably do have great insight into this trend, subliminal atheism is a
philosophy replete with deception. Subliminal atheism has caused people to
treat clergy like children who are so naive as to believe in Santa Claus. This
places clergy in the position of being unable to accurately see the demise of
biblical credibility, and what this demise has done, and is doing to our
people.
A childhood friend of mine became a Catholic priest. Although for many
years we lived in different parts of the country, after I graduated from
college we briefly found ourselves living in the same city. One spring
afternoon we decided to play a round of golf.
The course was not very crowded that day. As we began play on the back
nine, a teenager, playing alone behind us, soon caught up with us. We asked
if he would prefer to go ahead of us, or play with us. He chose to play with
us.
We noticed that the young man had a rather bad temper. Every time he hit
a bad shot he would pound or throw his club and cut loose with a tirade of
profanity. Almost every shot he hit was bad.
This behavior continued until we reached hole number 16, a short par three.
On this hole both the teenager and I pushed our drives off to the right. My
priest friend hit his to the left. As the young man and I walked together to
find our golf balls, we talked.
He asked what I did for a living, and I told him. He then asked what my
friend did for a living. I informed him that my friend was a Roman Catholic
priest. The blood appeared to drain from the head of this young man, and I
heard him utter the words "oh my god, I'm Catholic."
There was a sudden change in his behavior. He continued to hit bad shots,
but he never again threw his golf club or utter profane words. This young
man did not believe that there was some god above who saw and
disapproved of his golfing behavior. But he thought that my friend was
stupid enough to believe that there was such a god, so he stopped out of
respect for the apparent naivete of the priest.
The following weekend while golfing with my usual foursome, I observed the
same young man demonstrating the same behavior which had been so
abruptly altered by the presence of the priest. The previous encounter
certainly had no permanent effect upon his behavior.
So many people today afford Christian clergy the same type of respect that
we give a child who believes in Santa Claus. In the presence of young
children we pretend that Santa is real. In the presence of clergy we pretend
that the biblical god is real. We do not believe this, but we are respectful
enough to not burst the bubble of those who do. This is a part of the fraud
which characterizes our subliminal atheism.
Because people treat clergy with traditional respect and protect their
apparent naivete, the clergy are deceived into thinking that more people
believe and are influenced by the Bible than really is the case. Christian
clergy are protected from seeing the extent to which subliminal atheism
exists in our nation today. Because of this deception, and because the
church is their livelihood, the clergy are truly unable to accurately gauge
the failure of traditional Christianity which is at the base of our general
moral decay.
So the clergy lay the blame for our moral decay on anything but the church.
They think that the church is working well for so many, and that if the
others could be persuaded to come back to the church our moral decay will
shift into reverse.
They are deceived into thinking that it is working well for so many, and
unable to see that it is incredible church doctrine which is at the base of our
increasing moral decay.
Remember back in the 1960's when John Lennon said that the Beatles were
more popular than Jesus Christ? Remember how outraged Americans
were? Even young Americans, who were quite taken with the Beatles, were
incensed by this remark.
What do you think would happen if some rock star made a similar statement
today? My guess would be that not much, or possibly, nothing would
happen. This is not indicative of an increase in our tolerance. This is
indicative of how the believability of our dominant religion has eroded in a
period of about 30 to 40 years. We do not defend what we do not believe.
I recently asked my students to write a paper describing what they think our
world will be like 50 years from now. Many of them painted a rather
gloomy picture. A few were so pessimistic as to think that there might not
be a world 50 years from now. Others described our future world as hell on
Earth.
When I asked them what they could and would do to help avoid these
morose predictions, most responded that they could and would do almost
nothing to change this outcome. Several said, quite frankly, that as long as
they were able to live their lives, they really did not care about future
generations!
Thirty years ago almost no one would have expressed such a calloused
disregard for future generations of humanity. But my students are not
alone in this respect. Look at our national debt. Look at what we are doing
to the environment. Look at those who deal in illegal drugs. Look at those
who produce what is called "entertainment." This type of thinking has
dramatically increased over the past thirty years. This type of thinking is
the product of subliminal atheism.
As a teacher who associates daily with a wide variety of young people, I
have noticed that religion is less a topic of discussion among our youth than
it was years ago. Even students who come from a religious home, and for
whom religion is still a very important part of their lives, are subdued by
this topic. Today these students seem to be embarrassed by their religion. It
is as if they are ashamed to confess a belief in something so incredible.
When confronted with their religion by peers, they admit to it almost
apologetically.
It was not this way 30 years ago. Thirty ago religious discussions were
common among young people. Because there was an almost unanimous
acceptance of the truth of the Bible and the biblical god, what was discussed
were the principles of the different denominational faiths. Because
subliminal atheism has eroded this almost universal acceptance, this type of
dialogue is rarely heard today. Subliminal atheism is a reality which we can
no longer realistically ignore.
People have a dual nature. We are savage, selfish and hedonistic, but we
are also capable of love, morality and kindness. Because so many of us lack
a credible religious philosophy to guide our conduct, as a nation we have
moved toward savagery, selfishness and hedonism. This move has caused us
to become increasingly cruel, selfish, greedy, envious, self-indulgent, and
lacking in love for our fellow man. Increasingly it is "every man for
himself" in a "dog-eat-dog world"--a "rat race."
If our movement in this direction continues our ability to live in harmony
with our fellow man will continue to erode. Movement in this direction
carries us away from harmony with the powers and principles of the
universe. We cannot succeed when we paddle against this current.
For a religious philosophical influence to be restored to the mind of the
average American, the religious philosophy must be believable. The average
American knows too much to believe the archaic ideas and unbelievable
accounts contained in the Bible. An effective religious philosophy must be
based upon what we know to be true. It cannot be based on concepts that
we know could not possibly be true.
George Washington advised, "Let us with caution indulge the supposition
that morality can be maintained without religion." Today a more
appropriate warning might be, "Let us with caution indulge the supposition
that morality can be maintained without 'believable' religion."
COSMIC ORDER
"If God did not exist, it would have been necessary to invent him." Voltaire
Our eyes convert light to electricity.
This allows the brain to see.
But in this crude conversion
We miss much reality.
Our ears collect vibrations.
A small range we can detect;
And all other commotion
Our brain must neglect.
Nerve cells in our tongue and nose
Detect chemicals which go by.
But they can only detect those
Of a certain shape and size.
Our skin has little nerve cells
Which respond to mechanical events.
They convert them to electricity
And our brain makes them make sense.
With all our limitations
It is easy to show
That there is much reality
That we can never know.
And what we are missing,
I'm led to believe,
Is far more than that
Which we can perceive.
As long as we believed there was an all powerful god who expected moral
conduct from us, this god served as a powerful external motive for us to
behave in a moral fashion. After all, this was our creator. This was a god
who could reward us with heaven, punish us with hell, and grant us the
favors for which we prayed. This is a hard act to follow. Fiction is better
than fact. It will be difficult to arrive at a religious philosophy which is
more powerful than the one under which we operated for so long.
But we cannot go back. Subliminal atheism is a progressive phenomenon.
Our growing number of subliminal atheists will not accept a supernatural--
magical God. But a religious philosophy gains strength from conviction. If
a philosophy is logical and crucial, it can gain our conviction.
To go from a religious philosophy that we have outgrown to one that relates
us to the powers and principles of the universe as we know them today
requires a transition between the old and the new--a transition in concepts
and in terminology. A transition which will be granted the same privileges
and protection enjoyed by other religious institutions in our society.
What do we know about the powers and principles of the universe? We
know that the powers and principles of the universe are orderly. We know
that if we discover, follow and properly use this order, we will progress.
So today we know that it is unlikely that god is a supernatural magician.
Instead, what we know tells us that it is more likely that god is the antithesis
of this--that god is the order in all that exists. If we know this order, and use
it properly, we will succeed. If we attempt to violate this order, we will fail.
Life itself is the result of this order. Order--organization is the ultimate
characteristic of all living things.
But such a god is not a life-form. If god were alive--composed of DNA,
RNA, protein, cells, tissue, organs, and organ systems, then god would
almost certainly be subject to the fate of all life--death. God is more than
this. God is the order--the organization in all that is. This order is the will
of god.
The order in the universe is more amazing than all the alleged magic which
has been attributed to gods. The only reason that we are not amazed by it is
that we are so accustomed to it. It is all we have ever known. If, however,
we existed in a world of random chaos, to experience such order would both
astound and delight us. This order makes the universe subject to prediction
and control. Aspects of the universe which appear to be random and
chaotic, appear so only because their complexity exceeds our present
capacity to comprehend its order.
But this order is absolute. This order cannot be violated. The magical
ability of gods to violate cosmic order does not exist, and it has never existed.
God as cosmic order is omnipotent. Any claim that a god can, or did, violate
cosmic order is fantasy. God's order can be discovered, followed and used;
but it cannot be breached.
At this point in human existence science is our best tool for discovering
nature's order. In this respect science is theology. As we discover this
order, follow it and use it correctly, we will become more successful at
living. All living things benefit from knowing, following and using nature's
order. All living things are harmed when they attempt to violate this order.
At the level of interpersonal relationships, god is love and the morality
which love allows. Love and morality give us order. They give us order in
that they allow us to live in harmony with our fellow man. This order leads
us to lives of quality and satisfaction. This order allows us to develop our
complete potential. If we attempt to go against nature's order, the result
will be struggle, conflict and failure.
The greatest "magic" which exists in the universe is its order. The greatest
"magic" in human living is the "mystical" power of love. Love alone gives
quality and satisfaction to human living. Love is so "mystical" that we think
that it cannot do these things. We think that money, power, fame, and
hedonism will lead to lives of quality and contentment. There is much logic
which tells us that it should be this way.
But all who have pursued happiness through these have found that it was
not that way. These people either turned to philanthropic activity to
achieve quality and contentment, or they never found quality and
contentment. Love is god's real "magic."
For centuries the Bible and the biblical god, by duress and persuasion,
coerced us to a more loving life. When so coerced, we found that love was
the key to satisfaction and contentment. Now that the Bible and the biblical
god are rapidly losing this coercive power, we must find other ways to
encourage this discovery, and to assure the development of our capacity to
love. Love and its morality will provide us with the order which will result
in success for us individually, and success for our species.
In addition to coercing us to love, the Bible and the biblical god also gave us
an objective basis for moral principles and obligations, as well as a source of
free will. If a religious philosophy is to serve as a strong external motive for
moral conduct, that philosophy must provide us with some amount of
objectivity for our moral principles and obligations. It must also make us
responsibility for our conduct.
The philosophy known as nihilism states that there is no objective basis for
moral principles or obligations. It is a philosophy which accurately
describes the nature of all living things, except we human beings.
Certainly there is nothing immoral about a colony of ants attacking, killing
and devouring a beetle. There is no reason to think that it is morally wrong
for a bobcat to prey on a rabbit. An oak tree has no moral obligation to
share sunlight with a mulberry bush. All of these living things have a
nature. The interaction of these results is the reality of what exists in the
various ecosystems. Objectively, there can be no good or bad, right or
wrong in these forms of life. Whatever is--is. Whatever will be--will be.
If there were no such thing as god in the form of love, nihilism would
accurately describe the human condition as well. Whatever the human
condition, it would be the result of the interaction of our nature with the
environment. There would be no objective basis for moral principles or
obligations.
However, the fact that we have the brain circuitry which gives us the ability
to love makes nihilism not descriptive of mankind. Our capacity for
compassion, charity, empathy, fairness, caring, altruism, and forgiveness
gives us an objective--physical, chemical--basis for moral principles and
obligations. The brain circuits for love form an archetype for the concepts
of right and wrong, good and evil. Our brain circuits for love give us some
amount of agreement on what is right, and what is wrong.
But, one might argue that the brain circuits which give us our ability to love
are just a part of our nature. As such, our ability to love is just another
thing that is--another reality which can be described by the philosophy of
nihilism.
However, the fact that these circuits work to partially control our savage
animal nature, so that we might achieve progress, makes them good for the
continued existence of humanity. The fact that love allows us to develop our
complete potential (next chapter), and experience contentment in our living,
makes love good for us as individuals. The fact that our ability to love
provides us with an objective--physical, chemical--brain circuit basis for
moral principles and obligations cancels the philosophy of nihilism as it
applies to mankind.
To the extent that our brain circuits for love are developed and functional,
compassion, charity, empathy, fairness, caring, altruism, and forgiveness
are objectively right, moral and proper conduct. To the extent that these
circuits are not developed and functional, nihilism accurately depicts the
resulting lack of objectivity.
So while our brain circuits for love are just a part of our nature, they are a
part which gives us a certain amount of objectivity for moral principles and
obligations. It is in our best interest, both individually and as a species, to do
everything possible to strengthen the force which cancels nihilism.
*****
A central concept to most Christian theology is the concept of free will.
Free will is classically defined as the independent power to make actual
choices that will affect the course that one's life will take. Traditional
Christianity proposes that free will was included in the creation of mankind.
Free will makes us individually responsible for our conduct.
Historically, and even today, Christianity and science disagree on the issue
of free will. One of the reasons that traditional Christianity has for so long
kept science at arms-length is that science is based on the philosophy of
determinism--a philosophy which states that everything has a cause that lies
somewhere in nature--that nothing just happens.
Before the maturation of the sciences it was widely believed that some things
did just happen. Since human intellect seeks a cause for the things that
happen, people often credited these happenings to supernatural forces.
But as the sciences matured, slowly there developed a picture of a universe
in which all happenings have some natural cause. Microorganisms were
discovered to cause many diseases. Matter was discovered to behave in an
orderly, lawful and predictable manner which gave us new insight into the
mysteries of our world. Slowly determinism was being proven correct.
The science of psychology embraced determinism. If schizophrenia,
depression, manic-depression, and anxiety "just occurred," why study
them? Soon psychology expanded determinism to apply to all human
behavior. Every human behavior, be it good, bad or indifferent, has some
sufficient cause or it would not occur.
Determinism slowly worked its way into the mind of modern man. The
insanity defense, for example, became more acceptable because most judges
and jurors believed that all behavior has some sufficient cause. Too much
testosterone, PMS, too many Twinkies, chemical imbalances in the brain,
the brain washing effects of television, movies and music, abuse, poverty,
oppression, and even ethnic rage became plausible causes for criminal
behavior. Because modern man has become increasingly deterministic, such
causes are often seen as being beyond the control of the person in whom
these forces are at work.
Because determinism reduces man to the level of being like a programmed
robot, people are very reluctant to discard the idea of free will. But does
modern man believe in free will? If free will is some independent power to
choose, what is it independent from? Testosterone? PMS? Blood sugar?
Brain chemistry? Television, movies and music? Abuse? Poverty?
Oppression? Ethnic rage? People cling to the concept of free will because
we feel free to choose. We feel free because the causes of our actions are
multi faced, obscure and beyond our conscious awareness. Therefore, we
cannot see clear causation for our every action. But increasingly we realize
that sufficient cause for all of our actions does exist, even though we cannot
specifically have awareness of them all.
Because of the obscurity of our perception of causal agents for our own
behavior, and because determinism degrades us, we are less likely to accept
determinism in ourselves than in others. But most people would
speculatively agree that the late vice president Nelson Rockefeller, for
example, might not have had a passion for acquiring valuable art work had
he been born the son of a sharecropper in the Mississippi Delta.
Hemingway might not have written The Old Man and the Sea had he been
born and raised in China. Even the Pope probably would not be a Roman
Catholic had he been born and raised in Iran.
So free will is an illusion. We feel free because the causal elements for our
actions are so obscure that we cannot always see their determining effect.
We feel free because it makes us feel better about who we are.
But we no longer truly believe in magical free will. Almost never in a court
room, in a psychiatrists's office, on "Geraldo," or even in congress do we
hear of defective free will being the cause of some undesirable behavior.
Because we are deterministic, we immediately search for the causes of
behavior. We hope that the causal agents can be controlled in the same way
that an antibiotic drug controls the microorganisms which cause pneumonia.
Although it is not likely that people have free will as it is classically defined,
our ability to love gives us an enhanced will that is unlike the that of any
other form of life of which we are aware. While other forms of life must
remain directly tied to their biological nature, people who have
well-developed circuits for love gain the will to deviate dramatically from
their basic animal drives.
The development of the human capacity to love has resulted in such
deviations from our basic biological nature as: forsaking wealth and
comfort, acts of unselfish generosity, the denial of sexual diversity to commit
to a monogamous relationship, thankless service to the disadvantaged, and
even giving up one's life for others. To choose such courses of action, which
are so completely opposed to our basic animal nature, illustrates the
freedom of will which the capacity to love gives us. It is only by developing
our capacity to love that humanity gains the power of choice and, therefore,
responsibility for conduct.
So often today we hear people call out for others to be responsible for their
behavior. However, without love and morality there is no responsibility for
human behavior. It is only through love and morality that people gain a
conscience and become responsible for their actions. Love and morality,
solidified in conscience, make us responsible for our conduct.
If we accept that god is love and support this conviction by working to
create an environment in which the capacity to love is developed more
completely in a greater number of people, then we are doing the work of
god--making people responsible for their behavior--giving people enhanced
will. When love and morality are well-developed features in our character,
we develop an order which allows us to live in harmony with the powers and
principles of our part of the universe.
*****
A religious philosophy which proposes that god is order and love can gain
strength from the conviction that it is the only road to functional morality,
progress and contentment. Through secular action alone we have not, and
we probably cannot, progress morally. Without strong morality our
intellect will not achieve progress and contentment. It is likely that the
present state of humanity requires a religious philosophy as a guidepost to
help us develop and maintain strong, functional morality. It may be that
humanity will always require such a force.
It is time for philosophical revision and reformation. We must generate
religious philosophies which motivate us to develop a religious dedication to
love in human life. Love and its morality deserve no less than this exalted
status.
If we gain a religious dedication to developing our loving nature, our
intellect will guide us toward perfection, progress and fulfillment. If,
however, we continue to neglect our loving nature, our intellect will guide us
toward cruelty, mercilessness, brutality, and destruction. Intellect and love
is a formula for advancement, creativity, contentment, and peace. Intellect
without love is a formula for barbarity, atrocity and our own destruction.
Empirically we know that human life is given quality through the
development of our capacity to love. Empirically we can see that love gives
us an enhanced will and an objective basis for moral principles and
obligations. The science of neurology has shown that children can realize
their complete neurological potential only when they are provided with a
loving and stimulating childhood (next chapter). The science of psychology
has shown that human potential can only be realized if children are given a
loving environment (next chapter).
Scientifically and empirically we know some of the powers of love. But do
we know of all its powers?
The brain circuits which empower us to love cry out to be developed and
used. Contentment and happiness can only exist in human living if these
circuits are developed and deployed.
Because people need to both give and receive love, and these needs are not
being fulfilled, we have become an unhappy people. Many of us are, to a
degree, suicidal. We know that such things as cigarettes, alcohol, other
drugs, and poor dietary habits are self-destructive. But because we are
basically unhappy with our lives, we do things that we know will shorten
them. Depression is epidemic in America. Is it any wonder that Prozac,
Zoloft, Effexor, and Serzone are being dispensed by the barrel?
Increasing the amount of serotonin or norepinephrine in our brains may
allow some of us to feel better. But we cannot look to a magic bullet to fill
our developmental void. This vacuum can only be filled by love.
A logical and credible religious philosophy can give us spiritual guidance. It
can guide us toward greater harmony with the powers and principles of the
universe.
"Spirit" is a term used to describe the force which guides our thoughts and
actions. Because our spirit controls our thoughts and our behavior, our
spirit is like a map which guides us on our journey of living. A spiritual map
which directs us to use intellect guided by love and morality will lead us to
lives of fulfillment.
The fact that we do not know the true nature of our spirit should not stop us
from using this powerful tool. Science does not really know the true nature
of light. There are scientific models which involve energized electrons,
photons and waves; but the truth is that people do not know and understand
the true nature of light.
Science also does not know and understand the true nature of electricity.
People know about the energy associated with electrons; but in truth,
people do not know and understand the true nature of electricity. However,
what we do know about light and electricity is used to our benefit. It can be
the same with our spirit.
We do not know if our spirit has essence. We do not know if the human
body has a "seat of soul." We do not know if our spirit is some God given
entity which has mass and takes up space, or if it is nothing more than a
group of beliefs which forms a set of attitudes.
But what we do know about the human spirit can be used to achieve
progress and contentment. Just as we do not have to know the true nature
of light and electricity to use these to our benefit, we do not have to know
the true nature of our spirit to make productive use of this reality.
Credible religious philosophies can give us the spiritual motivation and
direction which will result in strong, functional morality. Believable
religious philosophies can guide us toward love, happiness, contentment,
hope, and progress. The basis for such religion exists. It is not necessary to
"invent" god. It only necessary to transform what we know about god into
an institutionalized force to serve the spiritual needs of the growing number
who can no longer believe in the Bible and the biblical god.
While a functional religious philosophy must be based on what we know, it
must also remain open to what we do not yet know. Because we are very
intelligent and know so much, there is a tendency for us to think that we are
capable of knowing all. However, our physiological limitations make this a
virtual impossibility.
Visually, we can only perceive electromagnetic radiation between the
frequencies of 430 to 760 trillion hertz. Therefore, people are unable to
sense and perceive most of the light energy which exists. The human ear
makes our brain aware of sound waves from about 15 to 20,000 hertz. We
gain awareness of odors and tastes only if their chemical structure happens
to fit our receptor sites for these chemicals. Important and deadly
chemicals, such as methane and carbon monoxide, for example, do not fit
our receptor sites for olfaction. Because of this we cannot detect these with
our sense of smell.
All of our senses are specialized nerve cells which transduce stimulation to
create perceptions of reality. All knowledge is electro-chemically inscribed
in a brain that weighs only about 3 pounds.
With these limitations there is much reality that we do not know. Many of
the powers and principles of the universe lie in this domain. If a religious
philosophy is to be durable, it must be open to what we do not yet know, and
be flexible enough to incorporate new information.
*****
It would seem that humanity can choose between two broad assumptions in
regard to human living. The first is to assume that human living is but a
"joy ride," and that we owe future generations no care to the vehicle. The
second is to assume that there is some reason to both perpetuate and
advance our species.
If we choose to assume the first and are wrong, how tragic this will be. If
we choose to assume the first and are right, it will also be pathetic and
disastrous. If, however, we choose the second, right or wrong, the
consequences will be good.
The first choice reflects the philosophy of nihilism. The second requires a
philosophy of love. Never has it been said that god is nihilism. Often it has
been said that "god is love."
If we assume that humanity should continue to exist and progress because
there may be some important reason to do so, it then becomes our
responsibility to use our tools of intellect and love to achieve progress and
contentment. Because these tools are good, our progress will be good. The
by-product of using these tools, contentment, assures that our progress will
be continual.
Some may choose to assume that the only reason to use our tools of intellect
and love is so that we might achieve a better "joy ride." However, others
may assume that human living has a purpose which transcends such a wise
and calculated pursuit of pleasure.
For so long our concepts of what was right and good revolved around
ourselves. If something were seen as being good for humanity, then we
believed this to be both right and good. Today, because of scientific
knowledge and understanding, we know of the very small niche which we
occupy in the universe. Science has so rapidly expanded human knowledge
and understanding that many of us can no longer accept the maxim of
Diogenes that "Man is the measure of all things." Many of us are searching
for some ultimate goodness and purpose which transcends that of pure
human self-centeredness.
Alexander Pope observed that "Order is Heaven's first law." Auguste
Comte wrote that "Progress is the development of order." John Stuart
Blackie noted that "Disorder makes nothing at all, but unmakes
everything." If there is ultimate goodness and a transcendental purpose for
human living, these will probably reside somewhere in cosmic order. In the
cosmic order which produced life--in the cosmic order which we can use to
improve human life--we may find some ultimate good which both includes
and transcends human egocentricity.
Today we know that our existence is probably a finite thing. We know that
many life-forms were successful on Earth for millions of years, only to
become extinct. We know that microbes hold the potential to kill us through
disease. We know that asteroids will eventually collide with our planet with
catastrophic consequences. We know that our sun will eventually burn out,
and that all energy may become diluted in entropy. There is reason to think
that the universe may shrink into a universal implosion, possibly setting the
stage for another Big Bang.
However, if cosmic order is our god and we dedicate ourselves to this order,
we can use this order to live successfully and expand human existence. If we
recognize that love and it's morality is that part of cosmic order which most
immediately applies to human living, we can cultivate these and broaden the
cooperation which is the hallmark of functional morality. By discovering
god's order we can cure and prevent disease. By discovering this order we
can predict collisions with asteroids and take action to prevent these. By
using god's order we can escape a dying planet and continue human life on
other planets. By discovering god's order we may be able to cope with, or
reverse, entropy. Knowledge of cosmic order may even enable us to survive
the implosion of a shrinking universe by escaping to another universe which
may exist as a part of what is speculated as being a multiverse.
Science tells us that each person possesses about 100,000 genes.
Consequently, the permutation of individual humans is about 100,000
factorial--a very large number.
However, if humanity becomes dedicated to discovering and using cosmic
order, we might be able to enjoy something which approaches an infinite
existence. If our success allows us to approach infinity, every human being
who has ever lived could live again with a dramatic expansion in quality and
longevity. Such a heaven--such an afterlife--may be ours if we gain a
religious dedication to discovering, following and using cosmic order.
All of these are, of course, dreams. As things exist today they would seem to
be impossible dreams.
God, our creator, is the order which exists in all that is. The only
assumption that we must make is that we were created and exist for some
reason. It does not matter if this assumption is correct. We may never
know if this assumption is correct. However, if we do not make this
assumption, we lose.
Cosmic order is an omnipotent and mysterious god. We must be very
careful in our pursuit of this force. Without love and functional morality to
guide our pursuit, we will almost certainly experience the "wrath of god."
What we know about cosmic order at the present time is but a grain of sand
in a sprawling beach. To exercise anything but maximum discretion in
pursing cosmic order will likely bring tragic consequences.
Love and functional morality will give us the wisdom to discover, follow and
use this omnipotent force in a way that maximizes success, and minimizes
errors and their consequences. However, without love and functional
morality, we would be well advised to restrict our pursuit of god.
LOVE
"We are all born for love. It is the principle of existence, and its only end."
Benjamin Disraeli
Love is an enduring emotional state characterized by: compassion, charity,
empathy, fairness, caring, altruism, and forgiveness. Because of the unique
architecture of the human brain, human beings may be the only animal
capable of this kind of enduring emotional state.
Other animals demonstrate some of the characteristics of love. Often these
are instinctual--set off by the action of hormones on brain circuits. In many
animals imprinting (bonding) will establish a favorable inclination for the
development and maintenance of some of the qualities of love.
Ethologist, Konrad Lorenz, described and demonstrated how imprinting
occurs in some birds. Many birds experience a critical or sensitive period
for imprinting that begins several hours after hatching. During this period
the young birds become physiologically aroused, and attempt to follow the
first large moving object that they encounter. When allowed to do so, they
develop an irreversible bond to this object.
Ordinarily the first large moving object that they encounter is their mother
and proper species identification occurs. If, however, the young bird should
accidentally follow a person, a dog or a remote control toy car, for example,
an improper identification will result.
These sensitive periods are very short in duration, and the identifications
they produce are permanent. If the bird should imprint on something other
than its own kind, these unfortunate birds will always prefer to be with the
object to which they bonded during the sensitive period.
When these birds become reproductively mature, they will be sexually
responsive only to this object. These identifications will remain no matter
what corrective therapy is attempted. If the young bird encounters no
suitable object for imprinting during the sensitive period, they will become
an isolate--a bird without identification, incapable of social and reproductive
relations with its own kind.
As a child I first observed occasions of improper imprinting on the farm of
my aunt and uncle. On their farm my aunt and uncle raised chickens,
turkeys and ducks. Occasionally an accident of imprinting resulted in a
turkey who preferred to flock with the chickens, or a chicken who thought it
was a duck.
Years later I incubated fertile duck and quail eggs and allowed the young
birds to imprint on me. For the rest of their lives they demonstrated a
preference to be with people.
Puppies and kittens must at least partially imprint upon people for them to
become good pets. If a dog or cat is raised to adulthood having never been
exposed to people, it is difficult for them to become good human companions.
The effect of bonding in primates was dramatically demonstrated by the
research of psychologists Harry Harlow, et al. Harlow provided newborn
rhesus monkeys with two types of inanimate substitute mothers. One
substitute was constructed of wire with a milk bottle embedded in its chest.
The other was similarly constructed, but covered with soft cloth and was not
equipped to provide milk.
When not nursing, the infant monkeys chose to spend most of their time
clinging to the cloth-covered mother substitute, whose softness more closely
resembled the affectionate comfort of a real mother. This occurred despite
the fact that only the wire substitute fulfilled their biological need for food.
However, neither of these inanimate substitute mothers provided the
affection, security and stimulation that is normally provided by a real
mother. Harlow noticed that the infant monkeys raised with these
inadequate substitutes did not develop normally.
When placed in a social unit with other monkeys, these monkeys were
sexually inept and social isolates. Many were incapable of engaging in
reproductive behavior. The few female monkeys who did become pregnant
often rejected their young. And while therapy could reverse some of these
adverse developmental effects, some developmental potential was
permanently lost.
In the early part of this century some orphanages raised human infants in
an environment that was not that different from the experimental
environment of Harlow's monkeys. These institutions provided infants with
only what they needed to survive. They did not provide the love, affection
and stimulation which are developmental needs of children.
As reported separately by researchers Margaret Ribble and R. A. Spitz,
these children experienced a high death rate. Sometimes they appeared to
die from the lack of the will to live. They experienced retarded physical
growth, poor development of language and intellect, developed the
symptoms of depression, and were socially withdrawn. Without loving
intervention these adverse developmental effects became permanent.
In much of the animal kingdom there are critical or sensitive periods during
which experience is required to permanently wire the brain in a way that
will result in proper affiliation and socialization. In general, the more
advanced the animal the longer the duration of these critical periods.
This is why for Harlow's monkeys, and for the orphans observed by Ribble
and Spitz, therapeutic intervention was somewhat effective in reversing
some of the adverse developmental effects. However, in birds the critical
periods have a duration of only a few hours. Once this time has passed,
therapy will have no effect at all.
However, the differences between people and these other animals go far
beyond the length of critical periods. People are much more complex than
birds, dogs, cats, and monkeys. People are less dependent upon instinct, and
more dependent upon the decision making capacity of the human brain.
The architecture of the human brain holds the potential for high level
intellectual, psychological and social functioning. However, this capacity
can only be realized if we are provided with a loving environment. A loving
environment results in the brain becoming wired in a way which is
conducive to moral conduct. A loving environment maximizes the brain's
potential for decision making. For people, childhood is a time in which
much of our potential for love, as well as our intellect, becomes permanently
wired into the circuits of our brain.
Love is an emotion. Our emotions are related to motivation--what we want
or need. If we did not want or need anything, the emotional circuits of our
brain would be very quiet.
If, for example, we did not want or need money, but were given a million
dollars, we would have no reason to become emotional about this money. If
we did not want or need for our car to have a windshield, we would not
respond emotionally should someone smash it with a brick. If parents did
not want or need their children to arrive home safely, they would not
experience anxiety when their children were three hours late arriving home.
If we did not want or need for our favorite team to win, there would be no
emotional response to a victory or a defeat.
Generally speaking, the more motivation we have the more emotional we
will be. Because the human brain is conducive to a myriad of wants and
needs, we may be the most emotional of all animals.
However, we can also experience emotions when our emotional brain
circuits become activated independent of wants and needs. Psychologists
Stanley Schachter and Jerome Singer demonstrated this tendency
experimentally in the 1960's. If our emotional circuits are artificially
activated, or spontaneously activated, we experience a subjective emotional
feeling independent of external motivation. We then have the tendency to
look for something to which we can attribute this subjective feeling.
Psychoactive drugs chemically activate our emotional circuits causing us to
become emotionally involved in what otherwise might be unemotional
activities. Most psychoactive drugs affect the emotional centers of the brain.
This artificial activation leads us to attribute these induced feelings to
something.
Many writers, for example, have attributed this artificial activation to some
wonderful and insightful idea, only to examine this idea later and find it to
be quite absurd. Under the influence of drugs many people think that they
love the whole world and everyone in it. But when the drugs are no longer
activating their emotional circuits, this fondness disappears.
Low levels of brain chemicals called neurotransmitters can create
depression which may be independent of what is actually occurring in the
external environment of the person. The person then attributes their
depression to something or someone.
When the chemistry of our brain
Undergoes a change,
Someone in our lives
Will receive the blame.
Of course they didn't do it,
But we don't care.
We can't see what's in here;
We see only what's out there.
So it must be them;
They did this to me!
They suffer condemnation
For my brain chemistry.
So many lives are broken;
There are so many regrets,
Because we blame others
When our chemistry gets upset.
Many drugs, as well as malfunctions of brain circuits, can create anxiety
and panic which have no basis in the external environment. This fear will
likely be attributed to the places or the circumstances in which these panic
attacks happened to occur. Some drugs stimulate the brain to anger, which
is then attributed to an innocent person, or to an innocuous situation.
Almost every person can show temporary gratitude which manifests many
of the qualities of love in response to the satisfaction of their wants and
needs. However, enduring feelings of compassion, charity, empathy,
fairness, caring, altruism, and forgiveness are probably dependent on
having our circuitry for love developed during some critical or sensitive
period (or periods) in our maturation. Such optimal development likely
results in brain circuits of love which show high levels of spontaneous and
continual activity. The optimal development of the brain circuits for love
during this/these critical period(s) results in love becoming a personality
trait. It is like there is a permanent drug in our brain which predisposes us
to enduring feelings of compassion, charity, empathy, fairness, caring,
altruism, and forgiveness.
Love is not alone in this regard. So many brain circuits will achieve
complete maturity and a maximum level of functioning only when proper
experience occurs during some critical or sensitive period in our maturation.
Language, for example, develops best if experience with language occurs
early in life. It has long been known that when young children are exposed
to a second language, they tend to learn the language quickly and speak it
fluently without an accent. If, however, they are exposed to the second
language later in life, they require more experience to both learn the
language, and to avoid an accent.
It is also known that if a child is born deaf they do not develop normal
speech. This happens because they cannot experience speech and get
feedback on their attempts to imitate it.
However, some deafness can be corrected surgically. In those cases where
the deafness is corrected surgically at an early age, normal speech develops.
If, however, this is done later in life, normal speech does not develop.
Normal, fluent speech is dependent upon experience during a critical or
sensitive period in early life.
Vision is also dependent upon experience during a critical period in our
maturation. According to a report on ABC's "Primetime Live," if children
are deprived of sight during the first few months of their lives, they will
forever lose the chance to have their brains wired for normal vision.
Educators and educational psychologists have good evidence that there are
critical periods for the development of various educational skills, such as
reading and mathematical manipulations. This evidence indicates that the
brain circuits involved in these skills develop best when experience begins at
the right time. If the necessary experience should occur later than the
optimal time, these skills will develop, but not to the same level that they
would have if the experience had occurred during the critical period.
In 1994 the Carnegie Foundation issued a report on the scientific research
which shows that children will not develop their complete neurological
potential if they do not experience a loving and stimulating environment
during the first three years of their lives. This evidence indicates that the
first three years of life is a critical period to maximize the learning and
decision making capacity of the brain.
The same is almost certainly true of the brain circuits for love. If these
circuits are not stimulated by some amount of love in early life, the window
of opportunity will close and the development of these circuits will suffer
some amount of permanent retardation. And while love may exist in such a
deprived person, it will not exist at the level which it could have if they had
received the benefit of a loving environment during the critical period(s) in
which these circuits were primed for maximum development.
Consequently, such a deprived person will have a diminished capacity to
exhibit compassion, charity, empathy, fairness, caring, altruism, and
forgiveness. The quality of their life will suffer because they will be unable
to fully experience this high quality human emotion. They will not have a
strong attitude of love. They will be deficient in love as a personality trait.
As is characteristic of many human skills, the amount of experience needed
to achieve maximum development in the circuitry for love probably varies
from person to person. Because of genetic differences, some people will
develop a strong capacity to love, even if they receive very little love in their
upbringing. Other people will develop a weak capacity to love, even if they
are raised in a very loving environment. However, for most people the
capacity to love will be closely correlated to the quality and quantity of love
that they experienced in early life.
Our dual nature of being hedonistic and capable of love and kindness may
be like mathematical complements. To the extent that our capacity to love is
developed, the good feelings provided by these brain circuits will guide our
behavior. To whatever degree these circuits are incomplete in their
development, hedonism will exist to fill this void.
"We are all born for love." Hedonism is probably a compensatory motive
which fills the vacuum that exists when our circuitry for love is not fully
developed. If this is the case, love and hedonism exist as complements.
Their sum in our personality is equal to one. If love is 0.6, hedonism will be
0.4. If love is 0.1, hedonism will be 0.9.
Hedonism, however, will not provide us with progress and satisfaction in
our living. Love is the guiding force which will lead us to quality, progress
and satisfaction. Love is the rudder for the ship of humanity. It is a human
need, the fulfillment of which allows us to become moral and humane.
*****
When a child is born they have not only their survival needs but a need for
love which is satisfied by parental affection and stimulation. Loving parents
comfort, rock, cuddle, talk to, and play with their children. Because these
activities satisfy the child's needs, the child develops a precursor to love
described as an attachment bond.
A loving attachment between parent(s) and child results in many good
developmental consequences. It allows the child to feel safe and secure in
their new world. It causes the child to develop an optimistic attitude as they
discover that their new world is a good and satisfying place to be. A loving
attachment gives the child a feeling of importance. It creates a relationship
in which discipline will be more effective in molding behavior. It also lays
the foundation for the formation of a healthy conscience.
A secure and optimistic child is capable of learning to their full potential. If
a child has learned to feel safe, secure, optimistic, and confident, they feel
assured enough to explore the environment and to learn from it. This is the
only way that intelligence can be created. Intelligence cannot develop in a
vacuum. The child with a deficient attachment bond is psychologically and
intellectually detained by their unmet needs and will not feel assured enough
to maximize exploration and learning.
If you read any science-based developmental psychology textbook you will
find that studies consistently show that a loving attachment is necessary for
a child to realize their complete intellectual and psychological potential.
The science of psychology has proven that children raised in a loving
environment: feel secure, develop trust, are more enthusiastic, more
persistent, more cooperative, are better problem solvers, are healthier, and
probably even grow better than children raised in an unloving environment.
These studies show that a loving home environment allows children to
function better in day care, in kindergarten and in school. And while it is
true that children are resilient enough to rebound from periods where love
is lacking, long term deficiencies of love result in permanent developmental
retardation.
A loving attachment between parent(s) and child provides the foundation for
high self-esteem. The love of parents conveys to the child the idea that they
are important and lovable. Because these significant people consider them
to be important and lovable, they come to think of themselves as being
important and lovable. Thinking this, they learn to love themselves.
Think of someone that you really love. If you were put in charge of making
decisions for a loved one on important matters such as education, drug use
and sexual behavior, you would make every effort to make good decisions.
It is the same when you love yourself. People with high self-esteem are
motivated to make good choices for themselves. People with low self-esteem
tend to make poor choices for themselves. Behind almost every self abuser,
drug abuser and underachiever, you will find low self-esteem. High
self-esteem is synonymous with the enjoyment of life, as is low self-esteem
with misery. We can only become motivated to develop our complete human
potential when we love ourselves and want what is best for us.
People who have learned to love themselves develop the capacity to love
others. This capacity will result in more satisfying interpersonal
relationships, and will increase the probability of developing better
friendships, a better marriage and a harmonious family. It is only when we
achieve the ability to love ourselves and others that we gain the motivation
to really care for our fellow man. Without such capacity this aspect of
morality will not be realized.
*****
Another valuable feature of a loving environment for children is that it lays
the foundation for the development of a healthy conscience. The ability to
experience fear, and a type of low-grade fear called anxiety, appears to be
necessary for conscience formation. People who are pathologically deficient
in conscience are variously referred to as psychopaths, sociopaths or
antisocial personalities. These people often have neurological defects that
result in the inability to experience normal fear and anxiety. Because of
these defects, they do not develop a normal conscience.
The anxiety which results from the thought of diminishing the love and
esteem of parents serves as motivation to internalize the values of the
parents. Because anxiety is an unpleasant emotion, children find they can
avoid it by taking on the values of their parents. Because this conformity
protects them so completely from this negative emotion, in time these values
become automatic and relatively permanent.
While the anxiety and fear of punishment probably has some place in
conscience formation, the anxiety of reduced love and esteem of those to
whom we are bonded is probably the most effective source of anxiety for
conscience formation. If parents have satisfied their child's need for love
and formed a strong attachment bond, the amount of punishment necessary
to control behavior and generate anxiety for conscience formation will
almost certainly be reduced.
Self-esteem and the motive to satisfy those to whom we are closely bonded
probably contributes to the related aspect of conscience which Freud called
the ego ideal. This is the part of our psychological make up that allows us to
feel good about ourselves when we live up to our moral standards. Living
up to self-expectations and the expectations of those who love us, gives us a
feeling of pride for this accomplishment.
When parents have established a loving attachment bond with their child,
the stage is set for conscience formation. All that remains is that the parents
have values on which they will not compromise. Certainly, tolerance is a
virtue, but some amount of intolerance is necessary for good conscience
formation. However, what we see more and more today is a very weak
attachment bond between parents and children and fewer values on which
parents refuse to compromise.
Before the arrival of subliminal atheism the fear of god served as a second
source of fear and anxiety for internalizing values into conscience.
Excessive fear of harshly punitive parents can cause rebellion against moral
values. When one gains the strength and maturity to no longer be
threatened by harsh, punitive parents, one often rebels against the values
instilled in such a manner.
However, rebellion against a harsh, punitive, omnipotent god was less of a
possibility. One never gained the strength and maturity to effectively rebel
against such a powerful force. One certainly found pleasure in behaving in
a way that was pleasing to such a powerful god.
Today, the weak love bond between parents and children causes there to be
less anxiety from the thought of displeasing someone who loves them and
holds them in high esteem. The weak love bond between parents and
children causes there to be less pride for living up to parental expectations.
The lack of self-esteem results in less motivation to please one's self by living
up to self-expectations. Subliminal atheism has reduced the fear of god as a
source of fear and anxiety for conscience formation. Subliminal atheism has
reduced or eliminated the pleasure derived from living up to what we
believe god expects of us.
The end result is that our society is composed of a larger number of people
who have a weak conscience. These people have a diminished capacity to
exert self-control over their behavior. They do not have the means to be
truly responsible for their actions.
*****
It probably started in the 1950's. It may have been accelerated by the large
number of World War II and Korean War veterans who took advantage of
their G.I. benefits to attend college. It almost certainly invaded our society
from the top-down. As more Americans were exposed to the expanded base
of knowledge which resulted in an erosion of their belief in the Bible and the
biblical god, subliminal atheism crept into American society.
Subliminal atheism was not invented in the 1950's. To some degree it has
probably always existed. But in the 1950's the awareness of factual
information became sufficient to seriously erode the belief in biblical truths
for a large number of Americans.
Because these highly educated people rose to the top of our society, they
assumed leadership roles in the economy. Because of subliminal atheism
their greed was unchecked by the authority of god. As they took more in
monetary compensation than they contributed in production, inflation
accelerated.
As subliminal atheism spread to all levels of our society, the advertising
industry took advantage of our increasing greed and envy to create artificial
needs. Inflation, greed and envy took the American mother out of the home
and moved her into the work force to earn the additional money which was
necessary to meet both real and perceived economic needs.
In the 1960's and 1970's subliminal atheism resulted in some of the rebellion
which characterized this era. Many of America's young people could see
that something was going wrong. They did not know exactly what it was,
but they felt it had something to do with diminished love and widespread
hypocrisy.
The hypocrisy and lack of love which America's youth saw in the
"establishment" was the product of our budding subliminal atheism and the
resultant changes in our character. Many of these rebellious young people
began to experiment with psychoactive drugs in an attempt to find god.
"Love" became the religion of this revolution.
Unfortunately, it was "love" grounded in a naivete which bordered on
stupidity. Because it was passive and not productive, tolerant to the
exclusion of caring, and born more of chemically induced brain activity than
actual love, it died. This generation was then slowly absorbed into
subliminal atheism and the nihilistic attitude which characterizes this
philosophy.
Many of the social problems which face and hold the potential for the
destruction of American society are the direct result of the lack of a loving
environment for a significant and growing number of our children.
Historically, mothers served as the primary base of love, guidance and
security for the socialization of children in our culture.
According to census data, in 1940, about 10% of mothers with children had
employment outside the home. By 1960 this number was 19%. Today over
60% of mothers with children are employed outside the home.
While many women have come to want the fulfillment of a career outside
the home, others have been forced into outside employment because of
increases in inflation, greed, envy, perceived need, and divorce.
Why was it easy for parents to make the decision to relegate the love,
guidance and supervision of children to a secondary position for another
paycheck? In many cases it was not easy. However, one reason for this
rapid changeover was the traditional mentality which belittled the woman's
role as mother and homemaker. Bread winner and mother/homemaker
were never perceived as having equal status. The phrase "woman's work"
has probably always had subordinate connotations. When a second salary
became needed to chase inflation, greed and envy, "woman's work" became
expendable.
Many women were very reluctant to leave the full-time role of mother/
homemaker. However, subliminal atheism and our new gross national
psychology assisted to overcome this reluctance. Almost every facet of our
society made women feel inferior for being "just a mother/homemaker."
Our society made women feel guilty for being so lacking in ambition that
they would choose "woman's work" over "man's work." Faced with real
and perceived need, guilt and inferiority, women gave up their traditional
role and became more like men. For the high quality development of our
children this was the beginning of the end.
Who commits the crime?
Ninety percent
Is committed by the gender
That we call gents.
Which sex is more violent
And occupies more jails?
You are right, of course,
If you answered "male."
Why does it always
Turn out this way,
When the only difference is
An arm of DNA?
But in this chromosomal arm
Lies the blueprint for love and peace;
But because of testosterone
Males assume the driver's seat.
So I guess the answer
To the female concession
Is that love and compassion
Are dominated by aggression.
But the hand that rocks the cradle
Can cause any society to fail,
If the female hand
Ceases to civilize the male.
For men are destined
To destroy what they can,
If their aggression is not tempered
By the female hand.
Look at any society,
Be it sinking or swimmin',
You will see its destination
In the psyche of its women.
And if any society
Sees its women become like men
This event will signal
The beginning of the end.
In recent years we have seen a large decrease in the respect which is given
to women. Some blame this on the "women's movement" for equal rights,
opportunity, and equal pay for equal work. Seldom does something like this
have a single or a simple cause. Whatever the actual causes may be, it is
likely that subliminal atheism has been heavily involved in this attitudinal
change.
Apple pie and motherhood were once symbols of all that was right and good
in America. Many men felt moved to tattoo themselves as a demonstration
of their everlasting love for mother. In years past men accepted such adages
as "never hit a woman" and "ladies first." It is unlikely that these sayings
originated purely because women were seen as being the "weaker sex." It is
more likely that these saying developed out of love and respect for the
important role which women played as "mother."
Today, terms such as, "bitch," "slut" and "whore" are more frequently
applied to the female sex. Twenty years ago teachers almost never had the
occasion to stop a fight between male and a female students. Today teachers
have to do this quite often. The increase in rape and abuse of females in our
society is probably reflective of more than just an increase in the reporting
of such behavior. It is naive to think that the "women's movement" alone
caused this change in our regard for women. Our growing disrespect for
women is probably engendered from motives hidden deep within our
developmental make up.
It is entirely possible that women are being subconsciously blamed for the
lack of mothering which exists in America today. The love that was
traditionally associated with motherhood is, increasingly, not there. It is
possible that many blame females, the sex of motherhood, for this deficiency.
The terms "bitch," "slut" and "whore" reflect an underlying hostility
which seems to defy rational explanation. The fact that women are no more
to blame than men for the deficiency of love given our children makes no
difference to the irrational human psyche. For women today it is guilt by
association.
Thirty to 40 years ago there was great status in being "mother." Today
there is less status here, and more status in being a sex object. In the 1950's
when television gained a foothold in American society, advertisers saw the
power of the mother role and used this image to sell their goods. Mother
was boss; She was love; She was mother, the most respected and important
person in the lives of her family.
Today advertisers see that being sexually attractive is a very strong motive
for many women, and this is where their appeal is directed. As long as our
primary view of women is as being sex objects, women will continue to be
targets for abuse. And we have more potential abusers. Sexual arousal in
one who is incapable of love is a very destructive force.
If parents are fulfilled and gratified, but not absorbed by their employment,
they can still arrive home with a good psychological frame of reference to
give their children the love, guidance and feeling of importance that they
require for good intellectual and psychological development.
But subliminal atheism has made ours a cold, greedy, "dog-eat-dog world."
As a result, an increasing number of parents find themselves frustrated by,
unhappy with, absorbed with, or emotionally and motivationally drained by
their work. They bring this frustration, preoccupation and fatigue home,
making it difficult for them to provide the loving base required for high
quality interaction with their children. The result is an increase in the
number of children who mature into adulthood lacking the ability to love,
and lacking a well-developed conscience.
For the past three years I have asked my students to give anonymous, honest
answers to some questions which concern the strength of their conscience.
These are high school students. My students represent a cross-section of the
students at our school. Some are honor students. Others will drop out.
Most are from working class families, whose income would fall into the
middle and lower middle class range. The results cited are based upon 487
respondents. The questions and percentages of "yes" responses to the
questions are as follows:
1. If you were guaranteed not to be caught, would you rob a bank? 62%
2. If you were guaranteed not to be caught, would you cheat on a test in
school? 88%
3. If you were guaranteed not to be caught, would you steal from your
employer? 51%
4. If you were guaranteed not to be caught, would you steal from a
wealthy person? 60%
5. If you were guaranteed not to be caught, would you steal from a poor
person? 12%
6. If you were guaranteed not to be caught, would you kill someone? 19%
In another conscience probing activity I asked my students to write a paper
describing what they would do if for one day they were invisible. Their
responses included many pranks and acts of eavesdropping to discover what
others were saying about them. However, a surprising number dealt with
money floating from bank vaults, other acts of theft, voyeurism, sexual
assault, revenge, and aggression which frequently included murder.
If I were invisible
To others eyes,
Bankers would be amazed
At how money flies.
Stack after stack
Would float from the vault,
And being invisible
I would never get caught.
I'd go from bank to bank
Having lot's of fun--
Robbing banks
Without a gun.
When I was rich,
Then I guess
I would go to a spa
To watch the women undress.
And then I'd go
All over town
And have some fun
Slapping people around.
I'd hit them, kick them
And then I'd bite.
This invisible thing
Would be out of sight!
But I guess it's best
That I can be seen.
It keeps me from being
Psychopathic and mean.
Only one student, out of 155, mentioned activities of compassion, charity,
empathy, fairness, caring, altruism, and forgiveness. This young lady said:
"I would steal all of the dope dealer's dope, so they couldn't sell it to people.
I would steal all the dope dealer's money, and give it to the poor and
homeless..., and burn down all the crack houses." A young man did say that
he would "let all the prisoners out of jail;" but I do not think this really
qualifies as a mature act of caring and forgiveness.
Where was the conscience of these students as they creatively plotted the
prospects of invisibility? Did the thought of god influence their imaginative
plans?
These students will control the future. They are our future leaders, future
parents and the business people of tomorrow. We are not raising our
children with the love, guidance and supervision necessary for the
development of strong consciences.
Because fewer mothers are able to remain at home and devote full-time to
raising children, day care for children has become big business. Many day
care facilities are very good; Others are less than good. The social setting
of day care appears to be beneficial to certain aspects of socialization.
However, day care does not attempt, nor does it achieve, the development of
the loving attachment bond which should exist between parents and
children. Good parents and good day care will result in good children. Any
other combination will result in children who will never realize their
complete intellectual, psychological and social potential.
*****
At a time when parents are finding it more difficult to provide their children
with the love, guidance and supervision necessary for children to develop
their intellectual, psychological and social potential, other aspects of modern
living serve to devalue the love which children do receive from their
parents.
In Hamlet Shakespeare wrote, "There is nothing either good or bad, but
thinking makes it so." Almost everything that we think we know about
ourselves, we think we know because of social comparison. Social
comparison is the process of comparing ourselves to other people.
Throughout our lives we evaluate ourselves through social comparison. By
comparing ourselves to others we discover if we are better, worse or the
same as other people. We do this with such things as: our looks, our
strength, golf scores, grades in school, monetary worth, running speed,
dancing ability, S.A.T. scores, and our popularity.
However, because we are aware of our every flaw, and because we get only
a censored view of other people, there is a natural tendency to under-value
ourselves. This is often the case with our evaluation of both our parents'
love and our own lovability.
What we think we are
Is based on how we believe
That we compare and rate
To other people that we see.
But we only get
A censored, edited view
Of the other people
We compare ourselves to.
And we always see ourselves
Unedited and X rated.
This is why self esteem
Is destined to be ill fated.
If children or adolescents observe the behavior of other parents, and it
indicates that the children or adolescents of these parents are better loved
than they, they evaluate their parents' love as being deficient. Since they
are often shown only the better side of these relationships, they often draw
an erroneous conclusion.
What is even more unfortunate today is that children and adolescents also
evaluate their parents' love, and their own lovability by making
comparisons with what they see on television. The unrealistically high
standards set by such television shows as: "The Waltons," "Ozzie and
Harriet," "Leave it to Beaver," "Father Knows Best," "Little House on the
Prairie," "The Cosby Show," "Family Affair," "The Brady Bunch," "My
Three Sons," "Full House," "Family Matters," and "Who's the Boss," just
to name a few, lead children and adolescents to draw inferior conclusions
about their parents' love. Real parents will never be as loving as these
parents appear to be.
A large number of television programs that children and adolescents watch
feature characters who are very lovable. "Friends," "90210," "Melrose
Place," and even "Barney and Friends" feature very lovable characters.
Real children and adolescents will not be as lovable as these characters
appear to be.
So while many of these programs are entertaining and wholesome, they
cause children and adolescents to devalue both their parents' love and their
own lovability. Since it is not facts, but perception that counts, this
entertainment causes a miscalculation of parents' love and encourages
feelings of inferiority and low self-esteem.
Another very important cause for children not receiving the loving
environment necessary for good neurological, intellectual, psychological,
and social development is that fewer families remain harmoniously intact. It
is well known that the probability of a marriage today ending in divorce is
about 50%. With this amount of emotional conflict in the family it is
difficult to provide children with the loving base of security necessary for
them to develop their full human potential.
There are many reasons for the high divorce rate in America today.
Because of the experience of women who were encouraged to enter the work
force during World War II, women discovered that they did not have to
depend upon a man for financial support. If their husbands were abusive,
or if their marriage was unsatisfactory, women did not have to tolerate a
bad marriage. They could survive financially on their own.
As our divorce rate increased, and subliminal atheism grew stronger, the
impact of social and religious condemnation for divorce grew weaker. These
opened the door for divorce that needed to be. No one should be forced to
remain in a marriage which is abusive, unhappy or unproductive for
reasons of dependence, or because of social and religious castigation.
Once the increase in the divorce rate desensitized us from its previous
stigma, it became easier to consider divorce an acceptable thing to do.
However, because of philosophical, economic and social changes which have
made it more difficult for parents to provide a loving environment for
children, our society has seen a serious increase in the number of people
who emerge into adulthood lacking both a good conscience and a complete
capacity to love. These adults form the core of the problem of family
disunity that we are experiencing today. These adults are unable to love
their mates, their children and themselves.
Men in particular are not naturally monogamous. Women are not that
much better at the monogamy game. Without the ability to love, and a good
conscience, loyalty is an impossible task. Our cold, greedy, "dog-eat-dog
world" spawned by progressive subliminal atheism provides us with ever
increasing sources of relational conflict. Without the developmental
qualities for successful marriages, our families will continue to disintegrate.
In our society we are allowed to choose our own mate based upon what we
call romantic love. Romantic love is not a universal phenomenon, but occurs
only in cultures which promote it as an ideal. Therefore, as natural as
romantic love may appear to be, it is to some degree artificial.
What is the difference
When all is said and done,
Between being "in love"
And "loving" someone?
I "love" my mother;
I often say these words.
But I would never say
I am "in love" with her.
I "love" my sons.
They are both gems.
But I would never claim
To be "in love" with them.
I am "in love" with my wife.
About this there is no doubt;
But being "in love"
Implies you can be out.
So maybe "love" evolves,
And is forever unconditional,
And being "in love" abrupt
With continuance provisional;
Or maybe "love" is a feeling
Which grows from trust;
And being "in love" a feeling
That grows from lust.
Be it either or both
The doubts are few,
It is better to "love" yourself
Than to be "in love" with you.
The attractions that brings many couples to form a romantic relationship
are not enduring. They are subject to satiation. But when partners fight
together the "wars" of life an enduring love develops.
These are such as: wars which earn a living; wars of accomplishment;
wars which raise children; wars to overcome life's adversities. Win or lose,
fighting such wars as allies forges a strong state of love.
One of the most impressive examples of total, unconditional love is seen in
veterans of war. Their love for their comrades contains the deepest
emotional sentiments. These veterans may be old and gray, bald and
wrinkled, or physically and mentally infirm, but none of these will diminish
this total, unconditional love. If they should meet again, the strongest of
them breakdown in tears, and the force of their smiles would crack the face
of the Great Sphinx.
True love in a romantic relationship probably develops in a similar mode.
This war-like commitment was recognized by our forbearers and became a
part of traditional marriage vows. "In sickness and in health," "for better
or worse," "for richer or poorer," "till death do we part." In times past it
was recognized that husband and wife would be comrades in the "wars" of
life. Today, sadly, a growing number of our people are not
developmentally equipped to participate in a relationship of true love. They
have the misconception that romantic love should be permanent, and
drop-out when it fades. They do not endure to develop that bond of true
love which is not subject to satiation.
*****
In the survey of my students which was mentioned earlier in this chapter,
you may have been astounded at the percentage who said that if guaranteed
not to be caught, would kill someone. I was.
When I questioned the students as to who it was that they would like to kill,
so often they replied that it was a parent. I believe this is due to their feeling
of having been cheated of the love which they want and need from their
parents. Cheated because the love that they want and need is not there.
Cheated because social comparison makes them think that they were
cheated.
It seems that the perception of being cheated becomes solidified by
adolescence. The frustration of feeling cheated of love causes the adolescent
to project anger toward their parents at every conceivable opportunity. The
adolescent who feels cheated of love will often rebel against moral lessons
given by someone whom they perceive to have deprived them of the love that
they want and need.
In our society love is a "sissy" concept. With the exception of some aspects
of romantic love, we have been conditioned to associate love with weakness.
This attitude makes it unlikely that any child or adolescent would come out
and say to their parents, "you are not giving me the love that I want and
need." Consequently, the frustration and anger caused by this void are
expressed in other ways.
In many conversations that I have with students, they express anger and
even hatred toward their parents. When I ask about the specific reasons for
this attitude, the reasons so often seem not to justify these strong emotional
feelings. There is reason to suspect that unspeakable motives underlie these
strong feelings. They feel cheated of love from their parents, but are unable
to express that they have this "sissy" need.
The two most important influences on developing people are usually parents
and peers. Because the love bond between parents and children has grown
weaker, peer influence has correspondingly grown stronger. As more and
more children develop with poorly constructed consciences and antisocial
character, the peer group to which all of our children are subject becomes
increasingly negative. This influence often negates even the best efforts of
parents. The result is that the love deficient environment of some children
has an effect upon almost all of our children.
The lack of a loving environment for an increasing number of American
children has resulted in many of the social problems which threaten our
nation. A loving environment is necessary for people to develop the type of
conscience which allows for successful living in a free society. The lack of
love and deficiencies of conscience in a growing number of Americans has
resulted in our high crime rate, our drug problem, our growing number of
poor, neglect of the environment, deteriorating schools, and many other
social problems which moves our governments to tax our resources for
behavioral control.
The lack of a loving environment for a growing number of American
children has resulted in an increasing number of Americans who will never
realize their complete neurological, intellectual, psychological, and social
potential. America is being cheated of the benefits of its' human resource.
OUR GROSS NATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY
Have you ever considered
The reasons why
We shun the truth
And tell a lie?
Number one on the list,
This will burst no bubble,
We lie to keep
Ourselves out of trouble.
We lie out of necessity;
We lie out of greed.
We lie to get
What we want and need.
We also lie
Just to entertain,
To keep a conversation
From becoming quite plain.
We lie to aggress;
We do it as tricks.
Lies can really get others
Into a fix.
We lie to be kind,
When we use tact
To protect someone
From an unpleasant fact.
But the saddest of lies
Would have to be
The lies that we tell
Because of inferiority.
These lies reflect the pain
That we're not up to snuff;
And that what we are
Is just not good enough.
When the moral foundation of a society is eroded to any degree, there will
be changes in the character of the people which compose that society.
Subliminal atheism has eroded our moral foundation, and our national
character has and is changing.
In the 1960's psychologist Abraham Maslow theorized that human wants
and needs were arranged in levels which he called a hierarchy. Maslow's
theory was that the higher level needs, such as the needs to fulfill one's
potential and to make the world a better place to live, could only emerge if
the needs on the levels below them had been adequately met.
The lowest level of needs in Maslow's hierarchy are the physiological needs,
such as for food and water. Maslow believed that if our physiological needs
were adequately satisfied, then the second level of needs would
automatically emerge. The second level of needs have to do with safety.
If both physiological and safety needs are met, then we automatically
experience the next levels--needs for love, belongingness and esteem. If our
needs on these three levels are satisfied, we then experience the needs to
become everything that we are capable of becoming, and to contribute to the
well-being of others. Maslow's theory holds true for most people most of the
time. However, because human motivation is so complex, there are isolated
exceptions.
Imagine that you are inside of a safe building which is surrounded by
snipers. Should you venture from this building the snipers will shoot you on
sight. How long would you remain in this building if you had no food or
water? It would not be long before you disregarded your safety to eat or
drink. This is the strategy of a military siege. If you cut off a military unit
from the satisfaction of physiological needs, the unit will disregard its safety
and surrender or be killed. Physiological needs are more basic than safety
needs.
The same holds true for our needs for love and esteem. If a child, or an
adult, has unsatisfied needs for love and esteem, they will be dominated by
these needs. As a result, they will lack the motivation to develop their full
potential and to care for their fellow man.
Because an increasing number of American children are being raised in a
love-deficient environment, their developmental maturity has been arrested
at the level of "love and esteem" needs. Consequently, a part of our gross
national psychology is immaturity and a preoccupation with love and
esteem.
When a child comes into this world they are inferior. They are weak and
small. They cannot walk or talk. Through social comparison the child
becomes aware of their inferiority very soon. Children look around and see
other people doing things that they cannot do. They observe others doing
such things as: walking, talking, running, riding bikes, driving cars, turning
on lights, changing channels on the television set, and mowing the lawn.
These observations result in a sense of their inferiority and a need to
overcome it.
The need to overcome inferiority results in a strong drive to develop abilities
and skills which will make the child feel superior. As any parent knows, if
you do not allow a child to demonstrate what they think is a superior new
skill, the child will be angered because they are being perceived as more
inferior than they think themselves to be.
One of the skills that we are motivated to develop is lovability. Since we
have a need for love, any behavior which gains us love and approval will
likely be repeated. The motive to be lovable results in many of our
personality traits, including that of vanity.
As we grow in competency we evaluate our proficiency by comparing our
competencies to the competencies of others. The net result of these social
comparisons is our self-esteem.
Many years ago we had a relatively small number of people with whom we
could make social comparisons. If we perceived ourselves to compare
favorably with these people, then we considered ourselves to be adequate.
Today the sphere of people with whom we make social comparisons has been
expanded. Not only do we live in close association with a greater number of
people, we are also exposed by the media to a large number of seemingly
lovable and capable people. Children, and many adults, make social
comparisons with actors, their characters, athletes, singers, musicians, and
other media personalities. This is an unfortunate consequence of modern
living. These comparisons virtually doom us to hopeless feelings of
inferiority and low self-esteem.
The motivation to overcome these feelings of inferiority produces the dream
of becoming like these media role models. The achievement of this dream is
a low probability, and failure results in frustration, anger and depression.
So in addition to inferiority and low self-esteem, our gross national
psychology is characterized by frustration, anger, and depression.
If we need love, esteem and competence, and we are unable to obtain these,
we often attempt to experience these vicariously by identifying with
someone or something that we think has these things. In psychology
identification is known as an ego defense mechanism. The word ego is a
Latin word for self. Defense mechanism implies that we use it to gain or
preserve self-esteem.
In identification we affiliate psychologically with someone or something,
such as a team, a successful person, a group, or organization. These become
extensions of ourselves. Whatever happens to the team, the person, the
group, or organization, also happens to us. If the team wins, we say that
"we" won. If the person, group, or organization succeeds, we vicariously
succeed as well.
I recently had a student in my first hour class who had so strongly identified
with the Chicago Bulls National Basketball Association team, that I was able
to accurately predict whether or not the Bulls had won last night's game
based upon the expression on his face as he arrived for class each morning.
On more than a few occasions, to prevent blood-shed, I had to step in
between this young man and someone who had degraded "his" team.
In my home state we love "our" New Orleans Saints National Football
League team. I have friends who have so strongly identified with the Saints
as to wish broken legs and airplane crashes on any team which dares to
defeat them.
During the 1991-1992 school year I had a class composed of several
basketball players. When it was revealed that "Magic" Johnson was HIV
positive, I observed a depression in these students. They suddenly wanted to
know more about this virus. They talked with great interest about the
nature of the virus, how it is contracted, and they speculated about possible
cures. Because of their identification with "Magic" Johnson, vicariously,
they had this virus.
I recently had another student with a strong identification with singer Paula
Abdul. She and her friends skipped school and camped overnight to get the
best tickets for Paula Abdul's New Orleans performance. Later, as this
student described Paula Abdul's performance to her classmates, one of them
suggested that Paula Abdul was fat. I had to physically restrain her from
clawing the eyes out of the classmate who had dared to insult her heroine.
When Kevin Costner was in the New Orleans area filming the movie
"JFK," it was rumored that he was spending the weekend boating on the
Tchefuncte River near Madisonville, Louisiana. Hordes of people flocked to
this area hoping to get a glimpse of this actor.
It is well known that large segments of the American population have
similar identifications and adoration for such public figures as: Michael
Jordan, Snoop Doggie Dogg, Madonna, John F. Kennedy, Jr., Barbra
Streisand, Garth Brooks, Brad Pitt, Denzel Washington, Cindy Crawford,
and the Chairman of the Board. Even death does not deter strong
identifications. Many Americans still strongly identify with such people as:
Elvis Presley, Marilyn Monroe, James Dean, John Wayne, and Princess
Diana.
A large number of Americans view such people as stars, idols and heroes.
They wait in line to see them, aspire to touch them and to obtain their
autographs. They read about their exploits, imitate their speech and their
manner of dress.
A group of publications and productions, known as tabloids, prey upon these
identifications. Information about these people, both real and fictitious,
sells. Because it sells these publications and productions have become big
business.
Why have Americans increasingly developed these strong identifications?
What do these people have that we want? It is because we want love, esteem
and competence, and we believe that these people have it. Unable to satisfy
our own needs for love, esteem and competence, we identify to vicariously
satisfy these needs.
Another aspect of our gross national psychology is dishonesty. People have
always practiced dishonesty and probably always will. Dishonesty can
benefit us in many ways.
In childhood we are quick to learn that if we hide or alter the truth, it often
allows us to avoid the consequences of our behavior and keeps us out of
trouble. Because lying provides this benefit, it is a technique which will
always be a part of human nature.
Lying can also be used as a form of aggression. If we tell someone
something which is untrue, and they rely upon it and become distressed or
inconvenienced, it is an effective form of aggression.
Lying is also a way of dealing with inferiority and low esteem. If someone
tells others that they have skills and accomplishments that they do not really
have, their goal is to make these people believe that they are more competent
than they really are. The motive stems from inferiority. What the person
thinks they are is not good enough. If the lie is convincing, they gain the
esteem of others.
The motive of greed can be advanced by being untruthful. The term "con
artist" is used to apply to a person who uses dishonesty to gain another
person's confidence to defraud or swindle them. This type of dishonesty is
seen in varied activities, such as: the pigeon drop, false and misleading
advertising, the evangelist who claims special powers, and the politician who
deceives the public to gain election.
A gross national psychology characterized by: immaturity, the need for love
and esteem, inferiority, frustration, anger, and depression can be placated
by dishonesty. Because our gross national psychology is driven by
subliminal atheism, we believe that the only negative consequences for our
dishonesty will come from not doing it well--from getting caught. We no
longer believe that there is a god who will hold us accountable for our
dishonesty.
A socialization which results in deficiencies of conscience allows dishonesty
to be unrestrained by the internal controls of shame and guilt. We have
increasingly become a dishonest society. This flaw in our collective
character corrodes every mechanism of our society.
We are dishonest with our employees and with our employers. It is almost
impossible to know the strength and worth of many of our businesses and
industries because of dishonesty at every level. Every level misleads the
other, so that the true status of these economic units is unknown to all.
The success of our schools is clouded by dishonesty. Consider how
grade-point averages, achievement test scores and graduation rates would
differ if both students and teachers were totally honest.
We are routinely dishonest with insurance companies. We invent and
inflate claims. People fabricate and sell patients to physicians to collect
workman's compensation. People stage accidents to gain monetarily.
We are dishonest with our governments--cheating on taxes, medicare and
welfare. Many of our politicians are dishonest. These politicians collect
campaign contributions, bribes and kickbacks, and sell out the people's
interest for the dollars of the special interest groups. Our politicians have
also learned from experience that the voting public would rather hear a lie
that sounds good than the truth which sounds less than good.
In the 1992 presidential election, it appeared as if only two candidates even
considered being truthful with the voting public. This tactic eliminated one
of these candidates early, and the other saw the error of his ways and joined
into the deception game. In the 1996 presidential election there were also
many promises made, and much action proposed that fit the description of
being a "con." A society cannot function well when its members lack the
ability to be honest with each other.
Because this type of gross national psychology is growing in America today,
it threatens the existence of the greatest free society in the history of
mankind. Characterized by: immaturity, a preoccupation with love, esteem
and competence, inferiority, frustration, anger, and depression, and driven
by subliminal atheism, it is the psychology of a child--self centered and
greedy.
Increasingly like children, we are concerned only with what we want, and
not with the consequences of getting it. Our national debt, inflation,
destruction of the environment, our high crime rate, disregard for the
growing number of Americans who live in conditions of poverty and
oppression, credit cards charged to the limit, an obsession with status
symbols, high divorce rate, disintegration of families, growing economic
problems, drug abuse, and a government dominated by representatives who
are judged on their ability to pursue regional, pork barrel types of selfish
interests are all reflections of these changes in our national character.
While most Americans are not accurately described as being dishonest,
immature, preoccupied with love and esteem, and besieged with feelings of
inferiority, frustration, anger, and depression, such a gross national
psychology is rapidly becoming more characteristic of our people. While
our national character is not yet totally infested with such vermin,
subliminal atheism has created a hole in the wall which allows these traits
almost free access to our character.
We need help to assure that we will not continue to develop these traits. We
also need help to cope with the other maladies that subliminal atheism has
brought upon us. An institution already in place, our schools, could be
redesigned to provide our children with the needed love, which
philosophical and social changes have made it increasingly difficult for
parents to give.
EDUCATION
"Tis education forms the common mind; Just as the twig is bent
the tree's inclined." Alexander Pope
It is a principle of nature,
And a part of common sense,
That the tree will grow
As the twig is bent.
This principle of nature
Applies not just to trees,
But to other forms of life
Including you and me.
Today there is no doubt
That our problems are so big
Because we have not devoted
Enough attention to our twigs.
America's schools are blamed for many of the social and economic problems
which exist in our society today. Our schools graduate students who cannot
read, write or do simple mathematics. They are marketplaces for drugs and
the stage for crime and violence. Almost everyone agrees that American
education is in a state of decline, and has been for several decades. There
are serious problems in America's schools.
Many people blame teachers for the lack of educational success in our
schools. However, the truth is that most of the teachers of today are better
trained and qualified than were the teachers of 30 years ago. The most
important factor in the lack of success in American education is the quality
of the students which our schools receive to educate.
The blame projected at teachers is, at best, only secondarily their fault. In
many schools the teachers who maintain high standards will be asked by
their school administrators to explain why they are failing such a large
number of students. Administrators ask "what you can do to improve
student success." Faced with this kind of pressure, many teachers respond
by lowering their standards.
Another common criticism of teachers is that they cannot maintain
discipline in their classroom. Unfortunately, so many of our teachers were
educated in teacher education programs that were taught by those who have
had little or no recent experience in a public school setting. These college
professors know their theory, but so often they know nothing of the reality
that the teacher will face in a public school. And public school
administrators are so busy dealing with major problems that they have little
time to assist the teacher with routine classroom discipline. At my school,
for example, if a teacher should refer a student to one of our disciplinarians
for such things as using profanity, chewing gun, disruptive behavior, being
disrespectful toward either the teacher of classmates, etc., the teacher will
get no assistance. The disciplinarians are simply too busy to concern
themselves with such minor infractions. The teacher must either deal with
these, or tolerate them. With this type of situation many teachers retreat to
a line they feel they can defend.
What has happened in our schools is that the character of the average
student has changed, and it is very different from the character of the
student of 30 to 40 years ago. Because of philosophical and social changes,
so many of our students today have not received the love, guidance and
supervision necessary for developmental preparation needed to learn in the
school setting. Because our economy has become increasingly more
stressful, parents functioning in our "dog-eat-dog world" frequently do not
arrive home in a psychological frame of reference conducive to providing
their children with the loving foundation which results in a readiness to
learn.
The resultant gross national psychology characterized by: immaturity, a
preoccupation with love and esteem, inferiority, frustration, anger,
depression, and dishonesty leaves students unable to focus upon the task of
developing their intellectual potential. Given low quality raw material,
America's schools are turning out a low quality product.
It is time that we realize that a significant number of American parents
have abdicated the responsibility of raising their children in a way that
results in an educable character. Starved for love and attention, the
children of these parents disrupt the learning environment, and retard the
learning process for everyone. Those children who are intellectually and
psychologically prepared to learn, learn less. All of our children are subject
to an increasingly negative peer influence. Teachers become frustrated and
perform at a level below that which they would otherwise be capable.
Because of subliminal atheism and all of its ramifications, we are raising our
children with less love, guidance and supervision. The unloved child
becomes an adult who is incapable of loving. They abuse drugs, go to prison,
have a high rate of divorce, and produce children who will develop without
the loving foundation necessary for effective learning and productive living.
It is a vicious cycle.
The children born to drug abusing females have mental handicaps, many of
which are so different from the traditional mental handicaps, that they often
escape detection. These children enter our schools with disadvantages that
work against educational achievement.
By default we dumped on our schools the necessity of teaching such things
as: moral values, etiquette, sportsmanship, ethics, and sexuality. By default
we saddled our teachers with the responsibilities of being parents, referees,
psychotherapists, social workers, and law enforcement officers. By default
we added these burdens without the funding and without the official
authorization to carry out these functions. If American society wants its
educational institutions to turn out a quality product, then it is necessary to
provide these institutions with the opportunity and the authority to improve
the quality of the raw material. Our schools must accept the challenge of
loving and raising America's children.
While it would be desirable to have children properly raised by their
parents, this is not happening and the need is so great that we must assure
its provision by making it a function of our schools. The contribution of a
loving environment to the educability of a child is more important than the
mere presentation of information. Without this foundation the best teaching
techniques will fail.
The 12 plus years that a child spends in school are more than enough time to
learn the facts and skills necessary to prepare them to function as
responsible and productive adults. It is the lack of a loving environment
which makes them unable to fully benefit from this education.
To use an analogy of a former colleague: "Today's students are like
Coca-Cola bottles sitting in desks. They have a large capacity, but a small
neck. The teacher is like a fire fighter with a hose which emits a
tremendous volume of water. But the teacher finds that no matter what
spraying technique they use, only a few drops of water will enter these
bottles." Our schools need the opportunity to enlarge these small necks.
How can our schools be redesigned to provide the loving environment
necessary to prepare our children to learn? A very important place to begin
is with the selection, preparation and compensation of teachers.
Teacher education programs must attract very bright candidates who have
a kind and loving personality. This type of personality should be the
primary qualification to enter the teaching profession. We expect plumbers
to be able to unclog pipes. We expect medical doctors to be able to heal the
sick. We should expect teachers to treat students with kindness and love.
To be successful as a teacher in our public schools, they will needs the
self-esteem which will allow them to cope with the insults and degradation
they will find on the job.
There is no job of which I am aware in which one will be subject to the
name-calling and degradation which will be experienced by teachers. If you
are angered beyond your ability to exert self-control by being called a
"son-of-a-bitch," "mother fucker," an "ass hole," or "dick head," teaching
is not for you. While such behavior should not be tolerated, in today's
schools one must realistically be prepared for this type of insult. Teachers
must be taught to cope with such insults without the anger which would be
allowed other members of our society. To respond with anger will only
enlarge to the hole which buries so many teachers. It will also decrease the
likelihood that the offending student can be brought into the educational
fold.
Such teachers will be able to build trust and esteem in our students. Most of
the teachers we have now are very good people. However, if we are to
reverse our moral, social and psychological decay, we need the absolute best
people for these important jobs.
To attract and retain these highly qualified teachers, the teaching profession
must be elevated in both economic and social status. For too long, teaching,
as is the case with child care, has been going to the lowest bidder. At least
tripling the average teaching salary would be a good place to begin.
Tenure should be abolished. Teachers should be retained because they are
doing a good job of socializing and educating students, not because they
have managed to survive for a certain number of years.
The elevation of the teaching profession in both economic and social status
would result in attracting to this profession intelligent people who would be
better able to command the respect of students, and better able to give
students the love and attention that they require to mature to a level at
which they can benefit from their education.
The success of teaching is often dependent more on the affect felt toward the
teacher than it is on the information which is presented. In his
"Conversation with Eckermann," Goethe noted: "We only learn from those
we love." It is sad, unfair, but true that students are less motivated to learn
from teachers whom they consider to be "nerds" or "geeks" than teachers
they perceive as being "cool." It should not be this way, but it is, and
education must adjust to this reality.
Teacher education programs should require at least a four year degree in
the area to be taught. Following this, prospective teachers should complete
a one year paid internship. During this internship the prospective teacher
should be exposed to actual classroom teaching, and participate in every
other facet of the educational system. These experiences should include
working with: the school board, the principal, vice-principals,
disciplinarian, counselors, librarian, and with the various extra curricular
activities.
During this internship the interns should be taught psychological principles
which concern the development of trust, security and self-esteem. They
should be taught techniques which can be used to modify behavior, as well
as strategies for coping with disruptive behavior.
They should be trained to recognize the symptoms of conditions which
impede educational progress such as: mental defects caused by maternal
drug abuse, environmental poisoning, attention deficit disorders,
hyperactivity, dyslexia, addiction, depression, manic-depression,
schizophrenia, anxiety disorders, and feeding disorders.
If teachers are trained to recognize the symptoms of the conditions which
can adversely affect learning potential, students exhibiting these symptoms
can be referred to professionals who can diagnose and treat these conditions.
Such therapy must be made available. In the long run it is cheaper to
provide treatment at the earliest possible time than to suffer the economic
and social consequences of ignoring these conditions.
If, as a part of their professional training, colleges and universities would
make available to the public schools the services of interns in the areas of
social work, nursing, counseling psychology, clinical psychology, neurology,
pediatrics, law enforcement, and psychiatry, these interns could gain
valuable experience, and our students could receive the benefit of these
services at a lower cost to the taxpayer.
Early childhood education, such as an Early Head Start type of day care,
must become a part of our public educational systems. In its short history
the Head Start program has demonstrated the beneficial effects of early
childhood stimulation. These benefits are seen, not so much in intellectual
gains, but in psychological gains. This type of system needs to be expanded
to include the first three years of life.
The evidence suggests that this type of environment during this critical
period would result in neurological and intellectual gains. With this
advantage more children would enter kindergarten and first grade prepared
to benefit from the curriculum, and less likely to experience failure. Such an
extension of the schools to these critical, sensitive years would allow these
children to receive the love and attention from paid professionals which
their parents are unable to give them.
The school year should be expanded to become a full calendar year.
Socializing and educating children should be a full-time job. Expanding the
school year would give the students the benefit of an uninterrupted bond
with the school staff. There would never be a time during the school year
when students were without this bond. As students were promoted in
grade-level, a secure transition would be assured by a year long calendar.
Expanding the school calendar would provide the time to add the
psychological well-being of students to the curriculum, without a reduction
in the normal school curriculum.
Along with expanding the school calendar, teachers and other school
personnel must be granted additional time off. Few teachers can stay
motivated without sufficient time to recuperate from the stress of a job
which involved educating and raising children. It is generally recognized
that stressful jobs require time away so that the stress does not become
overwhelming. Teaching is a stressful job.
Our schools should employ students to handle most janitorial and
maintenance work for our schools. Our schools should be cleaned, grounds
mowed, landscaped, and building should be maintained primarily by student
workers. This will give students the opportunity to earn needed money, and
give them a sense of pride in their campus. Older students can be employed
as teacher aids, Head Start assistants, lab assistants, and to assist in clerical
responsibilities. This employment would make up for their inability to
assume a summer job.
After school employment should be automatically terminated by poor
grades. Laws regarding the employment of students should be enforced.
Although corporate headquarters are probably unaware of the practice, it is
well-known that many employers employ students beyond what the law and
good sense should allow.
The number of students in each classroom must be lowered. This is
necessary to allow teachers to focus on the developmental and educational
progress of each student. Under normal circumstances, ten students per
classroom would be an ideal size.
In addition to learning facts and skills, classes should engage in activities
such as games, field trips, social events, community service work, and
inter-classroom competitions. Homerooms should have at least bi-weekly
group discussions.
These discussions, conducted under the rules of group therapy, would be a
time when students could share their frustrations, accomplishments, goals,
interests, and feelings with the group. In short, the classroom should be
turned into an extended family.
Upper-grade classes should adopt neighboring elementary school classes to
serve as big sisters and brothers to these younger students. Each class
would regularly visit the other to work on such activities as: science
projects, social studies projects, home economics projects, mathematics
projects, community projects, seasonal decorations, or just to socialize.
The older students could plan and coordinate activities for the younger
students, such as: science, social studies and mathematics fairs. This
arrangement would give the younger students the opportunity to receive
attention, guidance and academic assistance from the older students. It
would give the older students a chance to gain the appreciation of being a
good and loving role model. It might also help to prepare them for their
eventual role as parents.
No one should become a principle or a vice principle unless they have at
least ten years of successful teaching experience. They should be selected
and retained based upon their ability to evaluate, support, assist, and inspire
teachers.
In addition, principals and vice-principals should serve as liaisons between
the school and the community. In this capacity they would procure
community resources and expertise for educational purposes. They would
also serve as public relations specialists between the school and the
community.
Student discipline should be handled by school disciplinarians who would be
responsible for supervising any security force the school might need. The
disciplinarians would be responsible for maintaining a peaceful and law
abiding school environment. The policies and actions of the disciplinarians
should be under the direction and supervision of the school board. The
disciplinarians should be separate from the principal, so that the principal
will be viewed by students as being a totally positive and progressive leader.
Incorrigible students must be pulled out of the normal classroom and be
given therapy to attempt to change their antisocial and disruptive nature.
Their parents or guardians should be included in this therapy. These
students should not be allowed back into a regular classroom until there is
reasonable assurance that they will not be a distraction to educational
progress.
The composition of school boards should be a cross section of the concerned
community. The school boards should, by law, be stratified to contain
representatives from business and industry, parents of public school
students, students, and teachers. Such a cross section would have immediate
awareness of problems confronting the schools, and would be in a better
position to work out solutions which would be acceptable to all involved
parties.
School board representatives from business and industry are necessary to
provide valuable feedback on how well education is meeting the needs of the
economic community. These representatives would head a committee of
business and industrial leaders who would give the board recommendations
on how their needs could be better served.
Parents of public school students will have a very important interest in
providing effective public education. Student representation gives students
a sense of personal involvement and responsibility for their education.
Teacher representation provides valuable input from the front lines of the
educational process. With this type of school board we could be assured of
conscientious involvement and deep personal concern.
School board members should not be paid for this service. The principle of
cognitive-dissonance suggests that, if paid, one may rationalize that they are
doing this job for compensation. If not paid, school board members are left
with no alternative but to believe that their motivation is altruistic, and
grounded in love and concern. Compensation, by providing a motive other
than genuine concern has a tendency to keep people on the board when their
interest and concern has dwindled. When interest and concern diminish,
board members must be encouraged to leave this service.
Local governments should levy a tax on parents who have children in the
public schools. This tax liability would be waived if parents devoted a
specific amount of time to school service. This involvement would include
such activities as: classroom visitation, parent-teacher conferences,
attendance of school meetings, participation in therapy to amend
disruptive-incorrigible behavior, and assistance with extra curricular
activities.
A similar tax should be levied on business and industry. This tax liability
would be waived for such contributions to our schools as: a willingness to
allow parents to become involved with school business, a willingness to share
unique expertise with schools, and a willingness to provide input to
committees which evaluate the contribution of the schools to the needs of the
economic community.
If our schools are to become more successful, every student must have a
realistic educational goal. It is pointless to have laws requiring students to
attend school if we have nothing to offer them but failure. Many students do
not have a strong academic aptitude. Today these students sit in class, often
disruptively, waiting to reach the legal age to drop out. These are students
who are likely to cost society big money in addiction, welfare, crime, and
incarceration. These students could be served by expanding vocational
education, and by adopting a dual system of high school degrees.
One type of high school degree would be for those students who have
achieved some minimum standard of academic skills. The other would be
for students who did not achieve that standard, but demonstrated the
development of such desirable employment skills as: persistence, a
cooperative attitude, hard work, and good attendance. Prospective
employers would know that these graduates might not have a high level of
academic skills, but that they do have other desirable traits sought in a good
employee.
We need to add to the curriculum the study of human nature. It is
unfortunate that in American education today, we teach more about the
nature of plants than the nature of people. The disciplines which are
primarily responsible for studying the nature of people are psychology and
sociology. These need to be a part of the school curriculum, with a special
emphasis placed upon marriage, family living, parenting, and human
development.
Today more than ever our students need factual information on these
subjects. Before they commit to marriage or parenthood, they need to know
the responsibilities and the obligations which these commitments carry. Too
often today our students make these decisions based upon fantasies of
"playing house," playing with dolls, or the illusions and delusions derived
from day dreams, television programs or movies. Our students need facts to
ponder before making these important decisions.
The responsibilities and obligations of marriage are so poorly consolidated
in the minds of so many young people today that this decision is made almost
purely by the clouded force of passion. So often the decision to engage in the
act which results in parenthood is not made with the knowledge of the
realities which this decision may bring. Good education in these areas might
better equip our students with the knowledge to make these important
decisions in a more cognitive, and less emotional manner.
We also need the inclusion of the discipline which examines the nature of
reality using empiricism and reason--philosophy. In recent years we have
seen all but the complete elimination of philosophy as a force to examine and
guide social living. With the demise of philosophy as a force for analyzing
the nature of man we have lost contact with our nature and with the factors
which cause us to flourish or falter.
Philosophy is not even an elective in most high schools. Many colleges and
universities do not require a single philosophy course to complete
graduation requirements. Our college educated minds are being turned
loose to practice the principles of: business, chemistry, education, medicine,
marketing, law, management, etc., without the benefit of even a cursory
examination of philosophical thought.
A part of any good course in philosophy would include an examination of
religious thought. We teach our children about the different forms of
government which exist. We teach them about the operation of the various
economic systems. We teach about the various professions and occupations
which can be pursued. We teach them about the various languages which
are spoken. We teach of the various art forms. Why should we not teach
children the principles of the various religions which exist, including
atheism?
This is not to advocate the establishment of any religion, or to give any
religion preferential treatment. It is to advocate removing our heads from
the sand. Religious philosophy has always been an important part of human
existence. It should not be ignored. The principles of the various religions
are facts which are significant to the functioning of our world, and to the
understanding of our fellow man.
The constitutional prohibition regarding the establishment of religion was
not intended to promote ignorance in regard to this subject. The role of
religious philosophies in human life is a reality. There is no benefit to
ignoring this. Does freedom of the expression mean that we cannot teach
our children how to talk, or how to write? Does freedom of the press mean
that we cannot teach the subject of journalism? Freedom of religion should
not mean that we cannot teach our students about the religious philosophies
which exist.
Leaving these minds unprepared to think out such issues as: the nature of
reality, what is good and true, and the nature of man, is to leave them
without the benefit of previous intellectual thought. More sadly, it leaves
them in a position to not think about these things at all.
These minds will not generate believable religious and philosophical
thoughts if they are not given the ammunition and opportunity to think
productively on these issues. These minds will not be prepared to function
as productive, responsible and moral adults until human nature becomes an
important part of the educational curriculum.
The annual inclusion of human nature studies will cause our children to
know the facts about love. They will emerge into adulthood knowing that
progress, happiness and contentment can only occur by living a loving life.
Just as they learn that two plus two is four, they will learn the benefits of
giving love to all children. Armed with these facts they will be better
prepared to function as productive, responsible, moral adults, and as good
parents.
In American schools today we are spending too much time teaching
information which is only partially absorbed and quickly forgotten. We
need to spend more time and effort giving our children the loving foundation
necessary for educational preparedness. By adding developmental
preparation to the curriculum, our children will not only learn more, they
will be better able to use what they learn to become productive members of
our society.
Today, many of America's schools are a very unfunny joke. The students
are so poorly socialized that they rebel against the very idea of traditional
school learning. They are so preoccupied with their needs for love and
esteem, that they are unable to focus on the development of their potential.
Teachers feel that they have had a successful day if they have been able to
prevent the students from killing each other and destroying the school. Too
often the qualification for being a principal is being a "good ole boy" coach
who suffered three or more losing seasons. Many of our school boards are
composed of second rate politicians who run for office, not because of an
interest in education, but because they crave power and notoriety. If we
want our free society to survive, we need to wake up to the fact that
education is a very important and critical business.
As a nation we do not want to see the reality of what is happening in our
schools. Without considering the depth of the causes, we assign blame.
Within education we grope for gimmicks which we hope will bring a
quick-fix. But each gimmick is like adding headers on a automobile engine
when the vital engine parts are in a state of ruin. At best they will
contribute little to the performance of that engine.
But our schools represent the social institution that we can use to begin to
change the gross national psychology which is at the root of the problems
which threaten our society. Our schools present us with the opportunity to
provide at least a supplement to the loving socialization of children, which
philosophical, economic and social changes have made difficult for parents
to achieve. Our schools can even provide the opportunity to help bring
parents back into the socialization process.
Business and industry can obtain direct input into the educational process to
insure that our graduates have the knowledge and skills which will serve the
needs of our economy. Psychological problems and intellectual handicaps
can be detected and treated early in life, lessening the financial burden to
the taxpayers for unproductive citizens, drug addiction, crime, and
incarceration.
So many times you hear very successful people relate that it was a certain
teacher who made an important difference in their lives. Although most
people are not aware of it, teachers probably do more psychotherapy than
all psychologists and psychiatrists combined. Teachers need to be trained
for and assisted with this responsibility. Systemic changes such as those
suggested here would give good teachers increased opportunities to make a
difference in many more lives.
These changes will require money. However, the moral and intellectual
salvation of the American people is a good investment. We are a nation that
spends a very large portion of our federal budget on national defense.
Because of this commitment, we are recognized as having the strongest
military, the best weapons and superior military technology.
However, the greatest threat to our national security today comes from
internal moral and social decay. According to news reports, of all of the
industrialized nations we spend the most money on crime and incarceration.
Although we have less than 5% of the world's population, we consume over
50% of the world's cocaine. About 10% of our population is alcoholic.
These are very expensive developmental traits.
Presently, among industrialized nations, we rank fourth in spending on
education. If we institute systemic changes which improve the socialization
of our children, we will receive a quick return on our money. In the final
analysis this investment will pay off in increased numbers of taxpayers, an
increase in economic productivity, a decrease in welfare payments, and
lower rates of crime and incarceration. Using the words of the mechanic in
a popular oil filter commercial: "You can pay a little now, or a lot later."
However, such changes in our public schools should not be funded primarily
by increased taxation. Our nation is already over-taxed and on the brink of
a taxation revolt. And, in truth, if one does not have, or will not soon have a
child or grandchild in public school, they are often unable to see that they,
too, have a stake in public education. So if these changes were funded by
increased taxation alone, it would breed resentment and contempt. This
would be counterproductive to the type of commitment needed for the
success of such an endeavor. These changes must be funded primarily by
the voluntary charity of our people.
Since the type of changes suggested here are most needed in urban areas,
the resources of these urban areas can be mobilized to support these needed
changes. Benefit concerts, benefit sporting events, auctions, raffles,
festivals, and telethons could generate the funds, and help to solidify the
commitment necessary to bring about these needed improvements in the
socialization of our children. Since many of our urban areas seem
determined to have casino gambling, maybe they should consider licensing
only those casino operators who would be willing to commit half of their
profits to our public schools. Better still, why not license only philanthropic
operators who would commit all profits to this cause?
To use our schools to improve the socialization of our children will require
commitment and creativity. To finance this effort will require equal
commitment and creativity. However, if we become committed to the
necessity of such systemic changes, we can and will find ways to accomplish
this. Just as the necessity of a heart transplant causes people to find a way
to pay for this necessity, we can find ways of financing the reconstruction of
our nation's soul.DRUG ABUSE
Not so long ago,
Clinging to a raveled rope,
I struggled free
From the quagmire of dope.
Days became weeks,
And weeks became years.
The voices still call,
But I've chosen not to hear.
I don't go to the places
That I went before.
The friends I had then
Are not friends any more.
All in all
I'm doing really good.
I'm making it better
Than I thought I would.
But I know very well,
When all is done and said,
That the demon is weakened,
But certainly not dead.
Now there's growing thought
And speculative consideration
Of changing the course
Through legalization.
This plan looks good.
It has logic, I agree;
But would it be
The best thing for me?
It might do something
To change the street feeling
About the role models
Who are doing the dealing.
It might even keep
Drugs off the street,
When smugglers and peddlers
Can no longer compete.
It would give agriculture
A shot in the arm,
As new cash crops
Could be grown on the farm.
Fewer people
Would have to die
Because a drug deal
Went awry.
And law enforcement
Might better keep order,
If their concerns
Were inside our borders.
One thing's for sure,
There would be no laments
About what it would do
For our balance of payments.
But the bottom line,
The only line that I see,
Is what all of this
Would mean for me.
Would I walk into
One of these new drug stores
And be back in the hell
That I was in before?
So I guess what I'm saying
Is to hell with everyone else.
What I want
Is what's good for myself.
But if fate
Should hand me this deal,
Then I will know
How the alcoholic feels.
While drug abuse has plagued mankind for centuries, an unfortunate series
of circumstances has converged to make the drug problem in America today
the worst large scale drug epidemic to have ever occurred.
There have been many scientific studies which indicate that some people are
genetically predisposed to become addicted to certain drugs. Many
addictions tend to run in families. Children whose biological parents were
addicted to certain drugs, who were adopted at a very early age by
non-drug using parents, show a slight tendency to follow the pattern of their
biological parents.
It is possible that our genetic makeup determines how a particular drug will
act upon our brain. If a certain drugs causes our brain to experience
unparalleled feeling of euphoria, we may be genetically predisposed to
become addicted to that drug. If, however, the brain does not respond with
unbridled ecstasy, we may not be predisposed to become addicted to it.
Whatever the role of genetics might be in addiction, psychological factors
are extremely important as well. Drug abuse and addiction are often
symptoms of underlying emotional deficits.
It is important to remember that most of the drugs which people tend to
abuse do not make them taller or better looking. Instead, they work directly
on the way people feel. If a person is not satisfied with the way they feel,
drugs will temporarily change these feelings. If they like the change, they
tend to use them again and again.
Our gross national psychology makes us vulnerable to the lure of addictive
drugs. Marked by immaturity, an obsession with love and esteem,
inferiority, frustration, anger, and depression, our development has left us
with bad emotional feelings that we want to change.
Different drugs produce different emotional feelings. Heroin provides a
"rush" of exhilaration, followed by a feeling of calm euphoria that permits a
sense of escape. Amphetamine and cocaine produce energy, a feeling of
competence and an enhanced sense of self-esteem. Marijuana slows
everything down, induces relaxation and calms feelings of frustration and
anger. In short, there is a drug which fits just about any emotional need.
Because so many Americans did not benefit from a loving, secure
development, and because we live in a rather cold "dog-eat-dog world," we
have these emotional needs.
Psychoactive drugs appear to be love substitutes. When we love someone,
we want to be with them whenever possible, and we long for them whenever
we are apart. Addicts feel the same way about their drugs. When a love
relationship is broken, we grieve emotionally. Addicts do the same thing
when they attempt to break from drugs. When we love someone, we tend to
have a fondness for the things associated with that person. Addicts cherish
their drug paraphernalia with this same fondness. When we love someone,
we think that our life would be empty and worthless without them. Addicts
feel the same way about their drugs. Too many Americans were, and are
being, developed in an environment which has resulted in their being
starved for love, but incapable of loving. Drug addiction may be an attempt
to fill this void.
It is possible that the lack of a loving and stimulating environment in early
life results in the incomplete development, and diminished functioning of the
emotional brain circuits which allows us to love. Faced with a life lacking in
the good feelings that this emotion brings, drugs provide good feelings to
replace those which are missing.
However, these substitutes are not as good as the real thing. Instead of
becoming "addicted" to living a loving life, which is good for everyone, one
becomes addicted to drugs, which is good for no one. The difference in
consequences are dramatic.
Drug technology has made the drugs of today more powerful, addictive and
damaging to the mind. Opium, although addictive, is not as addictive and
damaging as it is when refined into morphine or codeine. When it is further
processed into diacetylmorphine (heroin), it becomes even more addictive.
If the hypodermic needle is used to intravenously inject the drug, its power
is magnified another 10 to 15 times.
Many laborers in South America chew coca leaves to give them a lift; they
use them like we use coffee. When used in this form, coca leaves seldom
result in a damaging addiction. However, when cocaine hydrochloride is
extracted from the leaves, and additional technology is used to obtain free
base, you get a very damaging and addictive product.
Marijuana with 1-2% tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the most psychoactive
chemical in marijuana, is less addictive than today's marijuana which has
been selectively bred to contain 15%-20% THC. Refine marijuana into
hashish or hashish oil and you can actually die from an overdose of these
products. Designer drugs, such as ecstasy, present an even greater threat to
the functioning brain. So while previous generations had drugs which were
firecrackers, the drugs of today are bombs.
Another contributing factor to America's drug problem is, that in spite of
their illegal status, drugs are very available. In our history, America has
not always been a good neighbor in the world community. We have flexed
our muscles and, like a bully, imposed our will. Consequently, the import of
death and destruction is viewed in some countries as revenge.
Unfortunately, it is not Teddy Roosevelt who is targeted, but you and me,
our friends and our children.
Inside American borders are the dealers who import and distribute the
drugs. Operating without a conscience their lives are ruled by greed and
power. They distribute the drugs to street dealers.
Today there are so many street dealers that they enjoy safety in numbers.
They know that if the police arrested them all, there would be no place to
put them. They are like rats in a home. If you have one or two rats you take
action, buy a trap or poison. If you have a thousand you either move or
learn to live with them.
Although America is a nation of wealth, we have a growing underclass who
dwell in poverty. According to local news reports, in my home state of
Louisiana 31.2% of our children live in conditions of poverty, an increase of
8% in the last ten years. In the city of New Orleans over 50% of the
children live in poverty. The hopelessness of poverty brings little pleasure.
Drugs provide a means of "turning on" a good feeling at one's choosing. If
these people had to wait for pleasures to come from normal living, the wait
would be too long.
Drug dealers become role models for the children of poverty and oppression.
Dealers have fine cars, sexual opportunities, excitement, money, and power.
Dealers are symbols of rebellion against the forces of oppression. While
drug dealers may not live long, they live well. Living long in misery is not a
cherished goal. Consequently, there is no shortage of aspirants to deal
drugs.
Studies suggest that there is probably a greater consumption of illegal drugs
in the middle and upper middle class suburbs than in America's slums. But
it is less visible there. In the suburbs you find material wealth often
purchased through the sacrifice of a loving environment for children. The
excitement and escape of drugs placates the love-starved psyche.
If the falling of one person into the bottomless pit of drugs resulted in the
destruction of just that one person, a case could be made for "letting the
chips fall where they may." But that's not the way a drug problem works.
A drug problem in just one person spreads like a cancer. It effects the
addict's parents, their husband or wife and their children. It effects those
who are the victims of the crime committed to get the money to buy drugs,
the taxpayers who become responsible for the welfare of an unproductive
member of society, and who foots the bill for the cost of arrest, due process,
incarceration, and rehabilitation efforts. In truth, it effects us all.
Drugs invade all levels of American society. In addition to the illegal drugs,
we abuse alcohol, Librium, Valium, Xanax, caffeine, nicotine, barbiturates,
amphetamine, etc. Their legal status makes them no less destructive.
A recent study estimated that 95 million Americans are addicted to some
drug, resulting in an economic loss of $300 billion a year. There is a
possibility that these figures are erroneously low. Asking people if they are
addicted is like asking people if they pick their nose. A lot of people do it,
but fewer people will admit to it.
Drug abuse is a serious problem in America today. What can we do to solve
this very destructive and complex problem? What are we doing to solve this
problem? Will any of our present plans of action really work?
Many Americans think that we could benefit from our federal government
declaring "war on drugs." Presently our federal government is involved in
attempting to stop drugs from crossing our borders. Our government
provides support for rehabilitation programs, and for drug education. And,
of course, our government is involved in the arrest, prosecution and
incarceration of those who are caught breaking our drug laws. Many
Americans think that our government should do more than this.
These Americans think that our federal government should wage an all out
military war on drugs. They point out that America recently sent troops to
the Persian Gulf to return an oil rich country to its proper dictator. We
fought in Korea and Vietnam to stop the spread of a political and economic
system with which we disapproved. Today, on American soil, we are being
attacked with chemical warfare which is destroying our society at every
level. These Americans are not content with intercepting an occasional
shipment of drugs and chanting cute anti-war slogans, such as "just say no."
They want war!
However, the problem with a military war on drugs in a free society with an
underlying need for these drugs is that the war would be never ending and,
therefore, unwinnable. In addition, such a plan of action would win us no
friends in the world community.
Other Americans believe that our government should respond to our drug
problem by legalizing these drugs with the hope of gaining some amount of
control over them.
Proponents of legalization point out that if these drugs were legal, the illegal
drug dealers would go out of business. No longer would they be role models
for a significant segment of our society.
Legalization would put an end to the outflow of dollars which contributes to
an adverse balance of payments. American farmers would gain a new cash
crop. No longer would we have to bribe foreign governments to train their
people to grow new crops.
The price of the drugs would become very low. Lower cost would result in
less crime, because less money would be needed to buy drugs. There would
be fewer "turf" wars, drive-by shootings and fewer people would be killed
over a "drug deal that went sour."
Legalization would allow law enforcement to concentrate their efforts inside
American borders. They could concentrate on enforcing the new legal
restrictions on drugs. This would give law enforcement a more realistic
and, possibly, a more achievable task. These new legal restrictions might
better enable us to keep drugs out of the hands of children.
But in reality we would be best served by investing the taxpayers' money to
attack the underlying gross national psychology which has resulted in our
voracious appetite for these drugs. If people need drugs, a war on drugs
would be unwinnable. If people need drugs, legalization would make them
easier to get. If we reduce demand the problem of supply will be easier to
cope with.
Drug abuse will probably always be a potential threat to mankind.
However, there are actions which we can take to change the gross national
psychology which makes Americans emotionally vulnerable to drugs.
If we do everything possible to cultivate believable religious philosophies,
good spiritual guidance will result in a greater number of people who will
refuse to take part in the vast network of supply, demand, bribery, and
money laundering. If we socialize our children with more love, they will
make better decisions for themselves, and feel better about who they are.
Good feelings do not need to be changed.
At the theoretical level, if the development of the brain circuits for love is
dependant upon receiving love during some critical period in our childhood,
it is possible that such retarded circuits could result in a predisposition to
become addicted to psychoactive drugs. This is a theory which warrants
serious consideration.
Why was our drug problem previously confined primarily to our ghettos?
Was it because there were people developing in these ghettos who lacked a
loving environment? Why is addiction a culture-wide phenomenon in
America today? Is it because more children at all levels of our society are
being raised in a love deficient environment? Why did the rebels of the
1960's and 1970's so easily confuse love and drugs? Is it because there are
similarities between them? Why are there so many similarities between love
and drug addiction? Could it be that addiction to psychoactive drugs is
truly an attempt to activate the brain circuits which are developmentally
retarded in the ability to love?
Have you ever noticed that, on television, whenever illegal drugs are
mentioned there is hooting, hollering and cheering from a significant
segment of the audience? It is similar to the reception which might be given
the mention of some beloved celebrity. There is something akin to love going
on here.
Before we lose another generation to the often incurable and fatal disease of
addiction, maybe we should study the merits of using love as a vaccine to
prevent this affliction. Instead of throwing good money after bad, we should
use this money to test this vaccine. We may find that love is the vaccine that
will prevent many of the cancers which are consuming our national
character.
CRIME
It is a bad, sad scene.
You hear about it on the news.
People are killing people
Just to steal their shoes.
Reebok, Asics and Nike--
Are they really that neat?
They are actually just containers
Which surround our feet.
What's that noise outside?
Listen to all the racket!
It's people killing people
Just to steal their jackets.
It is to the credit of advertising;
There is no doubt that it works.
We want this apparel so badly
We've turned into murderous jerks.
It really is depressing.
It gives me the blues,
To think that human life is worth
Less than jackets and shoes.
Crime is a social problem of great concern to the average American. Our
growing crime rate has created an atmosphere of anxiety and fear. If our
crime rate continues to grow, it will destroy our free society.
Subliminal atheism and our new national character have resulted in an
increase in greed, deficiencies of conscience, increased drug addiction, and
increasing poverty. These are very important factors contributing to the
increase in crime that we have experienced in our society.
Believable religion and a loving environment for children both promote the
development of a healthy conscience. The conscience is a mental system
which allows us to be social. If during our socialization we learn that
something is wrong, we are deterred from engaging in that action by this
system of internal controls. If we violate the standards of our conscience,
the conscience will mentally punish us by making us feel guilty or ashamed.
If, on the other hand, we learn that something is right and good, and we live
up to these ideals, a mental system akin to the conscience pats us on the back
and allows us to feel good about ourselves.
The lack of a credible religious philosophy, and the lack of a loving
environment for an increasing number of our children, have resulted in an
increase in the number of Americans who do not have a strong system of
internal control for behavior. Because we have increasingly become a
society of subliminal atheists, religion has lost much of its influence over our
behavior. If more people believed that living a moral and law abiding life
was pleasing to God, more people would live this way. If more people
believed that living a moral and law abiding life would qualify them for an
afterlife in heaven, the crime rate would shrink. With the loss of a religious
influence we have lost a very important institution for social control.
Consequently, we have had to increase our reliance upon laws to restrain us
from immoral acts. This is a sign of moral decay. Laws are passed when
morality fails. However, the law is a poor and less effective substitute for a
conscience. A free society can function successfully only when most of its
members have strong consciences. Couple weak consciences with an
increase in greed, and you have the recipe for increased crime.
Crime which occurs out of real need has always been an understandable
reality. However, in America today we see more and more crime which
occurs because of the selfish latitude of subliminal atheism. It would be a
mistake to think that subliminal atheism has not effected every social class in
our society. While it is true that escalating crime is more visible at lower
levels of our society, it is increasing at all levels.
The white collar crime which is exposed is probably only the tip of the
iceberg. These are very cleaver people who are good at covering their
tracks. These people do not have to use a gun. These people are less likely
to be caught.
From a legal point of view, an immoral act is not a crime unless there is a
law against it. Much of the immorality available to the rank-and-file of our
citizenry has long been covered by law. However, there are many very
damaging acts of immorality which are not against some law.
Since the arrival of subliminal atheism our governments have been
scrambling to make some of these immoral actions unlawful. But this is
where the money is. Money can slow or stop law-making machinery.
Immorality at this level of our society will probably always be
under-criminalized, as well as under-detected.
In America today there is a growing number of people who live in poverty.
However, even for our poor most crime is committed in the name of greed,
rather than real need. Because the American economy thrives on creating
wants and needs, the wants and needs have been effectively instilled in
almost all of us. Anyone who has a television set is vulnerable to having
their brain programmed for greed.
If people are poor, and do not see a clearly marked avenue through which
they can escape their poverty, they will feel oppressed. When these people
see others living in the opulent affluence which is to some the American
dream, and they are being denied the opportunity to pursue this dream in
socially acceptable ways, there is an increased chance that they will pursue
their wants and needs in some socially unacceptable way. Oppression is a
reason, or a rationalization to override the restraints of conscience and law.
This type of crime contains some of the motivational aspects of a revolution.
The plague of drugs in America has made crime a way of life for those who
have become absorbed by addiction. Some estimates are that as much as
50% of all crime is drug related. Addicts seldom hold jobs, so crime is the
primary way of getting the money to buy drugs. One of the first
psychological consequences of drug addiction is the abolition of the
conscience. Nothing is more important to the addict than drugs. They will
lie, cheat, steal, and in some cases even kill to satisfy their chemical craving.
Crime is a sad reality for most of those addicted to drugs. However, it is
most outrageous for those in the business of supplying these drugs. It is
usually not addiction, but greed, a total lack of conscience, and a complete
disregard for humanity which directs these people.
Most crime can be directly traced to greed, a poorly constructed conscience
and the weakened influence of religion. This is the case with both
non-violent and violent crime. However, with violent crime must be added
the element of frustration.
Human beings have an aggressive nature. Anger, and the aggression which
it often produces, appears to be an unlearned response to frustration. When
we want and need things, and the satisfaction of these is blocked
(frustrated), we become energized with the aggressive potential of anger.
Actual aggression is employed to attack and remove these obstacles.
The human infant shows this aggressive nature. It has been observed that it
is good that infants are not born fully grown. If they were, their temper
tantrums would be deadly.
A loving environment for children causes there to be fewer sources of
frustration. A child who benefits from a loving environment will develop
maturity, a mature capacity to love and a healthy level of self-esteem. The
development of these traits will allow the person to avert many sources of
frustration.
A loving socialization also teaches a child how to tolerate some frustration,
and how to harness the energy produced by frustration to channel it into
productive actions which will effectively satisfy their wants and needs. The
result is that they learn to be more productive, and less destructive.
The character of American society makes us destined to experience high
levels of frustration. Commercial television programs our brains for need
and greed. The greater our need and greed, the more likely these will be
frustrated. Our entertainment makes us crave a level of splendor and
excitement which most of us will never achieve. Our need for love,
frustrated by our inability to love, makes frustration a continuous reality for
a large and growing number of Americans. Our cold, "dog-eat-dog world"
is wrought with sources of frustration.
Although frustration is a part of our new national character, victims of
poverty, oppression and those caught in the web of addictive drugs are even
more frustrated. Almost no one wants to be poor, oppressed or addicted.
This additional frustration increases the potential to behave aggressively.
When we are frustrated we walk around like a loaded gun, needing only a
trigger to release our destructive bullet. The verdict in the first trial of the
officers involved in the Rodney King beating case, for example, was not so
much the cause of the ensuing violence, but a trigger for the release of
frustration. Violent music, violent movies and violent television programs
serve as similar triggers.
When we are frustrated we do not always direct our aggression toward the
cause of the frustration. If what caused the frustration is too strong,
unknown or unavailable, we often displace our aggression upon safer, more
convenient objects.
Much of the violence in our society is displaced aggression. Something or
someone caused the frustration. Something or someone else is the actual
target of the aggression. The violence, destruction and looting which
followed the verdict in the first trial of the officers involved in the Rodney
King beating case was primarily displaced aggression. Much of the violence
in our schools is displaced aggression. Most vandalism occurs for this same
reason. The aggressive manner in which many Americans drive often
reflects the displaced aggression from the frustration of our "dog-eat-dog
world."
Displaced aggression is also the cause of many of the hostile interactions
which occur between husbands and wives, and between parents and
children. The violent crime of rape is usually a form of displaced
aggression, as is much child abuse. Combine frustration with subliminal
atheism and deficiencies in conscience, and you have the formula for an
increase in violent crime.
The only significant response of our governmental units to the increase in
crime in America is increased conviction and incarceration. America has
one of the highest incarceration rates in the world. According to a Justice
Department report released on June 30, 1996 citing statistics for the year of
1995, 5.36 million American adults were under some form of correctional
supervision, triple the number under such supervision in 1980. Of this 5.36
million adults, 3 million were on probation, up 4% for the year; 700,000
were on parole, up 1% for the year; and almost 1.6 million American adults
were incarcerated in federal, state or local jails. In 1995, almost 3% of our
adult population was under some form of correctional supervision.
The Justice Department also reported that between the years of 1980 and
1993, violent offenders represented the largest net increase in our prison
population, increasing in numbers by over 225,000. Drug offenders
accounted for the second largest increase. Their ranks rose by almost
211,000.
Justice Department statistics tell us that since 1980 federal expenditures on
conviction and incarceration have grown steadily. The number of federal
prison beds has increased by 300%. The average prison facility costs about
$60,000 per prisoner unit to build. It costs between $14,000 and $26,000 to
incarcerate a prisoner for a year. It often costs millions of dollars to go
through the procedure necessary to execute a convicted criminal.
We should not be lulled into a sense of complacency by temporary dips in
our crime rate. Dramatic increases in crime stimulate increased law
enforcement efforts which will result in such temporary decreases. But the
truth is that crime is a problem in our society which shows no signs coming
under control.
In terms of economics and salvaging human potential it would be wise to
focus on prevention and rehabilitation, as well as conviction and
incarceration. Believable religious philosophies can help to prevent crime.
A loving environment for our children will also prevent crime. A loving
rehabilitation will divert some from a life of crime. So while it is true that
we need more convictions, quicker convictions and more incarceration, we
also need to take action which will alleviate these needs.
We know from experience that our prisons are schools for crime. Why
would we want to send a convicted criminal to school so that they can
become even more criminal? When most prisoners are released from prison
they are not equipped nor inclined to earn an honest living. Pure
punishment simply increases the frustration and antisocial nature of the
prisoner. It increases the probability that, not only will they commit
another crime, but that the new crime will be more destructive than their
original crime.
Punishment only serves to give society a sense of revenge. It does almost
nothing to actually put an end to criminal behavior. Our tax dollars would
be better spent on prevention and rehabilitation than on punishment.
In the interest of lowering the crime rate and salvaging human potential,
criminals with a good prognosis for rehabilitation and restoration to society
should be rehabilitated and prepared to re-enter society in an environment
of dignity. They should be re-socialized, and taught employment skills, in an
environment of love, kindness and concern. Every effort should be made to
convey to them the idea that they are important and worthy of self-esteem.
This type of environment is probably the best for affecting new learning. If
this therapy succeeds in amending their antisocial nature, they should be
allowed to re-enter society, and after proving themselves, regain all rights of
citizenship.
Criminals with a poor prognosis for rehabilitation and restoration to society
should be incarcerated in a secure, but humane environment. They too
should be treated with kindness, respect and dignity. However, the purpose
of their incarceration should be to protect society from their potential
actions. They should receive the longest allowable sentences, and there
should be no such thing as parole or early release. It would be cheaper to
incarcerate these criminals for their lifetime than to suffer the cost of their
antisocial behavior.
If an evaluation of a criminal leaves significant doubt as to their
redeemability, we should err on the side of society. Justice is a worthy goal
which cannot be achieved to perfection. If prisoners with an antisocial
nature do complete their sentences, local law enforcement and victims of
their crimes should be notified of their release. However, lifetime
incarceration should be the objective for these criminals.
Such an approach would convey the idea that if the criminal is willing to
change, society is willing to forgive them and to help them change.
However, if there is not a reasonable chance for rehabilitation, society will
write them off and incarcerate them for life.
The death penalty has no place in an enlightened society. From a practical
point of view, it is more expensive to execute than to incarcerate until death.
An enlightened society would forgive the criminal's behavior as being
understandable in terms of some, often unknown, cause, that was sufficient
for the criminal action to have actually occurred. Absolute lifetime
incarceration is the appropriate response to heinous crime. Love and
forgiveness should be neither vengeful nor stupid. Forgiveness does not
mean irresponsible tolerance. Love does not mean the acceptance of
anarchy. We cannot realistically expect those who are directly hurt by
crime to instantly forgive and not feel the need for retribution. However,
governmental response to crime should be to stop crime, and to prevent its
reoccurrence. These goals are not served by having our governments
function as agents of revenge. Government should function to arrest,
prosecute, rehabilitate whenever possible, and isolate for life when not
possible.
Isolation means isolation. There should be no book deals, no television
interviews, no movie deals. Prisoners should have no right to earn outside
money from their status as a prisoner. Isolation should be conducted in
modest comfort if the prisoner is willing to work to earn modest comfort, but
never in luxury. If the prisoner is not willing to work, a roof, a bed, food,
water, and medical care is all that government should provide. Other than
this, if it costs money, the prisoner should earn that money. Prisoners
should be neither pampered not tortured.
If a criminal is deemed not reasonably capable of being rehabilitated, they
should be written off quickly. Without a death penalty, appeals could be
limited. If we need to double the number of judges and prosecutors to
hasten this process, then this should be done. Are we operating with a
shortage of judges and prosecutors because we think that, any day now, the
crime rate will suddenly shrink? Having judicial systems which respond
quickly would be good for the psychological well-being of those who have
been directly hurt by criminal actions. It might also serve as a deterrent to
crime.
Once an unredeemable prisoner is convicted we must have a place to
incarcerate them. If the redeemable are removed from the prison setting,
more prison beds will be available for the unredeemable. But if we need
more prisons, we should build them. Again, are we operating under the
assumption that our increased crime rate is some quirk that may change in
the very near future? If our house is being eaten by termites, and we are
not willing to spend what is necessary to contain them, we must concede the
loss of our house.
If the unredeemable criminal who receives a life sentence does not wish to
be incarcerated for life, and expresses an interest in repaying society for
their wrongful actions, they should be allowed to do so by volunteering to be
subjects for medical research. Since medical scientists could learn more
about cancer, AIDS, diabetes, schizophrenia, Alzheimer's, and other
dreaded diseases by using human subjects, such criminals should be allowed
to ease their guilt by making such a contribution, even if their death will
result from this activity. This should be a choice allowed such criminals. If
they do not wish to live out their lives in isolation, they should not be forced
to do so.
Crime has always been with mankind, and probably always will be. There
are genetic mistakes and abnormalities of development which will
predispose people to be violent and to have deficiencies of conscience.
However, these are not to blame for the astronomical crime rate in America
today.
A successful attack on crime must involve attacking the reasons for it. We
need believable religious philosophies. Parents must be encouraged to
provide their children with a loving environment. Our schools should be
redesigned to assist parents in the provision of this need, so that our children
can develop their neurological, intellectual, psychological, and social
potential.
Disorders which affect the realization of these potentials must be discovered,
and treated early, to avoid their costly effect upon society. Victims of
poverty and oppression must be given a clearly marked road through which
they can exit these conditions. We must end our obsession with punishment
and revenge, and concentrate on rehabilitation or isolation.
However, if all we do is build more prisons, one day we will all be prisoners
and our free society will cease to exist.
BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY
They Automate, they downsize,
They send jobs overseas.
These are among the ways
Our business shows its greed.
And our poor grow in numbers;
They suffer for these offenses.
Their lives lose satisfaction;
These are the consequences.
And our poor think that God
Does not hear their prayers,
And if God does exist,
Then He no longer cares.
They lose spirit and faith.
Because of their losing hands.
They are no longer moved
To live as God commands.
Then our society suffers;
Our morality degenerates.
Our conscience is not strengthened
By religious faith.
And the rich count their money
And buy what they please;
But find their lives are lacking
Contented inner peace.
For happiness and fulfillment
Comes not from purchased wares;
It will only come to those
Who answer people's prayers.
If each person must learn this
By sacrificing their fate,
It will be individually learned
When it is collectively too late.
As we look at our degradation
We look in places low.
For this is where we see
Our corrupt, immoral woo.
But to find the cause
We must raise our stares,
And look at those who refuse
To answer people's prayers.
Capitalism is the economic system which most closely fits the nature of man.
The capitalistic system gives us the incentive to produce. The laws of supply
and demand work to set prices in a way that most people will accept, much
as we accept getting wet when it rains. Free enterprise and competition, in
the long run, result in the best possible products at the lowest possible
prices.
Capitalism allows greed, a quality which exists in varying degrees in all
people, to function as an important motive for productivity. According to
The American College Encyclopedic Dictionary, greediness "...denotes an
excessive, extreme desire for something, often more than one's proper
share." This reference states that the word "greed" was derived from
various words for "hunger." The term "greed" implies the quality of
selfishness.
In the unloving and immoral character greed is a trait of selfishness without
virtue. However, in the loving and moral character greed is transformed
into a more virtuous trait. When one possesses a loving character the goals
of their greed are reconstructed by love. The success of one in whom greed
is blended with love must be measured in terms of more than just money.
While the transformed trait of greed is still selfish, because the "hunger" is
blended with love, its satisfaction results in virtuous productivity.
Take for example, the loving, greedy school teacher. Such a teacher
searches endlessly to develop the best teaching methods, and works
diligently to perfect these. They "hunger" for opportunities to impart
knowledge. Anything which interferes with their classroom time is greeted
with anger and disdain. Such teachers consider their class the most
important class in the school. They have lofty standards and demand that
students work hard and learn. Their teaching activities are not confined to
a schedule of bells. They are there for students before and after school.
Such teachers may be a little haughty, and they may lack tolerance for other
teachers who do not share their loving, greedy attitude. Although such
teachers are selfish and greedy, when these traits are blended with love and
wrapped in personality they will not even be recognized by others as being
selfish and greedy. Instead they will be viewed as being devoted, dedicated
and determined.
Those of loving character want to be loved. Because the loving, greedy
teacher "hungers" for love and respect, such teachers will earn the life-long
love and respect of their students, the parents of their students, and that of
their colleagues. Within their community these teachers are like celebrities.
When they go to the grocery store, a movie or a restaurant, they are
recognized and greeted with love and respect.
The loving, greedy businessperson "hungers" for similar virtues. Since
they, too, "hunger" for love and respect, they are driven to work
enterprisingly to create the best possible products, and to create good jobs.
They are motivated to give fair compensation, employment security and job
satisfaction to their employees. They too have high standards and expect the
best from their employees. If employees live up to these expectations a
life-long relationship of love and respect is engendered.
In the loving, greedy businessperson success will never be evaluated in
terms of money alone. Although wealth will usually be a part of their
concept of success, so will good products, good jobs, and the respect of
others. Without these their conscience would not permit them to consider
themselves to be successful. When such people do succeed a large number of
people are better off because of their success.
And such an entrepreneur will enjoy a higher quality life, as they live each
day with the pride of producing quality products, providing good jobs and
enjoying the respect and admiration of their fellow man. The fact that they
have a net worth of only two million dollars instead of two hundred million
would not in any way distract from the high quality existence which love
alone can bring.
So Capitalism works best in a moral society composed of people with loving
character and strong consciences. If love, morality and conscience are not
present to transform the trait of greed, capitalism will divide a society into
the rich and the poor. It is only when most members of a society have an
attitude of love that capitalism works to benefit society at every level. But
there is no need to search for an alternative economic system which does
work well without love and morality. Such a system does not exist.
To the extent that loving character and good morality exists in any society,
laissez faire is a good economic philosophy. To the extent that these do not
exist in a society, government will feel the need to restrain greed and
redistribute wealth. However, government intrusion and restraint will
make business and industry less efficient. Government regulation of
business, like all laws, is a poor an ineffective substitute for loving character,
morality and conscience. Government cannot transform greed to make it a
beneficial trait.
The social purpose of economics is to allow the members of a society to have
their needs fulfilled. The economy should provide the products which
people need, and generate the income which allows all members of society to
meet their needs. If our entrepreneurs were bright, creative, loving, and
greedy, this is how our economy would work.
However, because love is increasingly not a part of this mix, we are
experiencing an ever widening gap between our rich and poor. Because
there is less love, there is less sharing. There is no effective way that
government can control or limit unaltered greed.
For example, our federal government recently moved to increase the
minimum wage. Anyone with a calculator could discover that if the family
bread winner worked for the minimum wage, their family would be in the
poverty category. It is unlikely that such an increase in minimum wage can
change this.
Subliminal atheism and our gross national psychology will make it
impossible to bring these people out of poverty by raising the minimum
wage. Our wealthy entrepreneurs will not respond to this legislation by
sharing wealth. Instead, they will likely respond by raising prices and
making cuts which defray the impact of such legislation on themselves.
The resultant increase in the cost of living will defeat the purpose of this
legislation. The working poor will gain nothing. All people on a fixed
income will be injured. Anyone who lacks the autonomy to adjust their
income to compensate for the increase in the cost of living will suffer. With
this increase in the minimum wage it is likely that no one will win. For the
wealthy and the poor, there will be no change. Everyone else will see a
decline in their buying power. The net result will be that more people will
be nudged toward poverty, and the gap between rich and poor will widen.
Our government cannot change this. Government cannot legally require
anyone to have love and compassion for their fellow man. As long as
subliminal atheism and its ramifications exist, the gap between the rich and
poor will continue to grow.
But one might contend that government can tax the rich and redistribute
this to the poor. However, with subliminal atheism and our new national
character government probably cannot effectively do this either.
The Lafer Curve is used to describe how taxation effects the incentive to
produce. If there is no taxation, the incentive to produce is great. If there is
100% taxation, there is no incentive to produce. So there is a tax rate
somewhere in-between these two poles that will result in maximum tax
revenue. Where this point lies is largely dependant upon greed. It is
dependant upon the perception of the entrepreneur as to whether or not
they are receiving enough money.
If an entrepreneur is not satisfied with their income, they have options.
They can move their business to another country where labor is cheaper and
tax rates are lower. They can hire more part-time employees so that they
can save on salaries and employee benefits. They can downsize their
business to squeeze out more profits. If such options as these were not
available, then and only then would the entrepreneur either stop production
or share wealth through increased taxation.
In our economy today, untransformed greed rules! Even our government
must respect the power of this monarch. We are probably at a point where
any increase in our tax rates which attempts to wring more from the rich
will result in a decrease in tax revenue. We are at the point where some of
our rich are considering renouncing their American citizenship to avoid
taxation. Today more than ever our government is not in a position to use
taxation to redistribute wealth.
The social purpose of economics is lost in the immorality of the business
world. Profit is the only bottom line. If something is not done to change
subliminal atheism and our gross national psychology, the gap between the
rich and the poor will widen. Our increasing division into rich and poor
does not occur on a one-to-one ratio. For every new millionaire there are
several who regress toward poverty. The mathematics of this trend is not
good. This will inevitably lead to a very destructive revolution. And it is not
just the poor how suffer. Wealth without love will not bring happiness. The
development of a loving character will benefit everyone.
As important as love is for the development of the individual, it is just as
important for the well-being of the economy. If America's business and
industry invested love in its employees, everyone would gain.
We tend to love those who love us. If management really cared about labor
and demonstrated a genuine concern for their well-being, labor would
respond by caring about both management and the business. If a group of
people really care about what they do, they tend to do it well.
If the American worker knew that those for whom they work love them and
has their good interest in mind, it would ease much of the stress which
makes ours a "dog-eat-dog world." Americans might then be better able to
come home from their work in a psychological frame of reference conducive
to providing their children with the loving interaction that they require to
develop into moral, psychologically balanced adults.
Because our economic units do little to make employees feel loved, many
workers do not love either their jobs, or the organization for whom they are
employed. It is often an adversarial relationship--"them against us."
Certainly our economic units would function more efficiently and effectively
if there was love between "them and us."
Social philosopher and psychoanalyst Eric Fromm wrote about the
"alienation" of modern man. Fromm described alienation as the separation
of people from the product of their labor. Fromm reasoned that because the
modern worker's labor contributes only an infinitesimally small part to
some whole finished product, the worker no longer gets primary satisfaction
from the finished product.
Because the primary satisfaction of accomplishment is missing, there was a
sense of alienation or separation from the product of labor. This alienation
was believed to result in a lack of satisfaction with one's job, and the motive
to demand more secondary reward in the form of money.
As accurate as this description might be, it is possible that some alienation
may result from the lack of love and appreciation given labor by
management. If labor is given the thought that their contribution to a
business or industry is important and appreciated, and if labor is treated
with the type of love that such importance and appreciation warrants, then
much satisfaction will be gained from labor, no matter how small the
contribution to the finished product might be.
The economic side of our new gross national psychology driven by
subliminal atheism is an economy in which success is evaluated in dollars
alone. Our business is governed by profit and law, not by morality. It does
not matter if a business or industry does harm to people, just as long as what
they do is both legal and profitable.
We have all been amazed by the tobacco industry, that for decades claimed
that tobacco was neither addictive nor harmful to people; and automobile
corporations who based their decision to recall defective automobiles on
dollars, rather than lost lives; with those who produce "super" bullets,
designed to pierce bullet-proof vests; with the marketing of toys which
encourages barbarity in our children; and entertainment industries which
produce anything that will legally maximize profits.
Almost any business which can will brainwash people to induce greater
consumption and higher profits. The fact that advertising uses
brainwashing techniques is a well kept secret. To illustrate how this is
accomplished the television commercials for breweries, and those made by
McDonald's will be cited as examples. But these businesses are not unique.
Many products are sold by using this technique.
Most people believe that commercial advertising for alcoholic beverages are
just amusing, entertaining ways of letting the people who choose to consume
alcohol know that the advertiser has a product which exists. This sounds
innocent enough. If a person is a beer drinker, a beer company should be
allowed to let this beer drinker know that they have a product available to
be chosen. This is, however, not the whole story.
Many years ago a Russian Nobel Prize winning physiologist and physician,
named Ivan Pavlov, trained a dog to salivate whenever the dog heard the
sound of a bell. He accomplished this by making a surgical incision beneath
the parotid salivary gland of his dog, so that he could tuck the gland inside
out. With this done, whatever saliva was secreted by it could be seen,
collected and measured. He then deprived his dog of food and placed him in
a harness.
He inserted a tube into the dog's mouth. At the other end of the tube was a
bulbous devise filled with meat powder. Whenever he squeezed the bulb, a
small amount of meat powder would be quickly delivered to the hungry
dog's mouth. With this done he began his procedure.
Pavlov would ring a bell. Immediately after ringing the bell he would squirt
a small amount of meat powder into the hungry dog's mouth. The dog
would salivate in response to the meat powder. He then repeated the
procedure again and again--ringing the bell and having it immediately
followed by the meat powder. Finally, after several repetitions he could ring
the bell, omit the meat powder, and the dog would salivate to the sound of
the bell alone. Subsequent bell ringing would result in several salivary
responses before the dog began to dissociate the bell and food.
This model of learning became known as classical conditioning.
Psychologists discovered that many human emotions are learned through
this model. If there is a neutral person, place or thing, and this person, place
or thing becomes repeatedly associated with something good, we develop a
good emotional feeling toward that person, place or thing. We do not decide
to like that person, place or thing--it happens automatically because of the
repeated associations. Psychologist refer to these responses as conditioned
reflexes to denote their involuntary nature.
In television advertisements for alcoholic beverages we are presented with
scenes which are designed to arouse some kind of positive emotional feeling.
Frequently used are the emotions associated with sex, humor or fun-filled
social occasions. Then through repetition, these are linked to the sponsor's
product. The effect is unconscious, but the net result is the conditioning of a
positive emotional feeling to the image of the product. It works. On
Madison Avenue this technique is called Imaging.
Many advertisers use Imaging. McDonald's uses this approach to sell its
fast food. They direct their campaign primarily toward children, probably
because children make most of the fast food buying decisions. Positive
emotional images, such as: beloved celebrities, a hamburger clown,
Hamburglar, Mayor McCheese, Happy Meals, toys, and "food, folks and
fun" are repetitiously presented on television and directly linked with
McDonald's.
Today McDonald's is the number one fast food chain in the world. Are they
number one because they have the best tasting fast food in the world?
Probably not. But for children it is now an emotional decision, not a choice
based on taste.
For adolescents they link McDonald's with adolescent love. For the Los
Angeles Olympics they linked their image to the emotional thrill of personal
achievement.
You might remember the commercial in which an adolescent basketball
player was practicing diligently, working overtime to sharpen his playing
skills. Then in the actual game, with the score tied and only seconds
remaining on the clock, in dramatic slow motion he drove to the basket and
scored the winning goal to the adoring cheers of a capacity crowd. This
emotional scene was then directly linked to their logo and, of course, it was
shown again and again.
In this commercial they never mentioned or even showed a hamburger or
french fries. Their purpose was to condition an emotional feeling to
McDonald's, not to talk about food or taste. They produced a similar
commercial using an adolescent female gymnast, whose diligence and hard
work resulted in similar adoration and success.
The point is that almost any business which can uses this technique, and it
works. Research on Imaging has proven this fact beyond doubt. However,
the general public is not aware of what they are accomplishing. The
average person thinks that when sexy young people with beautiful bodies
enjoy a certain brand of beer while frolicking on the beach, that they are
just trying to entertain us. Those humorous beer commercials, lovable dogs,
a Bikini team--just entertainment to let us know that they have a product
which the beer drinker can choose. Nothing could be further from the
truth.
Alcohol is so ingrained into our culture that few people would suggest even
attempting to make it illegal. While the "great experiment" of prohibition
did result in less alcohol abuse, it also gave birth to organized crime in
America. But is it moral to use Imaging to recruit customers to drink a
beer? Is it moral to brainwash children to want a Happy Meal? It is,
however, profitable and legal.
What gives advertisers the right to brainwash the public? Basically, it is
our greed which gives them this right. We want "free" television, and we
think that commercial television is free. We are not perceptive enough to
realize that we are paying. But we are paying a large price with our money
and with our character.
There are scientists who speculate that excessive, or even a moderate
amount of television viewing during the critical periods of childhood, during
which our brains are becoming rapidly wired, causes the brain to become
wired differently. It is possible that television commercials cause the brain
to become wired for expanded greed. It is possible that this may predispose
us to develop an almost uncontrollable drive to satisfy this amplified
characteristic. If this is the case it would explain a lot of the behavior that
we see in our society today. Maybe this is why we are killing each other for
Starter Jackets and Nike shoes.
Our entertainment industries also typify subliminal atheism and our gross
national psychology in the American economy. The motion picture and
television industries take the themes which appeal to our gross national
psychology and raise them to a new level of glory and luster. The products
of these industries are similar to psychoactive drugs.
When people use psychoactive drugs they experience emotional feelings that
normal living cannot match. Once a person experiences this emotional
euphoria, normal feelings become second rate.
So it is with television and movies. We watch these "larger-than-life"
productions and their magnificence makes our normal life seem boring.
They cause us to crave a level of splendor that is seldom achieved in normal
living. Compared to the roles played by Tom Cruise, Sharon Stone, Arnold
Schwarzenegger, and Demi Moore; for example, most people do lead rather
boring lives.
The social comparisons which we make with the "larger-than-life"
characters of television and movies contributes to our low self-esteem. The
violent themes of many television programs and movies serves to intensify
our aggressive nature. This kind of entertainment gives us the idea that
violence is an effective way to solve problems. These productions teach us
new and creative ways of behaving violently. The large number of violent
scenes desensitizes us to violence; thereby making violence more acceptable
to us. Commercial advertising on television helps to create the insatiable
wants which contribute to our greedy character.
These industries know that they are doing these things to us, but what they
do is both legal and profitable. Television and film makers respond that
their productions are just entertainment--not reality. They defend
themselves by crediting us with the ability to separate fiction from fact.
But this is not how it is, and they know it. We are not that smart. Young
people in particular are vulnerable to these magnificent productions. When
you consider a gross national psychology characterized by: immaturity, a
preoccupation with love and esteem, inferiority, frustration, anger, and
depression, how can you expect such an audience to mechanically block out
the cognitive and emotional messages of these productions? It is not being
done; it cannot be done. We know this, and they know it too. There is no
need for these industries to attempt to deny their impact by crediting us
with intellect and judgment that we do not have.
Music as a form of entertainment has been in existence since the dawning of
man. Its captivating and often hypnotic appeal probably stems from its
rhythmic nature. Because of our biology people are rhythmic machines.
Music has the ability to influence the rhythm of our brains, and to induce
rhythmic patterns which evoke a variety of emotional feelings. The
inclusion of lyrics often functions to increase the emotional drawing power
of music. Samuel Johnson once observed that, "Music is the only sensual
pleasure without vice." Mr. Johnson has been dead for a long time. Things
have changed.
To achieve a distinct and independent identity there is a tendency for each
new generation to rebel against the previous generation. In the past this
rebellion has taken such innocuous forms as a new vocabulary, a different
manner of dress, different hair styles, a different style of music, and new
ways to dance.
However, because recent generations have felt cheated of the love which
they both want and need, resentment and anger have been added to the
motivation to rebel. Because of the aggressive character of this new
motivational dimension, generational rebellion has increasingly been
directed toward activities intended to offend and distress the previous
generation, such as moral values and standards. Because so much hypocrisy
exists here, it is a convenient and logical target.
A part of America's music industry has established itself as the avant-garde
in the area of generational rebellion. By doing this they have tapped into a
vein of never-ending gold. This segment of the music industry is an avenue
by which a new generation can engage in organized rebellion against the
morals, standards and values of the previous generation.
Since recent generations have become progressively immoral, each new
generation has been forced to identify with increasing decadence to
effectively rebel. Today we have musical performers who perform sex acts
on stage, sing lyrics which are tirades of profanity, which glorify murder,
and encourage hatred and sexual degradation. Certainly this kind of
product has little to contribute to the betterment of mankind; but, it is legal
and profitable.
To change the nature of this segment of the music industry requires that
something be done to change the motivation of the artists, and the needs of
those who support their work financially.
I suppose it is always possible that the morality of our nation will become so
defective that the only way for a new generation to effectively rebel will be
to turn to higher moral standards. Today a real social rebel is one who does
not use any drugs, does not exploit their sexuality, abuse profanity, or
neglect the rights and well-being of others.
It is very tempting to blame our entertainment industries for many of the
social problems that confront America today. Although it is true that our
entertainment industries do influence both our morality and our gross
national psychology, they are as much a reflection of it as a cause for it.
Operating in a free market system, their production is guided by what sells.
If sex, violence and human degradation sells, this is what they will produce.
In this respect these industries are no different from other business
enterprises that are guided by profit alone.
While it would be nice if these industries had the good conscience to refuse
to produce work which is damaging to mankind, deficiencies of conscience
are a part of our new gross national psychology. Because of this, it would be
surprising to find this type of moral strength in these industries.
Until such time that we generate believable religious philosophies and
improve the socialization of our children, these industries will continue to
produce work which appeals to, and erodes our character.
If we are able to alter our gross national psychology we will see beneficial
changes in our economy. Ostentatious, untransformed greed will become
socially unacceptable behavior. The well-being of people and families will
become important corporate goals. Emphasis will be placed upon employees
arriving home in a psychological frame of reference conducive to
participating in functional family activities. Equitable sharing of profits
will become a social and economic ideal. Products which do not contribute
to the good of the consumer will be discontinued by the conscience of the
producer.
If we are able to give our children the love that they require to develop their
complete intellectual and psychological potential, the American worker will
become more efficient and effective. Loving, greedy entrepreneurs will
create good products and good jobs. This combination will result in
increased productivity, and a better distribution of wealth.
However, if we are unable to change our gross national psychology, our
economy will continue to reflect and augment our moral decay.
Economics is a vital cog in modern living which relies upon morality to
function. Our economy can be simplistically pictured as being one giant
store. If 1% of our people steal from this store, the store will simply raise
prices to cover this dishonesty and go on about business as normal. But
what happens when this rises to 25%? What happens when it becomes
50%? What happens when it becomes 90%?
Every cog in our society is vulnerable to immorality. A society cannot exist
in the absence of rules for cooperation. Laws cannot replace morality.
Morality is the most essential component for social living.
But, increasingly we have grown to equate morality with stupidity.
Morality is increasingly seen as a disability. When the typical person uses
immorality for selfish gain, they chuckle inside because they think that they
are both smart and lucky. Smart because they see the loop holes by which
they can "beat the system." Luck because they are not constrained by a set
of silly rules which would only serve to keep them down.
But in truth the immoral are neither smart nor lucky. The satisfaction of
greed cannot match the contentment of living a loving and moral life. If,
however, increasing numbers of our people grow to be so "smart" and
"lucky," they will force our national store into bankruptcy. This will be
nihilism's finest hour. The motor will be dead, and the joy ride will be over.
POLITICS AND GOVERNMENT
Love and hate are both
Emotions that will grow.
You are almost guaranteed
To reap more than you sow.
If you decide to hate,
All the hate you do
Will be multiplied
And returned to you.
But if you choose to love,
The love that you extend
Will be amplified
And returned to you again.
George Bernard Shaw observed that "Democracy is a device that ensures
we shall be governed no better than we deserve." Considering our new
gross national psychology we are being governed no better than we deserve.
In fact, it may be worse than we deserve. Our government is a reflection of
a gross national psychology characterized by: immaturity, a preoccupation
with love and esteem, greed, selfishness, and dishonesty.
Our federal representatives have a rather difficult assignment. They are
charged with representing the interest of their state or district, and the
interest of our country. Any level of compensation or status which makes
them covet the position of representing the people, hinders their ability to
perform this dual role.
If they become addicted to the position, the interest of the country will be
neglected as they focus solely on serving the region whose votes determines
position security. This has probably always been a problem for our federal
representatives. It is certainly a problem today.
There was a time in our nation's history when our federal government
focused primarily on national issues. However, many of our states fell short
in their responsibilities, and the federal government moved to assume more
authority over state and local affairs. With this has come the power to dole
out money to state and local governments. This power has placed state and
local greed into a competition with the interests of our nation.
And, over the course of our nation's history, our federal representatives
have worked overtly and covertly to elevate their positions to near regal
status. They are chauffeured, pampered, protected, and exalted. These
grandiose positions are a natural attraction to egotistical, grandiose people,
who will do whatever is necessary to secure their positions. We do have
some very bright, altruistic representatives. However, we also have our
share of narcissists who are preoccupied with esteem, status and prestige.
The dual role played by our representatives require that they function as
both leaders and followers. They must attempt to guide our nation with
wisdom, and serve the unique interests and needs of their state or district.
However, as these elected positions have become more coveted and
grandiose, our representatives have become more our followers than our
leaders. Increasingly, it is not "these are my convictions, if you agree, vote
for me." It is "these are the convictions that I believe most of the voters
have, so I will have them too."
Candidates are challenged to put together a platform having the planks
which will result in their election. Campaigns are contests of which
candidate can best read what the voters will fall for. Because so many of
our representatives are followers, if votes were cast in congress based
strictly upon opinion polls from each state or congressional district, our
government would not be that much different from what it is now.
Once elected, our representatives play on our selfishness to assure their
re-election. Our representatives maintain large staffs whose duty is to man
the phone lines, answer mail, make gifts of flags which flew over the capital
for two seconds, intervene as advocates, and generally do whatever is
necessary to keep the voters happy. What is in the best interest of our
nation today, and in the future, is at best a secondary concern. Regional
interest which insures position security is the primary concern.
Because greed and selfishness have come to characterize our gross national
psychology, it has become characteristic of our federal government.
Regional greed and selfishness has resulted in a government which is a
"house divided." The fact that surveys indicate that most Americans think
poorly of our congress, but highly of their representatives points to the truth
of this condition. This "house divided" has resulted in both a decreased
ability of government to solve problems, and the actual creation of new
problems.
Our tremendous national debt, for example, is primarily the result of
regional greed. Our representatives want to be sure that their constituency
is served. We can only accomplish legislation for our country by including
in the legislation enough regional benefits to "buy" the votes needed for
passage. If a representative has seniority and chairs an important
committee, they can extort even more for their region. If all this means
spending more money than we take in, so be it.
Our government has always used compromise to achieve progress. This can
be done when we compromise among necessities. However, our government
today is increasingly compromising necessity and selfish greed. This type of
compromise is very inefficient. Our government is being held hostage to
regional greed. Even those representatives who are inclined to think of the
well-being of our nation are compelled to join in, because if they don't, their
constituency will be short-changed in the greed game.
Can you imagine a family that could only agree to replace the leaking roof
on their home if little Johnny is given a TV set, little Susie a phone in her
room, mom a new car, and dad a new computer? This is not an efficient
way to replace the leaking roof. How long would the replacement roof be
delayed because of the time needed to arrange and finance this compromise?
What damage might occur to the interior of the house during this delay?
What might the family debt become?
Both the American public and our federal representatives know it is this
way. We also know that this is unlikely to spontaneously change. In the
very near future we will likely have an amendment to our constitution
requiring a balanced federal budget. The American people are demanding
this. Our representatives are demanding this.
Why must we have a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced
budget? It is because regional greed, and our representatives motivation to
satisfy it, cannot be restrained in any other way to put an end to deficit
spending. The balanced budget amendment is an admission that this
behavior is totally out of control. It is like the alcoholic who knows that they
cannot control their drinking, so they self-administering antabuse. It is good
that we are willing to admit this inability; but, it would even better if
something could be done about the gross national psychology which
produced this trait.
Even if we have an amendment which forces our government to operate
within a balanced budget, the greed game will go on within this constraint.
The basic problem will be merely restrained, not solved. Such an
amendment will only function as "damage control." It would be better to
address the underlying cause of the damage.
To obtain and protect these esteemed positions our politicians are not above
using dishonesty. They tell us what we want to hear rather than what we
need to hear. We will not be told the truth if the truth will threaten their
job security. By telling us what we want to hear they believe that we will
love them. If we love them, we will re-elect them. If you ever want to hear
how wonderful we are as a people, just listen to a few politicians.
I am very smart.
How do I know?
I heard it on TV;
My congressman said it's so.
I have high moral values.
I work hard for my pay.
How do I know this?
It's what my senators say.
Whenever my ego suffers,
And self-esteem is missin',
I'm reminded of how good I am
By listening to politicians.
And you can bet I will
Continue to help elect
People so good at assessing
My character and intellect.
Because of our new gross national psychology we are increasingly not
thinking as mature adults. Attuned to our character, our politicians appeal
to our immaturity. They sway our votes by calling their opponents childish
names and by quoting movie heroes. They promise what they have to
promise to get elected. They do not believe that we are mature enough to
consider all of their promises. They believe that we will dwell only on the
ones that we want and ignore the rest. They are often right in their
assessment.
Politicians excite us
And create quite a stir
With promises to you and me,
And to him and to her.
But if they kept these promises,
How pitiful it would be.
I would love one
And despise the other three.
And you, he and her
Would feel the same;
So no one really wins
In the promising game--
Except the politician
Who gets our vote
And accomplishes nothing
But stirring our hope.
Our new gross national psychology increasingly makes us unable to identify
the root causes for our problems. It also causes us to embrace simplistic and
symbolic solutions. Instead of directing our attention toward actual causes,
we tend to rely upon laws to repress the symptoms. Our new gross national
psychology has created the misconception that if there is a problem, passing
a law will solve it.
We want a law against abortion, without considering the underlying reasons
for the high demand for abortion. We want a law protecting and glorifying
our flag, without an understanding of the causes for its disrespect. We think
that a law allowing prayer in schools will lead us back to God. We think
that harsh laws concerning drug use will solve our growing problem of
addiction. We think that if our government builds more prisons, that will
solve our problem with crime. We think that building orphanages will solve
our problem with "career" welfare mothers, teen pregnancies and family
decay. We believe that censorship laws will curb our desire for lustful and
vulgar forms of entertainment. We are not thinking at a high level of
maturity.
Since so many of our representatives are our followers, they attempt to give
us what our maturity requires--simple and symbolic solutions. If they have
real insight into the underlying causes of our problems, they will reveal only
what will work to increase their popularity. Surely some of our
representatives have detected subliminal atheism and our new gross
national psychology. But criticizing religion, or telling the voters of their
character flaws will not increase their popularity. Telling people the truth
is not a part of their working vocabulary. Our representatives can only
exercise wisdom within the bounds of what a majority of the voters perceive
to be wise.
Problems such as: drug abuse, crime, pollution, poverty, oppression, and
the failure of our schools, will not gain our representative's attention until
these issues threaten to effect voting behavior. Today almost no problem
can be "nipped in the bud." As buds they do not pose a threat to our
representative's positions. For these representatives, if it does not effect
voting behavior, it is not a problem.
For example, it is likely that many of our federal representatives have a
good idea of the adverse effects that the advertising technique, Imaging, has
upon us. It is probably correct to assume that public revelation and
education in regard to this technique would decrease both its effectiveness,
and the impact it has upon our character. But because the effects of this
technique are not widely known, it is not a threat to our representatives
positions. If and when it does threaten to effect voting behavior, it will
become an important issue. And what then will our representatives want to
do about this? Probably pass some law.
Our federal and state governments are games with three visible players: the
voters, the press and our representatives. The role of the press is to
recognize and formulate issues, and to convince the voters that these issues
have merit. If successful, our representatives are stirred to action. There is
a fourth, less visible, but very powerful player--the special interests armed
with the weapon of money to insure the well-being of their "special"
interest.
In this game the role of wisdom is assumed by the press. Our governments
would certainly work better if all players possessed intellect guided by
experience, love and morality. The achievement of this should become state
and national goals. It would be better for our states, and for our nation, if
this game were being played by wise participants.
With the example set at the top, civil service has become ineffective and
inefficient. The phrase "good enough for government work" did not
originate without justification. The peoples money is nobody's money.
Since effective and efficient government is not a primary concern for our
representatives, it is naturally not a concern for many of the functionaries of
government.
The attitude at the top has contaminated the attitude of many of our civil
servants, and has molded many of our government agencies into indolent,
lethargic and under-productive bureaucracies. If real leaders expected and
demanded that the people's business be conducted in an efficient and
effective manner, it would be done in this way.
The attitude at the top has encouraged those who do business with
government to cheat the people at every turn. If our elected representatives
had genuine concern for the interest of our nation, government contractors
would toe this line as well. If real leaders expected and demanded honesty
and fairness from those who do business with the people, it would be this
way.
A very good illustration of regional greed, immature thinking, special
interest money, subliminal atheism, and our new gross national psychology
at work in America today can be seen in the proliferation of legalized
gambling. Although this was written to apply to the decision to legalize
gambling in Louisiana, the political and social thought involved in such a
decision applies to all states which have adopted, or are seriously
considering such activity.
Is it reasonable to think
That gambling is great
For Louisiana
Or any other state?
People go to the casino
And lose, that's a fact.
The rich get richer
And the state gets a tax.
If people didn't lose
At the casino,
Where do you think
That money would go?
For groceries, savings,
Furniture or a show--
These create jobs and taxes
Just like the casino!
But the biggest difference
Is that gambling addicts.
It destroys lives
And puts families in a fix.
If only tourists
Gambled in our state,
It would be
Economically great.
This fact was recognized
By the principality of Monaco,
Who only allow tourists
To gamble in its casino.
But if Louisiana did
Like this principality,
What would this say
For our morality?
Arkansas, Texas,
Send us all you care,
Then go back home
Your lives to repair.
But when every state
Joins in this trend,
From where do you suppose
The money will come them?
So we must gamble
That they won't follow suit.
If it is more them than us,
We can rake in the loot.
And as for morality,
What can you say?
We never had much
Of that anyway?
We can only see what gambling will do to benefit us now. We are not
mature enough to see the future consequences of our actions. We are
willing to sacrifice the well-being of our neighbor for money. Since we are
this way, our representatives are this way too. So our politicians take the
money from the gambling lobby and run--for re-election.
Should gambling be legal in a free society? It probably should. Will the
proliferation of the gambling industry be good for our people? Considering
subliminal atheism, our national character and our cold, greedy,
"dog-eat-dog world," many lives will be destroyed as we place our hopes in
the hands of luck, with the odds stacked squarely against us. Would a moral
person want to earn money through such business activity? It is doubtful
that they would. Would moral leaders push gambling as a good source of
jobs and revenue? No way!
Our representatives are so concerned with maintaining the coalition which
keeps them in office that tough issues, which might otherwise be decided
with wisdom, become entangled with complexities. These entangled
complexities are not the actual pros and cons of the issues, but coalition
interest and our representative's desire to protect this interest. They are
unable to evaluate an issue on pure merit, because their concerns are
divided between the merit of the issue and the need to keep their coalition
satisfied.
So we have federal representatives who are severely constrained in their
leeway to exercise wisdom. Every decision is a compromise between the
forces of regional greed, solidifying constituency, special interest money,
and the merit of the issue. As a result, our federal government is doing
almost everything ineffectively and inefficiently.
An ineffective and inefficient "pile of money" becomes a natural target of
which government functionaries and contractors can take advantage. You
would be hard put to find an American who thinks highly of our federal
government. It would be even more difficult to find an American who feels
good about supporting our federal government by cheerfully paying taxes.
As it exists today we do not respect, and we do not want to support our
federal government.
The preamble to our constitution states the purposes for which our federal
government was created. These purposes are: "to form a more perfect
union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common
defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to
ourselves and our posterity..." Our federal government was established to
be a benevolent, non-profit organization.
Benevolent, non-profit organizations which we respect and support are
efficient organizations which put a high percent of their resources directly
into serving their stated purposes. To these organizations we gladly donate
our time and money. Our business and industry will either donate, or sell
goods and services to these organizations at cost. We feel good for
supporting the work of these organizations. Anyone who took advantage of
or stole from such an organization would be considered a very low form of
life. Those benevolent, non-profit organizations which we do not respect
and support are those in which much of their resources are wasted, or
directed away from their benevolent purposes. For these organizations we
avoid donating our time and money. Our business and industry avoid being
charitable toward them. We are suspicious of their motives, and we
question whether they are really benevolent, non-profit organizations at all.
Not only do we avoid making contributions to such organizations, we feel
justified in this avoidance. If we were forced to contribute to such
organizations we would feel angry and resentful.
This is why we do not respect, and do not want to support our government.
This is why government functionaries and contractors feel justified in sand
bagging it, cheating it and stealing from it. When our government buys
hammers and toilet seats for hundreds of times the hardware store prices;
when our representatives vote themselves huge salaries and lavish benefits;
when we see representatives hide regional pork in otherwise necessary
legislation; when we see theft, corruption and waste, we see our federal
government as one of those benevolent, non-profit organization that we
cannot respect, and do not want to support. The only way that our federal
government can regain our respect and support is to become efficient and
devote a high percent of our contributions to the benevolent purposes of
government.
In times of crisis or tragedy when our federal government efficiently
pursues and accomplishes its benevolent purposes, we are very proud to be
Americans, and are proud of our federal government. However, as our
federal government increasingly wastes our contributions and engages in
non-benevolent activities, we do not respect our federal government; we
feel justified in avoiding taxation; we feel angry and resentful for being
forced to pay taxes.
Any beneficial change in our gross national psychology will improve our
governments. Any improvement in our governments will result in beneficial
changes in our national character.
However, we cannot look to either major political party to change anything
for the better. The only difference between Republicans and Democrats is
that they "screw up" in different ways. By changing party control of our
governments we will only see a different array of mistakes. We must take
the first step.
To improve our federal government a very good first step would be to do
everything possible to reduce the trappings of our representative's positions.
A salary equal to the salary of the average American would discourage the
grandiose. Social security is an adequate retirement benefit for dedicated
public representatives. Health clubs are available in the private sector for a
reasonable cost. If a representative cannot drive themselves to their jobs we
should elect people who have this skill. We must insist that all forms of
bribery of our public representative be eliminated. If we demand this in
large enough numbers, we can have it this way.
Public servants should never earn more than the average person that they
serve. Give our public servants the same compensation that is enjoyed by
the average American and we can reduce the craving for these positions.
This will place our representatives in a better position to perform their dual
role of serving the interest of both their region, and our country.
In America today, there is growing sentiment for the adoption of term limits
for our federal representatives. If, however, we set the compensation for
these representatives at the level enjoyed by the average American, term
limitations would be unnecessary.
Any change in compensation or status which discourages the selfish and
grandiose will have a cleansing effect on government. Fewer narcissists
would want these positions if they were paid $30,000 a year. Our
representatives would go in, make their contribution, and get out. Eliminate
the grandiose nature of these jobs and the grandiose will not apply.
While there may be benefits to having career politicians in our federal
government, the disadvantages almost certainly outweigh the gains. In our
federal government there are too many lawyers passing too many laws.
This is a lot like letting the fox guard the hen house. We need leaders who
will perform their jobs with wisdom and truth, even if it means taking the
chance of losing their $30,000 a year job.
Our governments should never attempt to do all things for all people.
Having representatives who secure their positions by catering to the selfish
interest of their constituents is not in the best interest of our country, or
these constituents. Whenever government assumes responsibility for
functions which should be served by individual morality, it weakens these
character traits in its people.
We are a nation that was built on strong character and morality. When
subliminal atheism began to erode these traits in our individuals, our
governments tried to step in to fill this void. However, as our governments
have assumed roles of compassion, charity, empathy, fairness, caring,
altruism, and forgiveness, this delegation has caused these traits to become
weaker in our people. We are less compelled to exhibit these traits because
we feel that our tax dollars--our governments--are doing this for us.
When these moral responsibilities are passed from individuals to
governments, these traits are no longer exercised and strengthened in the
individual character. Like muscles that we no longer use, they become
smaller and weaker. When our governments function so that we, as
individuals, are spared from seeing the need for compassion, charity,
empathy, fairness, caring, altruism, and forgiveness, we become less likely to
develop and use these traits.
In my home state our geography causes us to experience numerous
hurricanes, floods and tornados. When these occur we all see the need for
compassion and charity. Anyone who has ever been in Louisiana in the
aftermath of one of these natural disasters is impressed with the love and
compassion of our people. When we see human suffering and need, we
respond in a very loving manner. If we are prevented from seeing human
need, we do not. We should always consider this reality before we permit
our governments to conceal from us human suffering and need.
In a moral society composed of individuals with strong character and good
conscience, a "government which governs least governs the best." However,
this is not the position in which we find ourselves in today. But instead of
using our tax money to patch the holes in our moral fabric, we would be
better off investing our money in efforts to enhance our human potential.
Love is an emotion that will grow. If we invest in love, we will reap more
than we sow. Morality and conscience make governmental laws and
regulations unnecessary. To invest in laws and regulations is to invest in
patch-work government. Our governments should function to function less.
SMART--DUMB, RICH--POOR, BLACK--WHITE
I'm not really sure
Why it is this way,
But people get dumber
Day by day.
I'm not really sure
Why it is this way,
But people get smarter
Day by day.
Dumber--smarter,
There is no in between;
There are no average people
If you know what I mean.
I'm not really sure
Why it is this way,
But people get poorer
Day by day.
I'm not really sure
Why it is this way,
But people get richer
Day by day.
Poorer--richer,
There is no in between;
There is no middle class
If you know what I mean.
Maybe these trends
That I have detected
Have occurred because
They are somehow connected;
But it may also be
That my logic has flaws,
And these thing that I see
Have some other cause.
In America today there is an ever widening gap between the rich and the
poor. A recent book has led to speculation that our technologically oriented
society has divided us into two camps: those intelligent enough to succeed
in our modern world, and those not intelligent enough to succeed.
It is further speculated that heredity is the primary factor which gives us
the intellectual capacity which is necessary for success. If the intelligent
tend to marry the intelligent, and have children who are genetically
predisposed to also be intelligent, and the less intelligent do likewise, and
have children with subnormal intellectual potential, this theoretically would
explain the ever widening gap between the rich and poor in America.
Recent writings have also created the concern that the less intelligent
underclass may soon overwhelm the intelligent, successful class. If the less
intelligent underclass tend to have more children than the bright, successful
class, and if the forces for natural selection are circumvented by social
welfare programs, this would be the natural course of this perceived trend.
In addition to intellect and success, recent publications have also suggested
that there may be an important link between our genetic make up and our
morality. The conclusion that many have drawn from this information is
that intelligence, success and morality are primarily determined by our
genes.
The debate concerning the relative importance of genetics and environment
in the formation of the intelligent brain has raged on for decades, if not for
centuries. The reason that this question cannot be resolved is, in all
probability, that both sides are correct. Both genetics and environment are
crucial to intellect. There is good scientific evidence to support the
importance of both heredity and environment in the formation of
intelligence. To turn a blind eye to the evidence on either side is likely a
reflection of bias.
But intelligence is a nebulous concept. Over the last century, the concept of
intelligence has been defined and redefined again and again. Now it is
thought that we have intelligences, and not just intelligence. So while
almost everyone thinks that they know what intelligence is, no one has been
able to define this concept in a way that brings general agreement.
Subliminal atheism and our new gross national psychology has caused us to
have a perverted definition of success. Success is measured in terms of
money, power and fame, not in terms of righteousness and real progress.
And what is immorality? Is this term applicable only to those who steal
using a knife or gun, or does it also apply to those who steal by using junk
bonds, deception, bribery, and embezzlement? Is the term "immoral"
applied only to those who are caught? Must an act be illegal before it is
considered to be immoral? Subliminal atheism and our new gross national
psychology may have perverted our judgment of this concept as well.
So we are not exactly sure what intelligence(s) is/are, we have a perverted
definition of success, and the term "immorality" is frequently applied in a
one-sided manner. But we read that all of these may be related. And these
authors have scientific evidence which suggests that genetics may be the
primary determinant for all three.
If we could know the determinants of real success we would likely find that
success does not occur when morality is absent. Intelligence alone will not
achieve real progress. It is more accurate to think that human intelligence
anywhere near the normal range will be successful if it is guided by love and
morality.
Almost all great achievements have been the result of intellect guided by the
strong force of morality. The greatness of these achievements was probably
more the result of great morality than great intellect. Did America become
the greatest free nation to ever exist because the American people are more
intelligent than other people? Was Abraham Lincoln a great president
because he was so much smarter than other presidents? Did superior
intellect alone guide the acts of Mother Theresa?
With morality the bright can be more productive than the dull. Without
morality the bright can be far more destructive than the dull. Intellect and
experience will result in wisdom only when guided by this powerful force.
Because of philosophical and social changes which have made it more
difficult for all Americans to give their children the loving interaction which
maximizes both intellect and morality, our society is experiencing a lack of
true progress. Many of those characterized as bright and successful, are not
as bright as they could have been if they had benefitted from a loving
environment, and are successful only in terms of hedonism and greed.
This is the type of success we are seeing in America today. Were the
corporate raiders of the 1980's really successful people? Were bright,
successful people in control of our savings and loan industry? How many
bright, successful politicians do we have today? Name a few bright,
successful entertainers in America today. Is our nation or the world a
better place to live because of these "successful" people? Are these
"successful" people really better off because of their "success?"
Since intelligence tests which were considered to be valid and reliable were
first devised in the latter part of the last century, there has been the
temptation to use test results to suggest racial superiority or inferiority. A
recent book points out that according to test results, American orientals
are more intelligent than American whites, and both are more intelligent
than African-Americans. There is really nothing new presented in this
book.
Although this book is carefully written to avoid direct statements of racism,
it serves as fuel for those who lean toward a prejudiced attitude against
black people. This type of work will be seen by many as science validating
racism.
When basically the same information was brought up in the 1960's and
1970's, it was not well received. However, since this flag was last raised the
gross national psychology of a significant number of Americans has
changed. Because the intelligent, "successful" class is less capable of
compassion, charity, empathy, fairness, caring, altruism, and forgiveness,
"scientific" racism may be better received today. There are more bright,
"successful" people who are short sighted enough to be persuaded that black
people should be written off as inferior human beings.
Because of the effect that subliminal atheism and our new gross national
psychology has had upon us, our perception is clouded and we cannot see the
complexities which have created an American tragedy. Our new gross
national psychology demands simple answers. The defective gene theory
provides one. It also provides us with another rationalization to continue to
discriminate against, and oppress black people in America.
What the "scientific" racists are leaving open for belief is that it is pointless
to do anything for black people, because no matter what is done their
genetic inferiority will not allow them to succeed. Because of their genes
they will always be to the left on the bell curve for intellect, success and
morality. They are claiming that, scientifically," this is how it is, and how it
will always be.
In scientific methodology it is necessary to control, or hold constant, all
variables except for the one variable which is being tested. It is only
through this type of control that scientific proof can ever occur. This has
never been done in a way that would allow science to make any factual
statement regarding racial inferiority. Without this type of control, there
are too many alternative explanations which could account for observed
differences.
What would happen to black people in America if all black children received
the benefit of a loving environment? What would happen if one could erase
all prejudice and discrimination against blacks? What would happen if
subliminal atheism and our gross national psychology were not profound
realities in the black communities of America? What if one could extract
the bitterness which has built up in black people because of centuries of
discrimination and oppression? What if one could cancel the nihilistic
attitude of hopelessness which characterizes much of the peer influence for
black children, adolescents and young adults? This is the kind of control
which would be required before science could even consider making a
factual statement about racial inferiority.
Not only is science not in a position to make factual statements about racial
superiority-inferiority, the scientific evidence which is pertinent to this issue
does not tend to support the contention of the "scientific" racists.
The scientific evidence is that children will not realize their complete
neurological potential if they do not benefit from a loving and stimulating
environment during the first three years of their lives. The scientific
evidence is that children will not be able to realize their complete
intellectual, psychological and social potential if they are not raised in a
loving environment. There is certainly no evidence to warrant writing off a
significant portion of humanity.
However, black people have experienced an increase in crime and a
decrease in morality. Black people have not become completely successful in
America. Something bad has happened to black Americans. What could it
be? It is the same thing that has happened to other Americans--subliminal
atheism and our gross national psychology. However, the effect of these has
been greater on black Americans because of the added burden of
discrimination and oppression.
As a caucasian child raised in the south during the 1950's I lived in a white
neighborhood which bordered a black neighborhood. Although it was a
social taboo, many of the white and black children played together. In this
contact with the black community I found black people to be moral, loving,
peaceful and deeply religious.
If black people were that way then and not that way now, how could this
change be of genetic origin? Were they that way then because they feared
they would be jailed or lynched if they acted out their "true" nature? Or
were they that way then because in spite of poverty, discrimination and
oppression there was much love in the black community?
Because the civil rights movement of the 1960's and 1970's coincided and
collided with the arrival of subliminal atheism there has been a deflection of
black progress. At a time when some legal and social barriers were being
weakened, the loss of compassion, charity, empathy, fairness, caring,
altruism, and forgiveness obstructed the path to success for black
Americans.
Subliminal atheism and our gross national psychology have blocked the path
to success for a large number of Americans by making us think that success
exists in terms of hedonism and greed. A gross national psychology
characterized by: immaturity, an obsession with love and esteem,
inferiority, frustration, anger, and depression has doomed many Americans
to live unsuccessful lives. Our penchant for simple answers has caused us to
blame each other for our lack of success. The end result has been stronger
racial identifications for almost all Americans.
In an attempt to gain or preserve self-esteem, we use the ego defense
mechanism known as identification. Our identifications are extensions of
ourselves. We identify with successful people, teams, organizations,
churches, schools, nations, states, and cities. We also identify with our
racial or ethnic group. Identifications are irrational loyalties which allow
us to enjoy success and esteem which is unrelated to our actual competence.
We have all known people with such a strong identification to their race,
that in the Olympic Games, they would pull for a white Russian rather than
a black American, or a black Kenyan rather than a white American. For
these people their racial identification is stronger than their identification to
their country.
Because of our racial and ethnic identifications, we want our racial or
ethnic group to be the best--to win. This rivalry can breed prejudice,
discrimination and oppression. Much of the history of Western Civilization
is the story of these rivalries, which may be as strong today as they were in
the time of the Roman Empire. Identification to these scientifically
insignificant genetic specifications is one of the primary causes for turmoil
in the world today.
The first identity of black people in America was as property--slaves. The
freedom of black people in America, while still incomplete, occurred in
stages. When slavery was legally abolished, discrimination and oppression
kept black people in a position of defacto slavery. Paid slave wages, denied
loans, segregated, denied educational opportunities, disenfranchised--the
American Dream was denied to black Americans. The thirteenth
amendment only changed the rules of slavery. Black people were, in fact,
still slaves.
The next significant stage of freedom came with the civil rights movement of
the 1960's and 1970's. When America's youth rebelled against the
subliminal atheism and hypocrisy of the "establishment," black people stood
to gain by being a part of this revolution. If there was any perfect example
of subliminal atheism, injustice and hypocrisy, it was the way black people
were treated in America. The civil rights movement, unfortunately,
partially merged with this other rebellion. These two movements lived, and
to an extent, died together.
When these social rebels were absorbed into subliminal atheism, black
people were absorbed as well. As more Americans lost the ability to
experience compassion, charity, empathy, fairness, caring, altruism, and
forgiveness, black people lost their chance for social acceptance in American
society. Social acceptance would have weakened the essence of which people
mold strong identifications. Social acceptance would have removed the
barriers which preclude many black people from the American Dream.
As subliminal atheism and our gross national psychology emerged, black
people saw that integration was not going to result in acceptance, so they
retreated to segregation. Because black people met with barriers to social
acceptance, they responded by erecting barriers of their own. Both sets of
barriers serve to strengthen racial identifications. In many respects, racial
identifications in America are stronger today than they have ever been.
Because of discrimination and oppression, subliminal atheism and our gross
national psychology have had a greater impact on the black community.
Frustration, anger and depression are typically greater in black Americans
than in other Americans. Today many black people are so angry and
depressed, that they lack the emotional energy to even try to succeed.
The enormous impact of these philosophical and psychological changes have
affected black families to a greater extent that other American families.
Because of this, many black children are not receiving the loving and
stimulating environment which is necessary for them to realize their
complete neurological, intellectual, psychological, and social potential.
Because so many black American children do not receive a love-based
development, they enter school lacking the loving foundation for educational
preparedness. Too often a loveless environment of poverty, discrimination,
oppression, and family disunity has resulted in children who are insecure,
intrusting, pessimistic, uncooperative, and quick to throw in the towel. A
change in America's educational system which adds the responsibility of
providing children with a loving environment would benefit many black
children.
When children develop in a love-deficient environment there is an increase
in love substitutes, such as drugs and gangs. Some black children,
adolescents and young adults turn to gangs. The gang represents the loving
family that they want and need. In their own way gang members love and
protect each other. They gain feelings of importance, acceptance and
esteem through these associations. However, lacking maturity and moral
guidance, and because they harbor much frustration and anger, gangs do
many antisocial and destructive things. But gangs fulfill a large group of
unmet needs.
When rapper Tracy Marrow (Ice-T) was questioned about his association
with a Los Angeles street gang during his adolescence, he was quoted as
saying: "I first found the word 'love' in a gang. I learned how to love in a
gang, not in a family atmosphere." The fact that gangs are not just a black
phenomenon tells us that the need for love is wide-spread in our society.
Black families who are providing their children with their developmental
needs find that their children's peer group is a constant threat to their
parenting efforts. I cannot tell you how many times I have seen really
bright, capable, successful black students succumb to peer pressure to "stop
acting like whitey." Unfortunately, what "stop acting like whitey" really
means is "stop being successful, and become a failure like me." This type of
behavior defines the proverb "misery loves company."
I would dare say that if any immigrant arrived in America today with the
same emotional baggage as is carried by black Americans they would be
unsuccessful, they would be angry, and they would have difficulty
maintaining high moral standards. The psychological damage which
America has done to black people can only be rectified by assuring a
love-based development for all American children.
An original goal of the civil rights movement of the 1960's and 1970's was
the integration of the various racial and ethnic groups of America. This
goal has been abandoned.
Scientifically, there is every reason to believe that actual racial and ethnic
integration would be good for mankind. In most plants and animals a
diverse mixture of genes results in superior qualities. There is no reason to
think that Homo sapiens would be the exception to this rule.
A recent twist to the speculation on the evolution of man is that Homo
sapiens might have rapidly evolved because of the interbreeding of the more
primitive forms of man in Asia, the Near East, Africa, and Europe. The
theory holds that this mixture of genes resulted in the advanced traits which
characterize man today.
However, the thought of this type of racial and ethnic integration is
unrealistic at the present time because of racial and ethnic prejudice which
exists on all sides. A more realistic goal is the achievement of a loving
socialization, so that all Americans will have the chance to develop their
potential.
If we assure a love-based development for all American children, more black
Americans will succeed. This success will change the way black people are
perceived in American society. Whether this success is equal to, less than or
greater than that of other Americans is unimportant.
Identifications are difficult defense mechanisms to weaken. How can you
turn a fan of the Saints into a fan of the Falcons, a Yankee fan into a Red
Sox fan? Identifications are irrational loyalties, but they come as naturally
to people as breathing.
In truth, there will be resistance to any program which helps to provide a
loving socialization for children because of the irrational need for racial
superiority. After all, the Super Bowl champion team does not have to be
good; the other teams just need to be worse.
To think that because I.Q. scores of a certain segment of our population are
lower than another is justification to abandon that segment is irrational.
Because Louisiana students have lower A.C.T. and S.A.T. scores than
students in most other states, should we shut down college preparatory
education in Louisiana? Because men commit more crime, have more
addictions, and have more genetic defects than women, should we write
them off too?
One could make these types of divisions infinitely until all people could be
written off. It is time to stop blaming each other and get on with the
business of assuring that all of our citizens can develop their full potential.
EPILOGUE
*There is a feeling of contentment and security that we get from living our
lives in the way that we believe God wants and expects us to live them.
*There is a consolation that comes with thinking that no matter what
happens or does not happen in our life, that we will enjoy an afterlife of
eternity in heaven.
*There is a secure feeling of hope when we think that at the appropriate
time, if it is in fact something that would be good for us, that God will
provide us with that for which we pray.
*We cope with life's injustices and experience less bitterness because we
believe that vengeance will come from God.
*Our ability to endure hardship increases when we believe that God will not
burden us more than we can bear.
*Our burdens become lighter and our hopes become brighter when we are
able to discuss these with God in prayer.
*When we are tempted to do wrong, we do not do it because we believe that
this would displease God, and we walk away from temptation feeling good
because we believe that we have done the right thing.
*We play the role of "good Samaritan" because we believe that this type of
behavior pleases God and puts us in better standing with our maker.
*We forgive the transgressions of others because this is what the Bible tells
us to do.
*Faced with a choice between hoarding or sharing, we share because this is
what we believe God expects of us.
*We become "our brother's keeper," because the Bible tells us that we
should.
All of these good things were made possible by our belief in the Bible and the
biblical God. All of these have become less possible because of subliminal
atheism.
Thirty to 40 years ago all of these were more commonly experienced by our
people. Today these are experienced less frequently by our people. Things
are different today. They are different because our religion is losing its
credibility and its power to shape our hopes, our morality and our behavior.
As an adolescent in the 1950's I had a newspaper route. Each day the
newspaper publisher would include in my bundle several extra newspapers.
I would take these to a convenience store and place them in an open rack
which had a coin box attached to its side. Anyone could have easily taken a
paper (or papers) without paying. No one would have ever been caught if
they had chosen to do so. However, in the two year period that I did this,
never did any such theft occur.
During this same period of time I first took up the game of golf. I played
golf at a college course where they charged $.50 per round. By the first tee
there was a small metal box which had a slot into which golfers were
expected to deposit their $.50. There was no attendant; none was needed;
everyone that I know of who played, paid.
In the 1950's people paid the milkman by putting cash in the empty milk
bottles which they placed on their porch. Many people did not lock their
houses or cars, and some saw no need in ever taking the key from the
ignition of their automobile. Morality was better then. There is no doubt
about this.
Why are things different now? Did we suddenly get smart and realize that
immorality could benefit us in material ways? Were our people of yesterday
just too stupid to realize that stealing could get them something for nothing?
No, we were not stupid, and we did not suddenly get smart. Our strong
religious beliefs made us morally strong. Our corroding religious beliefs
have freed us from moral restraints, so that we can gain from immorality
without pangs of conscience, peer condemnation or the fear of God. And
we cannot go back. We know too much to go back. But can we go forward
without a credible religious philosophy which guides our thoughts and
actions in a virtuous fashion? Can any religious philosophy which lacks a
prayer-answering, magical God, who can reward us with heaven or punish
us with hell, gain the strength to guide us in moral conduct?
We must hope that the advanced state of our knowledge does not preclude
all credible sources of morality. We must hope that we are smart enough to
realize what allows progress and contentment in human living, and work to
make these prominent guideposts for our conduct.
*****
I did not dream up the concepts of subliminal atheism and our new gross
national psychology because I wanted these to be true. I, like almost
everyone else, wish that these were not realities in our nation today.
As was mentioned in the Introduction, much of what has been presented in
this book was derived from my role as a school teacher. Over my many
years as a teacher I have noticed that my students have become
progressively more angry, depressed and irresponsible. At the beginning of
my teaching career I attended more graduations than funerals. Today,
without exaggeration, I attend more student, or ex-student, funerals than
graduations.
The students of today have stronger identification, are less honest, and are
lacking the maturity of my students of twenty years ago. Although
adolescents have always been concerned with love and esteem, today's
students are absorbed by these needs. But the most noticeable change was
gauged by a decline in smiling faces. So many of my students of today are
very unhappy people. I wondered why, so I started asking my students
questions and listening to what they had to say.
I wondered why so many more of my students are involved in gangs? The
answer they gave me was that they need the love and esteem that these
associations give. I wondered why so many of my female students are
becoming pregnant? They told me that it was because sexual activity is a
misguided attempt at finding love. I wondered why so many more of my
students are using drugs? I learned that it was another misguided attempt
to capture the feelings of love. Subliminal atheism and our new gross
national psychology became theories which seemed to explain the behavior
that I see everyday.
I only hope that what has been written here will show the need for action,
action which will remove from the concept of love connotations of weakness,
timidity and trepidation, action which will cause us to elevate the
development of the trait of love in our children to a plateau at least equal to
that of language development, and action which will lead us to a spiritual
renaissance.
One might have gotten the impression that I labored under the assumption
that the "good old days" were truly wonderful. I realize that the "good old
days" were not always so good. But I do believe that most our children of 30
years ago did have it better than most of our children today. Most of them
had a mother at home. Most of them had a believable religion. Most of
them had a cohesive family. Most of them had a good peer group. Most of
them had good role models. Most of our children today do not have these
good things.
Over the past 30 years we have seen an erosion in both our external and
internal bases for love and morality. If both the external and internal bases
for love and morality become even more frail, we may find ourselves facing
some very trying times. Today anyone with a fifth grade reading level can
learn to construct a bomb that will level buildings and destroy many
innocent lives. Today any person who cares to do so can obtain or make
gases which can kill masses of humanity. Tomorrow such people may be
able to destroy cities. Tomorrow such people may be able to decimate
nations.
Today, despite our best effort to contain it, organized crime is as strong as
ever. As our government makes some headway against established
organized crime, new ethnic gangs emerge as organized groups dedicated to
various forms of criminal activity. International drug cartels are somehow
able to withstand the eradication efforts of nations. Terrorism threatens the
interests and security of our nation both at home and abroad. All of these
antisocial forces are growing in strength. None of these are being abolished
or contained. What will these antisocial forces be like tomorrow? What
new antisocial forces will emerge to join them? Will a free nation be able to
defend itself against these forces?
It is likely that if subliminal atheism and its ramifications remain
progressive, as a nation we will experience an increase in distressful and
tragic events. When faced with hardship and tragedy people have
previously had a tendency to retreat to religion and morality. This is a
course which has often been repeated in human history.
However, it is possible that subliminal atheism makes even this occurrence
unlikely. Regression, chaos and savagery will not make the Bible and the
biblical God more believable. We may be at the point where even such
regression will not bring us back to our traditional religion and morality.
We may instead regress to a level of savagery and brutality that will make
for very trying times.
I would suspect that a typical reaction to such "doomsday forecasting"
might be to regard it with doubt and suspicion. There have been many
doomsday forecasters and almost all of them have been wrong. But never
before in human history have conditions been like they are now. Never
before have people been so advanced in destructive knowledge, and morally
and spiritually bankrupt at the same time.
Think back to the test you were asked to take in the introduction of this
book. Except for hedonism and greed, and excluding science and
technology, what advances did you note in our society over the past 30
years? There really have not been that many, if there have been any at all.
Even the advances in science and technology are a double edged sword.
These have made it possible for almost anyone to destroy humanity in mass.
These will make it possible for such people to be even more destructive in
the future. For us there may not be the consolation that we can regress to
religion and morality. A renaissance of spirituality and love may be our
only hope. A revolution of love and morality may be our last chance to
avoid an unparalleled disaster.
Subliminal atheism has led us to travel uncharted waters. If this state of
mind is allowed to remain progressive, we run the risk of sudden moral
collapse. Subliminal atheism has increasingly caused us to equate morality
with stupidity. The moral do make good targets of which the immoral can
take advantage. The moral cannot remain moral in an immoral world and
survive. At some point in our moral regression morality will become
stupidity. At this point morality will be abandoned to survive.
We do not know where that point lies. We have suffered a certain amount
of moral regression over the past 30 to 40 years. If this regression cannot be
reversed, at some point there will come complete moral collapse. Morality is
the foundation on which we built our skyscraper. We do not know how
weak the foundation must become before our skyscraper collapses into
rubble.
In our history we have waged war to protect our nation from external forces
which threatened our security and our way of life. Today our free society is
being threatened by internal moral decay. If we do not wage war on this
enemy, it can and will destroy us. However, this will not be a war of bullets
and bombs, but one of confrontation, information, persuasion, compassion,
charity, empathy, fairness, caring, altruism, and forgiveness. It would be so
tragic to lose everything that we have achieved because we did not fight to
restore what we know we need to survive and thrive.
We need believable religious philosophies which direct us toward harmony
with the powers and the principles of the universe. These philosophies must
become prominent, omnipresent guideposts which insure that our loving and
productive features will dominate our character. We must challenge our
great minds to examine our relationship to the powers and principles of the
universe, so that they might generate believable religious philosophies which
will lead us in harmony with these powers and principles. We must teach
our young people the simple truth, that love and morality are the keys to
quality, for both individuals and for nations. We must arm our young
people with the information that they need to contemplate the powers and
principles of the universe, so that they might discover believable religious
philosophies--philosophies which will improve the quality of human life and
guide us into the future.
These needs may be urgent needs. We do not know how much time we have
before we suffer complete moral collapse. War is appropriate. War may be
essential. War must be declared as soon as possible.
Our nation is analogous to the mighty Mississippi River. Its numerous
tributaries are the diversity of our people. Our people can be seen as the
molecules of water which compose this powerful river. Our morality is
analogous to the levees which channel this river.
Although most of the time we are kept in channel by other molecules, we
occasionally find ourselves in a position where we must be kept in channel
by the physical restraint of the levees. If our levees are strong, we remain in
the channel.
If, however, our levees are not strong, we break through them to form a
crevasse. This creates a new norm--a new flow. As more molecules go with
the new flow, the crevasse becomes wider. The flow in the channel becomes
weaker as the flow through the crevasse becomes stronger.
This analogy suggests that most people pursue the norm--go with the flow.
This is why it was postulated that subliminal atheism invaded our society
from the top--down, from societal leaders who broke through the levees of
Judaic-Christian morality causing the flood which followed.
Our leaders are the pacesetters and trend-setters who control our
institutions and exert influence over our people. These are the molecules
who, more often than most, find themselves facing the levees. It is difficult
to conceive of moral decay originating in our rank-and-file and spreading
upward. Although the visible aspects of our moral decay are more readily
seen at lower levels of our society, our moral decay did not originate here.
Subliminal atheism first affected the leaders of our society, then it quickly
spread to all levels.
The immorality at the lower levels of our society is more graphic and
perceptible. Antisocial acts at these levels often lack sophistication.
Immorality at leadership levels is complicated, delusive and masked in
rationalization. Although immorality at leadership levels does not, on the
surface, appear to be as savage and brutal as immorality in our
rank-and-file, its impact is greater in both actual damage and in exemplary
influence.
In a free society pacesetters and trend-setters can only set pace and trend
with societal approval. However, as quickly as subliminal atheism became a
logical reality at the leadership level, it was accepted by much of our middle
class. Our educated middle class did not need much prodding. The
knowledge base of factual information was strong enough to cause large
numbers of middle class Americans to subliminally reject the Bible and the
biblical God. Consequently, a large portion of our middle class responded
by following the pacesetting and trend-setting molecules which were taking
the courses of less resistance through the breaks in our levees.
The expansion of scientific knowledge dealing with cause and effect
convinced many of our pacesetters, trend-setters, and much of our middle
class, that the magical biblical God did not exist. As more of our leaders and
middle class were lost to subliminal atheism, fewer of the prayers of our
rank-and-file were being answered. So our leaders and our middle class
became subliminal atheists primarily through cognition. But at the level of
our rank-and-file subliminal atheism was reinforced empirically and
emotionally because of unanswered prayers.
I recently watched a television show in which several attorneys were
discussing how our constitutional Bill of Rights protection is being slowly
taken away. The consensus among these attorneys was that we are moving
toward a totalitarian state.
Because we lack a credible foundation for moral principles and obligations,
we must rely upon laws to restrain our immorality. The "law and order"
movement must involve infringements on personal liberties to cope with the
immorality which subliminal atheism has caused. Unless subliminal atheism
can be successfully dealt with, this is what we must expect and accept as
patches to slow our social decay. Laws are very weak sandbags and can
never be an effective substitute for strong moral levees.
Our forefathers established our nation in a way that granted much
individual freedom because our strong morality gave us strong, natural
levees to control our conduct. Our free nation was not created so that we
might have the freedom to violate moral standards to take advantage of
others. Our freedoms do, however, present such an opportunity. We have
had many such opportunists in our history. But we have many more who
are so inclined today. Sandbags can be useful, but they cannot be
permanent substitutes for strong natural levees.
But as the basis for our strong morality erodes, our governments must
sandbag each crevasse. Monitoring and sandbagging levees is expensive
activity. More of our resources could be used to achieve real progress if the
necessity for such activity did not exist.
To reverse what has happened to us spiritually and psychologically we need
levees which we can believe and respect. These levees must be built upon
religious philosophies which are credible to all levels of our society. If our
moral principles and obligations are based upon logical truth, we will gain
the basis to confront immorality in a way that will defy attempts to
rationalize such behavior. With such a foundation, our pace and
trend-setting molecules can be kept in channel and our society will flow in
emphatic solidarity.
There is little doubt that the limited amount of love and morality which
mankind has been able to generate is directly responsible for the rapid
progress achieved by human drive and intellect in our relatively short
existence. Because of love and morality, we have achieved a dominance of
the planet, the likes of which have never occurred in the history of life on
Earth. Love and morality in a relatively small, clever animal has resulted in
a dominance which eclipsed that of huge, ferocious dinosaurs.
It is intriguing to imagine what we could accomplish if love and morality
were more than borderline and finite characteristics. While there are limits
to what love and morality can do for humanity, we are not even within sight
of these limits. We must contemplate the qualities which make us special
and cultivate them so the we can become even more special.
We alone can have an objective basis for moral principles. We alone can
gain expanded will and responsibility for our actions. We alone can
contemplate God. We alone have what can be described as an archetype of
God. We must examine what it is that makes us special and work to develop
our special qualities to their limits. These special qualities will keep us in
harmony with the powers and principles of the universe.
For every action,
Says one of Newton's laws,
An equal and opposite
Reaction is caused.
In physics this law
Is a constant reality;
But it does not apply
To you and to me.
If it did, indeed,
It would be very sad,
For every good action
Would cause equal bad.
So you and I
Are special because
We are free to disobey
One of Newton's laws.