I must preface this with my intent, which is to promote what may be the most remarkable piece of literature regarding the relativity between politics and humanitarian values that I have ever read, “Weapon of A.S.S. Destruction,” by Alfonzo Rachel. A full painting will require some lead-in. So bear with me. I really will get to the point which goes far beyond religion, eventually.
One ever present aspect of human nature is the curiosity about our own eternal (or not) nature. Is there a God? Of course! (not)! Naturally I share this universal curiosity and have taken approaches ranging from absolute atheism all the way through the gamut to the committed following of organized religion (Mormon). None of this seemed satisfactory, comforting, nor truly fulfilling. Thus none stuck.
Agnosticism is certainly the easiest route, being quite similar to the political belief referred to as, “independent.” It requires very little in the form of commitment and is the “faith” I have adhered to throughout most of my life.
Atheism can be logically compared to political anarchy, which is one of it’s lures. People are at least tempted to believe they are individually capable and responsible and that they don’t need to depend upon “fairy tales,” “magicians,” nor Gods. Most of us deny it, but there is an element of narcissism that naturally resides within us which makes this type of independence look appealing. This is one of the reasons I took a stab at atheism. I lost interest as my realization grew that atheism leaves us with true, non-self centered reason for nothing. I do like to think of myself as reasoned, yet I also confess to a propensity towards the dark side. It is largely because of my lingering fear of eternal damnation that certain individuals remain alive today whom I believed the world would be better off without.
The study of Christianity, particularly the pursuit made outside the reigns of any particular religious organization (Catholic, Protestant, Mormon etc.), the aspect of Christianity which claims to be the actual teaching of Jesus Christ (the red letters, as it were), ignoring the human manipulations of his doctrines, leads the student to some of the most sound and loving humanitarianism imaginable. Although I am far removed from the typical view society has as to what a Christian typically is, I am never the less sold on the fact that it presents us with a philosophy that guarantees such a broad range of freedom/responsibility empowering beliefs that no political philosophy can compare. Even if there actually were no Jesus Christ (that there was is historically provable), or if the man were nothing but a magnificently talented philosopher (which may be the case), the result of following his teachings leads to true freedom, the truest respect of humanity, AND an appreciation for our own existence, that no secular philosophy can approach.
It is easy to argue against torturing and burning witches, cutting the tongues out of “blasphemers,” the idea of multiple wives, or religious socialism. However none of these perversions can be traced directly to the words of Jesus. These were manipulations for personal gain made by humans holding up their own interpretations or even their own generation of words they attributed to Jesus. The ultimate core of true Christianity boils down to “My command is this: Love one another the way I have loved you.” The simple fact of the matter is if humanity actually followed this teaching alone, every one of the legal and political problems we face would fade back into the Hell holes from whence they came.
The flip side of this coin is the fact that humanity is distantly removed from the nature of Christ. Thus it is quite unlikely that we can be successful in imitating his behavior. Our best hope is to recognize it and hold it up as motivation for our higher intentions. This, beautifully, is the point of Christianity. It is a set of logical, reasonable, and purely humanitarian ground rules to strive for. Failure is certain but the attempt will naturally build good principle and strengthen morality in the heart and soul of the person who sincerely makes the attempt. Thus the failure becomes a success.
One of the greatest disappointments with atheism for me was the atheist arguments for morality. There is no doubt that atheists are perfectly capable of completely moral behavior, and atheists who do live morally, (there are many) can logically be seen as actually having a more personal form of morality than those who pursue moral behavior in order to earn a mansion in heaven, 70 virgins, 30 wives in heaven, eternal existence, or whatever payoff is being played/prayed for. However the ultimate question still remains. Why be honest? Why be fair? Why help the weak? The unfortunate answer which the atheist will employ volumes of words to present, boils down nicely and cleanly to one, “because.”
Now, down to the nitty gritty:
According to Plato, Socrates referred to democracy as the “politic of mediocrity.” Rachel’s book is a brilliantly written, shoot from the hip look at historically verifiable facts about the development of democracy in our American republic. He Illuminates beautifully all of its brilliant absurdity, and backs up Socrates’ observation made almost 2500 years ago with indubitable evidence. He ties it all together beautifully with the relativity between proper principle, morality, freedom, responsibility and Christianity. All of which are rapidly being lost in America.
Rachel begins with the “so called party switch,” where he illuminates the true roots of racism in America, revealing startling, verifiable truths about slavery, the Jim Crow laws, the Dred Scott decision, the KKK, the truest opposition to Martin Luther King, AND the truest roots of the growth of civil liberties in America.
From here Rachel moves on to one of the most coherent descriptions of the difference between liberalism and conservatism, which alone makes the book a masterpiece. He states quite plainly and simply, something I’ve been trying to relate in my writing for well over a decade.
He moves into the association between religious thinking and effective politic. “Facts have little effect on the opposition because everyone has an interest in confirming what they already believe,” the very foundation of my own philosophical interpretation of one of the core aspects of human nature, egoteneoism. He illuminates the difference between conserving the freedom to do for yourself, and the political hunger for voters’ dependency. The difference between voting for what’s popular and voting for what’s “right.” It is this portion of his book which will cause the most consternation for the liberal thinker, but careful consideration of its premise reveals a beautiful philosophical basis.
Next he attacks another liberal bogeyman, capitalism. By clearly describing what it is and the power that it implies, “capitalism is freedom of money.” The innate differences between capitalism, socialism, and fascism. He examines modern absurdities such as “minimum wage,” “unionization” (the stepping stone to communism), pulling into focus the “render unto Ceasar” statement, so often used to Biblically support taxation.
State run healthcare, abortion, Constitutional protection, homosexuality (including a very illustrative historical look at the real physical dangers which inspired the the anti-gay mentality which still exists. (Rachel presents a very logical case in justification for including homosexuals in the military) Immigration, back to racism “Democrats still have you on the plantation. They farm blacks for votes like ballot cattle.” Which brings to my mind a quote of L.B.J., “I’ll have those niggers voting democrat for the next 200 years.” Environmentalism, “Our government currently makes laws respecting the religious establishment of environmentalism” (back again to egoteneoism).
Rachel takes a look at libertarianism, which was somewhat uncomfortable to me since I have often referred to myself as libertarian. “A Libertarian is typically just a liberal that doesn’t have a love/hate relationship with capitalism and the free market.” He presents a case which is now a new bug under my saddle.
One of the most important points Rachel makes is in reference to the American media, who I see as the biggest enemy the American tradition of freedom/responsibility has ever faced. “People vote democratic, not because of principle, but because of feelings swayed by the media.” There is a rising surge of resistance to the media lies, based on the growing recognition that it is going on. Tis one of the most important aspects of Donald Trump’s popularity, his refusal to kowtow to the whims of the liberal American media.
Bottom line… buy this book, read it, buy copies for your friends, give it out as Valentines, donate copies to charity, slide copies under your liberal professor’s doors, read it to your children at bedtime. Thank you Alfonzo Rachel (http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=mpg&mpid=84 ) for a true breath of fresh air and a rekindling of hope!