Uncle Emanuel Watkins
01-08-2009, 03:05 PM
The greatest power welded by the American people is revealed in their divorce decree from tyranny, the formal document of The Declaration of Independence. The problem with Form though is that it is much like God the Father Himself in that it is immovably concrete.
So, an informal, practical means was needed to dispense the formal ideal itself to the people. Therefore, a formal document of laws was officiated in the The U.S. Constitution to define the nation's new marriage to a more perfect government, the necessary tyranny which still rules over us today.
We always like to think of the three branches of government as a new development in history, but every tyranny that ever existed was made up of these parts. So, these branches of government are more of a confession of what tyranny has to be than a new overall concept of it. There is the idea that when defined seperately each branch will keep the others more honest and the idea that when the powers of each are kept seperate from the other that they wouldn't revert back to once again become invisible parts of tyranny.
This all leads to a legal paradox. In any legal matter in the United States, both formal documents have to be considered when making a judgement for how can one validate the new marriage to a new government, the purpose of The U.S. Constitution, without first juxtaposing it with the divorce decree from tyranny, the purpose of The Declaration of Independence?
But then it wasn't our Founding-Fathers intentions to create our government in a legal sense as ruling officials would do but in a civil fashion as mere people would. So, our government wasn't established by legal precedence but with a Civil-Purpose in mind.
Responsibly speaking, legal-precedence is that tradition we all bring with us from our families, the old primitive caste system of a ruling master class over a slave class. This system narrowed down ultimately to pimping and prostituting which divided dinner into three classifications -- one table for a master class, a lower one for a slave class, and an even lower one for the untouchables. The untouchables were outcast as members by both the master and slave classes.
In contrast to legal-precedence, the new concept of Civil-Purpose, that which was narrowed to a self-evident truth and an unalienable right in every human soul, wished to bring everyone to sit as one nation at the same dinner table. While it was once common in the old tyranny to satisfy a few by perpetuating a dynasty, the new concept originating from Socrates / Plato attempted to dispense contentment to every member of society.
Thus, while the teachers of old trained the children of the master-class to erode perpetually into tyranny as a dynasty, the teachers of new served the children of the slave-class to improve perpetually as a nation/state.
So, an informal, practical means was needed to dispense the formal ideal itself to the people. Therefore, a formal document of laws was officiated in the The U.S. Constitution to define the nation's new marriage to a more perfect government, the necessary tyranny which still rules over us today.
We always like to think of the three branches of government as a new development in history, but every tyranny that ever existed was made up of these parts. So, these branches of government are more of a confession of what tyranny has to be than a new overall concept of it. There is the idea that when defined seperately each branch will keep the others more honest and the idea that when the powers of each are kept seperate from the other that they wouldn't revert back to once again become invisible parts of tyranny.
This all leads to a legal paradox. In any legal matter in the United States, both formal documents have to be considered when making a judgement for how can one validate the new marriage to a new government, the purpose of The U.S. Constitution, without first juxtaposing it with the divorce decree from tyranny, the purpose of The Declaration of Independence?
But then it wasn't our Founding-Fathers intentions to create our government in a legal sense as ruling officials would do but in a civil fashion as mere people would. So, our government wasn't established by legal precedence but with a Civil-Purpose in mind.
Responsibly speaking, legal-precedence is that tradition we all bring with us from our families, the old primitive caste system of a ruling master class over a slave class. This system narrowed down ultimately to pimping and prostituting which divided dinner into three classifications -- one table for a master class, a lower one for a slave class, and an even lower one for the untouchables. The untouchables were outcast as members by both the master and slave classes.
In contrast to legal-precedence, the new concept of Civil-Purpose, that which was narrowed to a self-evident truth and an unalienable right in every human soul, wished to bring everyone to sit as one nation at the same dinner table. While it was once common in the old tyranny to satisfy a few by perpetuating a dynasty, the new concept originating from Socrates / Plato attempted to dispense contentment to every member of society.
Thus, while the teachers of old trained the children of the master-class to erode perpetually into tyranny as a dynasty, the teachers of new served the children of the slave-class to improve perpetually as a nation/state.