Month: July 2014

At the Cross Roads of Light and Darkness

At the Cross Roads of Light and Darkness

For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places

While hate and corruption are the progenitors of misunderstanding and exigent circumstances, here cause and effect have their genesis in different realms. Though composed as misunderstanding and exigent circumstances in the natural realm, hate and corruption are nevertheless the offspring of evil, which has its genesis in the spirit realm. No matter the realm of origin, metamorphous from like inspiration to like expression is immutable.

The spirit realm is comprised of multiple imperishable dimensions, operating in parallel with the natural realm. The natural realm is comprised of three specific temporal dimensions providing both visibility and tactility. Confining belief to only what can be seen or held defrauds life of its immeasurably abundant potential. The consequential sense of limitation and unquenchable dissatisfaction, is both un-natural and un-spiritual.

Evil has a spirit realm advocate whose very substance of existence is fear, which can only be resisted in the realm of its genesis. Evil cannot be abated by political, social, economic, psychological, or religious tonics; natural realm intervention is impotent against spiritual agency. The ability of evil inspired in the spirit realm to perpetrate in the natural realm is facilitated by deception. Further, the devastating weapon of deception takes advantage of the most powerful delivery system in the universe, words. By this means, evil attained dominion of the natural realm.

The universal sovereign, whose very substance of existence is love, has already defeated the advocate of evil in the spirit realm, and endowed a new natural realm weapon, truth. Truth has its own formidable power, capable of thwarting both fear and deception. However, truth cannot be discerned or engaged by intellectual, clinical, analytical or heuristic assessment. Inseparable, truth and love culminate in unbounded liberty and abundant life, nourished in spiritual Light. Fear and deception culminate in the illusion of control, ignorance illuminated by spiritual Darkness.

In the natural realm darkness seeks to suborn the conscience of the influential and powerful, and to beguile all into false confidence. The witting and unwitting agents of darkness are actually victims, addicted to deception and disinclined to truth. These victims declare the spirit realm a fantasy province, and evil agency a phantom companion of the gullible. Pronouncements pertaining to spirit realm principles have been declared politically incorrect and even illegal in some jurisdictions; spiritual province and agency may only be embraced privately and silently.

While the inferior Spirit of Darkness invades the mind, the superior Spirit of Light must be welcomed into the heart. This subconscious proximity is exploited by the inferior to impersonate the superior. Affirmations of conflicted aspirations abound; the spiritually inclined often live indistinguishably from the spiritually disinclined. No matter that the superior has bruised the head of the inferior, now under spirit realm house arrest, the merry-go-round of self-providence remains the bon vivant of the natural realm.

Deception and fear provide the primary seismic energy dismembering relationships between nations, cultures, orientations, and individuals, yet attention remains laser focused on hate and corruption, which are but transient aftershocks. Only those freely indwelled by the Spirit of Light can operate in unconditional love and discern truth. They must not and in fact cannot, surrender under the white flag of silence. There will be neither armistice nor détente between the natural realm ambassadors of spirit realm adversaries. The conflict is actually a conquest for dominion and power.

Prompting peace and prosperity by natural realm practices and methods such as intellectual development, journalistic disclosure, economic and social initiatives, military conquest, and philanthropy, has proven futile and disastrously contagious. No corner of humanity has managed to circumvent the signature achievements bequeathed by enlightenment, such as: sectarian conflict, criminal confiscation, nuclear proliferation, kidnapping, rape, mass murder, ethnic cleansing, abortion, and pernicious greed.

The human heart is the fertile abode where the Spirit of Light inculcates truth and gestates discernment. The sages of enlightenment, who consider the mind the seat of wisdom and propitious providence, lambast this position. Nevertheless, just as many consider sitting the new smoking, all had better recognize enlightenment as turbo charged deception, with turbo charged destructive potential.

Over two hundred years ago, her Majesties reluctant subjects chose to resist demands for tribute rationalized by deception. They possessed underwhelming resources and experiences with which to contend against overwhelming technology and organization. These reluctant colonists committed yet another subversive act when they disavowed self-providence to embrace the well familiar refuge of Spiritual Light. The miraculous power of truth was brought to bear in the natural realm against the agency of deception.

Victorious, the infant nation chose to begin its most seminal written expression of national creed with the words, “We hold these truths to be self evident”… The same nation is now challenged to lead a world in turmoil, not by bent of political, financial, or military swagger, but into the same Spiritual Light embraced at and before it’s founding. However, this nation must first resign its own world-class addiction to enlightenment and return to the Light.

In every arena of life and on every occasion, whether personal or private, each of us must determine under which spirit we are operating.

What the Jurist Saw


Recently the Supreme Court adjudicated the constitutionality of a Michigan law prohibiting consideration of race when determining admission to public institutions. While differences and dissension remain venerable prerogatives of the courts, these prerogatives are increasingly under attack by a culture that demands strict allegiance to red or blue orthodoxy. Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas (siding with the majority) and Sonia Sotomayor (joining the minority) saw the merits of Schuette vs. Coalition to Defend Affirmative Action quite differently.

The Justice’s backgrounds have much in common to include: economic and social challenges surmounted by strong family values, hard work, and the audacity of self-reliance. Both are pioneers, having provided invaluable stewardship to radical new campus organizations; one helped to found the Black Students Union at Holy Cross, and the other served as co-chair of the Acción Puertorriqueña at Princeton. Both were courageous enough to fall in love and marry partners outside of their ethnic group.

Justices Sotomayor and Thomas know first hand the power and disquiet of access to the privileged sanctums of higher education, where each had to weather the shock of temporarily unpolished verbal fluency. Though graduates of Yale, arguably the most prestigious of Law Schools, both have voiced doubts about its imprimatur with regard to people like them. Initially, Justice Thomas served as an Assistant Attorney General in Missouri, and Justice Sotomayor a NYC Assistant District Attorney.

Though their backgrounds suggest otherwise, their opinions from the bench are usually conflicted. However, their positions on the merits of Michigan’s anti-affirmative action law might have been more similar had the question before the court focused explicitly on public benefit rather than the unstated, prior academic accomplishment. Granting priority admission to publicly supported institutions of higher education to those with superior prior academic accomplishment presumes to actualize highest return on public investment.

It would be absurd to consider an applicants prior academic record as other than a principled barometer of future performance (“merit”); most of whom are also distinguished beyond their demonstrated levels of intellectual accomplishment. Many also consider aversion to racial preferences (artificial denial) a principled position. There are other principled and relevant criteria. Private academic institutions and commercial businesses have reaped demonstrable value by broadly assessing applicants for admission and job candidates respectively. While public initiative purports to facilitate private initiative outcome, like the two Justices, these models in practice have little in common.

It’s difficult to discern best-use policies and practices under the influence of errant context materially altered by time and reformation. Fashioning prudent and actionable policy requires a clear understanding of what disciplines contemporary higher education experiences actually attend and their relationship to return-on-public-investment. Publicly supported education must act responsibly to endow public benefit over personal reward. The perception that current admissions policies reward certain applicants from the pubic coffers absent corresponding impact on public well-being, adds fuel to plaintiff’s rage before the court and energizes defendant’s determination to legally enshrine the practice.

A closer look at the critical disciplines attended by higher education is revealing. Three valuable related disciplines predominate, students learn more, how, and about. Students learn more regarding: specific subjects of interest, subjects in which they previous held no interest, and subjects that add value regardless of their personal interest. Students learn how to: study in a manner best suited to them personally, productively collaboration with others, prioritize time and effort, sacrifice and persevere. Students learn about: making social and professional connections, nurturing and leveraging connections, and integrating and transitioning connections.

Even though the wavelength of illumination can mislead (Darwin’s handicap), the merit and artificial denial arguments remain synergistic in that they are both exceedingly personal. They’ve also proven to be symbiotic. When merit is assessed apart from constructive correlation with all three critical higher education initiatives (more, how, about), it yields a relatively uniform intellectual pool, exacerbating structural denial. Reputable social science investigations both support and refute the notion that a critical mass from all groups adds unique value to educational experiences and outcomes. These conflicted findings likely reflect the confluence of artificial and structural denial (Michigan’s handicap).

Universities offer a range of challenging courses of study, well suited to correspondingly different degrees of intellectual giftedness and personal preparedness. Some argue that universities ought to be reorganized into but two schools-of-study, one for the study of mathematics and physics, and another for all other disciplines – often emerging nations first establish technology focused institutions of higher education to jump-start economic development, demonstrably beneficial to public interests. Predicating all admissions substantially on student applicants applied science aptitude would be brutally and irrationally exclusionary, even though it would be lawful to adopt just such a policy.

California practices a lawful form of macro-differentiated admissions. It places applicants into two merit based intellectual pools; each applicant is then guaranteed admission to either the University of California or California State University systems. What constitutes a best fit varies more broadly and differently than a single branch of preparedness. Though neither system currently differentiates admissions, for example by school-of-study, such an admissions letter might read: “congratulations you’ve been admitted to the School of Social Sciences, and wait-listed for the School of Public Administration; we regret to inform you that your application for admission to the School of Material Sciences has been declined”.

There are other lawful and beneficial approaches to broadening qualified applicant pools and higher return-on-public-investment, without resorting to artificial denial, or structural denial induced by uniform intellectual pools. The most successful American technology firm’s hire candidates from a far broader cross section of graduates than universities recruit applicants from. If the actual challenges faced by students within higher education were better reflected in both admissions criteria and recruitment efforts, merit and public interest outcome would be better aligned and likely more apparent.

Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Sonia Sotomayor have clearly excelled at learning more, how, and about, without which neither could hope to perform, as expected, above the standard. Haggling over whom to invest in apart from cogent assessment of how to best invest imperils formulation of policies suitable to realizing highest public benefit. Nevertheless, review and reconciliation of potentially discordant policies should not be entrusted to well intentioned all seeing Justices, unable to differentiate or resist exigent activism over scrupulous adjudication.

No Sides Just Eyes Wide Open


 It was neither the Best nor Worst of times; the People were confident, Leadership floundered

Despite legions of evidence and experience to the contrary, many in Washington believe higher taxes drive economic efficiency more so than good old-fashioned best in class American productivity. These seeing-eye economists presume two points; higher taxes will inspire investment and productivity, and higher taxes can actually be collected. In reality the genuinely rich remain the least likely to be affected by higher taxes.

Numerous studies, to include one published by the Hoover Institute, chronicle what happens when governments attempt to levy higher taxes on the rich. The article revealed that on one hand US tax rates were increased, but the rich still got their way. More than eighty percent of the income earned by those eligible to pay at the new higher tax rates vanished into thin air, as did the revenues the government had hoped to collect. Not surprisingly, vast amounts of money that might have been invested in the economy were instead invested in tax-exempt securities.

Corporations and individuals behave similarly with regard to taxes on their profits and incomes; no matter, the US Corporate tax rate remains the highest in the industrialized world. Today corporations and the rich have many legal options to shelter their earnings beyond the reach of carnivorous tax collectors, and individual tax exiles are younger than ever before.

The Wall Street Journal, citing a study which analyzed the public filings of the top 100 U.S. publicly trade companies, reported these firms have parked nearly 1.2 trillion dollars of profits in low tax jurisdictions abroad. Many G20 nations back a plan to overhaul international tax rules that today allow companies to shift their profits to lower-tax jurisdictions, regardless of where those profits were earned. The French having recently considered markedly raising taxes saw hundreds simply relocate into the welcoming arms of Belgium, even when required to pay an exit tax.

Washington remains committed to higher tax rates that don’t assure higher revenues, and a lack of clarity regarding fiscal policy, particularly spending. While both weigh heavily on business confidence and planning, spending controls are unlikely to prove potent absent meaningful economic expansion. Certain legislatively mandated spending increases have merely been delayed until a time when they might be less visible. No significant bankable spending reductions are in process other than dramatic reductions in overall military budgets – announced on the eve of Russia’s second armed invasion of an independent former Soviet state.

Fact Check projects U.S. total debt to double between 2009 and 2016, debt substantially driven by entitlement spending and interest payments on prior debt. Washington is addicted to printing and borrowing trillions to meet needs current productivity hasn’t. While the challenges are substantial, printing and borrowing in conjunction with phantom spending reductions can’t be described as leadership. Coupled with self-inflicted forfeitures of global influence and collaterally diminished national security, a radically altered vision of American greatness is emerging.

Leadership that embraced a cogent vision of historical American resilience and resolve would advance a plan that supports: reductions in debt, comprehensive entitlement reform, private sector managed initiatives to expand GDP, long term capital investment, increased fundamental R&D, incentives to promote study of science, technology, engineering and mathematics, and maintenance of a preeminent but restrained military.

In a season where the challenges are many, serious, and varied, the American people are increasingly uninformed about domestic and global politics and events. This predilection for not knowing, dependence on entitlements, and addiction to conjecture about government-controlled redistribution of wealth, greatly expands the power of oracle Washington. Americans no longer have a shared faith, nor is acknowledgement or embrace of faith welcome in the public space.

A leaderless, uninformed, dependent, addicted, and faithless America, can still find it’s way anew, but this will require an immediate and urgent change of course consistent with past coordinates of greatness.