Eclecticwriter

From the diary of Townshend Harris, first American consul to Japan 1856. On his way there he had a stay in Ceylon. He writes, among many other interesting entries, “The extraordinary custom of polyandry, i.e., one woman having several husbands, is practiced in Ceylon and also in Thibet and parts of Nepal. The husbands are usually, (but not always) brothers, and exercise their marital rights for one week at a time. On the road from Point-de-Galle to Colombo, the guest house where coach passengers breakfast is kept by three Cingalese brothers, who have one wife. On stopping there the  second time I asked the woman which she would like the best: to be one of many wives to one man, the sole wife of one man, or her present situation. She spat at the idea of polygamy, shook her head at a single union, and was emphatic in praise of polyandry. After some pressing she said the youngest of her husbands was her favorite, but that all three were kind to her.”

He was speaking to a priest of one of the Eastern religions, of which there are many, and this priest had built a shrine that Harris visited. Nevertheless, he conversed with Harris telling him, “He would not take a life under any circumstances; that, if threatened by a cobra capello or tiger, he would not attempt to secure his life by destroying either of them; that if it were God’s will that he should escape or die, that will  would take effect notwithstanding his efforts.” He said he would not fish or kill a fowl, yet he would eat of both when they were cooked for him; that the sin lay not in the eating but in the slaying. In answer to my remark, that if there were no eaters of fish or fowl none would be killed, he said those things were settled by an overruling power.

The logic behind this is, if you robbed a bank and I knew it and you gave me some of the money. I am clean since I committed no sin. Fortunately, American jurisprudence would look differently upon this as an accessory after the fact.

In his travels he came across the translation of a poem by Cingalese poet, he states, “The following lines, translated from a Cingalese poet, show that females do not occupy a high position in their estimation:

“I’ve seen the udumber tree in flower;
White plumage on the crow:
And fishes’ footsteps o’er the deep
I’ve seen through ebb and flow;
If man it is who this asserts.
His word you may believe
But all that woman says, distrust,
She speaks but to deceive”

He continues, “The udumber, almost alone of the Cingalese trees, never blooms. In my wandering in almost every part of the world I have applied one test, which I find to be unvarying, and that is, the the social position of women in any nation will indicate the amount of its civilization. Therefore, given her social status and you can at once find the mental state of the men.

A little gem from Townsend Harris journal as first consul to Japan 1856. While on his way to Japan on the ship the Saint Jacinto the captain docked in the port of Hong Kong. Moored nearby was the English seventy-four-gun vessel the Minden, now used as a hospital ship. Footnotes mention, “It was on board this ship that the words of, ‘The Star-Spangled Banner,’ were composed.”

Francis Scott Key, an American Lawyer, was a prisoner held on this ship during the siege of Ft. McHenry. Consequently, he witnessed the bombardment of it. Fort McHenry, a large star-shaped citadel built in 1800 to protect Baltimore, Maryland’s inner harbor. The United States declared war against the British on June 18, 1812, which officially did not end until February 17, 1815.   The British felt that Baltimore was more important than Washington, D.C. and laid siege for twenty-seven hours shooting more than 1,500 cannonballs, shells, and rockets to no avail. Francis Scott Key thought that the Americans had lost, however, on the morning of September 14, 1814, he saw the fort raise its garrison flag (a 30 ft X 42 ft flag). This inspired him to write a poem, “Defense of Fort McHenry,” which later was set to the tune of, “To Anacreon in Heaven,” and became the national anthem of the United States in 1931, “The Star-Spangled Banner.”

The flag was commissioned by the fort’s commander one year prior from Mary Pickersgill, a local flag maker.  She benefited from the notoriety of the flag by becoming a very successful businesswoman. She was also a slave owner.

Left and Right

In the political scene we refer to two extremes of philosophy the far right and the far left. I recently, received a copy of the manifesto of the Mandate of 2025. It led me to deep thinking about politics. I find this work to be a vision of totalitarianism. I use this word because communism, socialism, fascism, Nazism, monarchism are all the same in terms that they have to use the same structural technics to stay in power once they get it. Everything and I mean everything they think and do concerns efforts to stay in power.

In reading this manifesto, it is, clear to me, in its propagandistic style of rhetoric implies and sometimes emphatically, advocates totalitarianism.

It mentions four scary pillars, and four broad fronts by the authors of the manifesto.  

The Four Pillars:

“Pillar 1—this volume—puts in one place a consensus view of how major federal agencies must be governed and where disagreement exists brackets out these differences for the next President to choose a path.”  (This states- Hey! puppet chief listen to us this is the way to do things. We know because we are professionals and want to keep you in power. You are a great guy.)

“Pillar II is a personnel database that allows candidates to build their own professional profiles and our coalition members to review and voice their recommendation. These recommendation’s will then be collated and shared with the President-elect’s team, greatly streamlining the appointment process.”

(The coalition members are to make sure you, the candidate, think along the same line as they do, for them to achieve their ends to stay in power. Here we see a loss of the blessings of liberty. The candidate must follow orders. That sounds familiar. No flexibility to make wise decisions. We already have problems with many bureaucrats who just follow orders. Let us not compound it.)

“Pillar III is the Presidential Administration Academy, an online educational system taught by experts from our coalition. For the newcomer, this will explain how the government functions and how to function in government. For the experienced, we will host in-person seminars with advanced training and set the bar for what is expected of senior leadership.” (This sounds like communist cadre training and retraining of those already in office to fit their needs to streamline the government. This is a major step into totalitarianism. Everyone must follow orders. If it happens at the national level it will trickle down to the local level. The following of orders stifles innovation which is one our greatest American values. We have a democracy and democracies do not run smoothly because of freedom. So be happy that you are free and do your duty to keep it that way—vote. Later in this document they speak of giving back governmental control to the American people. You already have it. We call it the ballot box of which access to it has received some restrictions by followers of this type of thinking.)

Pillar IV—the Playbook—we are forming agency teams and drafting transition plans to move out upon the President’s utterance of “so help me God.” (This is apparent if the Donald is the one who says it.

I do not need to say anything about him. He speaks for himself by his words, actions, and deeds—present and past. If you see him through my eyes you would be very worried. Kamala Harris can, we both were in law enforcement she as a prosecutor and I as a policeman and a criminologist these personality types are frequent visitors to courts of laws and serving time in prison.)

Four Broad Fronts or the Promises of Conservative

1. “Restore the family as the centerpiece of American life and protect our children.”

The first statement in this section is: “The next conservative President must get to work pursuing the true priority of politics—the well-being of the American family.” (This really gets to me, here they support Trump, a person who can’t keep a wife, a serial monogamist, dates prostitutes, while his wife is having his baby, associated with Epstein, grabs women by their privates, debases others… I can go on. But to want this man as a leader of the American family values is ludicrous. If it is going to help the organization wrest the government from the American people and “streamline the government,” it apparently, is worth it.)

• “Dismantle the administrative state and return to self-governance to the American people.”

(If you dismantle the administrative state. Who is going to run things? The American people already have self-governance—the ballot box. I mentioned earlier conservative representatives have been working to restrict access to the box in various ways and have accomplished that in some states.)

• “Defend our nation’s sovereignty, borders, and bounty against global threats.”

(We as a nation defend ourselves from all of this.

The conservatives have problems with immigration, even though we are an immigrant nation. This has been a beef since 1849 when the Know-Nothing Party formed as an anti-immigrant party as a backlash to the numbers of German and Irish immigrants (mainly Catholic) coming to the United States. By 1875 some states passed their own immigration laws, that same year the Supreme Court declared immigration a federal responsibility. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was a mile stone in the early beginning of immigration restrictions. Success with this passage strengthened the resolve to restrict European immigration which they did with the passing of the Johnson-Reed Act of 1924. This act accomplished the setting of quotas, based on the 1890 census, with the higher quotas set for Northern European and the lowest for southern and eastern Europeans. The formula used was 2% of the nationality that already lived in the United States, for the Chinese the quota was 105 immigrants a year. The quota for Italians was less than 4,000 and for the English 150,000 per year. As you can see it was very discriminatory. I add the amount of crime committed by legal and illegal immigrants is minimal in comparison to nonimmigrants. They are in no way a threat to the United States. But they are newsworthy when they do, especially politically. They are fodder for politicians.)

• “Secure our God-given individual rights to live freely—what our Constitution calls, ‘the Blessings of Liberty.’”

In reading this treatise, I will admit I did not read it all, 950 pages.  My main interest is the philosophical points presented in the document; The Pillars and the four broad fronts. Anything that follows they base on these. Nevertheless, I have read many sections and do not like what I read. The language is presumptive and inflammatory. For example, in the introduction to the four broad fronts they state; “This is an agenda prepared by and for conservatives who will be ready on Day One of the next Administration to save our country from the brink of disaster.”  What disaster? The only possible ones I know of is nuclear war which is always forefront as a concern for all countries and/or a worse pandemic than what we recently experienced. I would suggest if Trump wins that would be disastrous and especially given that these people would be there to show him their WAY.

I recently heard and read that Trump says he doesn’t know who is behind Project 2025 yet, a CNN review found at least 140 people who worked for him before are involved. I suggest going to this article at http://cnn.com/2024/07/11/politics/trump-allies-project-2025/index.html. You will find it interesting. I also suggest looking at the roster of contributors posted in the document itself. You will recognize many names.

In the Forward of the mandate it mentions Ronald Reagan a number of times. One mention in particular is a quote by Ronald; “Freedom is a fragile thing and it’s never more than one generation away from extinction. It is not ours by way of inheritance; it must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation.” I say, yes you must fight against this proposal if you want to continue to have freedom as we know it today.

This work brags about the economy during the Reagan years. Apparently, these people must have been on the good end of the stick. The average unemployment rate During the Reagan era was seven and a half percent. It is nothing to brag about. Comparatively, under President Johnson it was four percent. Today, August 3, 2024 under Biden’s administration the reported rate is four point one percent. Overall, presidents don’t have much to do with the employment rate. When unemployment is high, stimulus programs give some help, but it takes years for economic changes to take place. Just look at the great depression, which lasted ten years, with an unemployment rate at its worst of twenty-five percent. Eight years later it took WWII to bring about significant changes in that rate. When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor the rate was nine and one half percent.  It dropped respectively as the war machine continued to develop, providing significant opportunities for employment. In 1942, the rate dropped to four point seven percent; but the defense budget tripled. The world economy has a greater effect on the economy of the United States more so today than back in the early 20^th century, simply because world trading has grown immensely. No country can survive without international trade.  Seeking isolation is not a good idea.

I like the saying of Prince Metternich, 1773-1859, “When France sneezes, the rest of Europe catches a cold.” He said this about political revolutionary ideas and happenings. The economy is intertwined in politics so we see today if any major country sneezes the rest of the world catches a cold. The impact varies from nation to nation. At present, the economy is on the rise having reached its low during the pandemic.

Unfortunately, for us the federal prison population of the United States began to increase in the 1970. I say much of it was due to the political rhetoric about crime. Particularly for black Americans as they integrated more into American society from the passing of the civil rights act of 1969. The black prison population surged from a comparative amount to whites to almost an equal number. Under Reagan the largest increased occurred at a rate of seventy-eight percent. We also need to remember the “Just Say No,” and the three prong drug enforcement program. Nevertheless, the prison population continued to rise until President Obama’s administration when his policies reduced the amount going to prison and the reduction of prison sentences. The prison population fell by 15,000 the trend continued through Trump’s administration. Since January of 2022 President Biden released 31,925 individuals.

The Reagan programs of putting people in jail for any type of drug offense, created numerous families needing welfare since for many the major bread winners, male and female went to prison. Thereby; the welfare rolls increased which many conservatives seek to decrease. Creating laws to solve perceived social problems, creates greater problems than the behavior itself.   A good example is marijuana smoking. Putting people in jail disrupts more than the life of the incarcerated individual. When Reagan became president the total prison population was 329,000 by the time he left office it doubled to 627,000. I am criminologist and taught it for twenty-nine years. Thus, here is the result of trying to cure perceived social problems by turning many of them into crimes. We have been doing just that since 1910, the epitomes of which was the Prohibition Act of 1920 and Just Say No of the 1980s which were dismal failures.  You can legislate morals but not all, simply because not everyone has the same morals. When I was a policeman a man and a woman not married or related in some way could not live together. It was a violation of Florida criminal State laws promulgated in 1860, 798.01 and .02. In 2022 Governor Rick Scott signed SB498 repealing it.

I also like this statement, “Today, America and the conservative movement are enduring an era of division and danger akin to the late 1970s. Now as then, our political class has been discredited by wholesale dishonesty and corruption.” I presume political class means Republican, and I agree with them the former president certainly has created division across the board with his incessant lying, making up of false and outlandish accusations, demeaning of persons; all of this from whatever come to his mind.

In reading the section on education it was very confusing and overladen with confusing data but initially I was interested in what they had to say, simply because governmental agencies of any sort need to be monitored in some way. I became wary when they used the word diversicrats and I eventually came upon the following. It recommends that the new administration rescind the nonbinary aspects of education respecting that there are only male and female sex categories. They mention Title IX which states “no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.” To rescind this means homosexuals, transgenders, and transvestite are non-persons nor are they citizens entitled to the protections of the U.S. Constitution.)

This really indicates ignorance of human development. People don’t choose what they are becoming. They don’t wake up one day and say, Aha! I’m heterosexual or homosexual. The origin of what pleases people’s eyes and sexual feelings are elusive but we accept that there is a control factor. We call it the super ego it is supposed to control those feelings from expressing themselves. At the same time learned values play a role which allow non-harmful feelings to society to express themselves. In other words what were social taboos and/or crimes in the past are no longer. Homosexuality, transgender, transvestism, and marijuana use are prime examples.

I leave you to read the mandate, it is long. It breaks the mandate into five major categories, and thirty sub categories. Many of the recommended changes are valid but the most important is the way of achieving these goals, which they base on their stated pillars of philosophy and four broad fronts.  These clearly to me, point to forming a totalitarian state.

In a discussion of Black Americans, an acquaintance opined that they presently are acting like a victim society. I take a different view.  I’d rather look at a black American as having suffered significantly throughout American history and its members continue to experience disenfranchisement because of the color of their skin, this is not to omit the experiences of other groups, (Women, American Indians, Mexicans, Asians, and yes European immigrants too). Black men (Negro) to be exact, walk on eggshells except for when they are in a black neighborhood. Black men from India or Ceylon for example have straight hair and are Asian, but people in our society look at them differently. I know from my police experience and the numerous seminars I’ve attended on race matters and general life experiences. Black people don’t hear the conversations that go on among some non-black people. I have and over the years those comments and conversations were not towards acceptance and tolerance but of disparagement. Many of my fellow police officers were apprehensive toward American Negroes, not the women but the men. When they encountered one or more it was with fear and of actions that easily brought about negative interaction. Many encounters would end in an unwarranted arrest. We, policemen, called a chintzy arrest (one of poor quality)

If you experience a sense of insecurity when you go shopping due to the mall shootings, that feeling is an insight into a sense of walking on eggshells. And that is what many black men may go through daily.

The subject of wearing or not wearing a mask as an issue of Freedom of Choice is the most ridiculous argument concerning freedom. Before I continue, I’ll ask some pertinent questions.  Do you need a permit to drive a vehicle on governmental roads?  (There are exceptions for farmers going from one field to another when a public road separates their property) Do you have the right to yell fire in a crowded theater when there is none? Do you have the right to fish or hunt without a license? (There are exceptions) Do you have the right to shoot off guns at any time in a city or town’s confines? Do you have the right to drive on toll roads without paying? Do you have the right to hitchhike on an interstate highway? Can you operate a vehicle on a public road drunk? Do you have the right to disturb neighbors with loud radios or harbor barking dogs? Can you operate or spectate chicken, dog, or other animal fights? Can you own an operable cannon? A Bazooka? Can you run naked through the streets of any community (other than a nudist colony)? Can you home-school your child without governmental approval. Can you burn down your house without permission? None of these are violations of your rights as an American citizen, they are regulatory and wearing or not wearing a mask falls into the same realm. The government (which is a composite of its citizens) says, “You have to wear a mask in certain situations and locations.” Is that then a violation of your rights? It is not at all. No one has the right to harm anyone knowingly or in this case unknowingly.

I can go on, but I am making my point, that wearing or not wearing a mask is a privilege.  If the government defines the spread of a disease as a danger to the country it can and will enforce mask-wearing. Many people are unaware that before the development of tuberculosis’ successful treatment and control, individuals who tested positive for the disease were hospitalized against their will. And stayed in the sanitariums until cured. They lost the right to live among others because they were a threat to the health and well-being of society.  When I was young and came down with measles and chickenpox, the county health department confined my brother and me to our home, and county officials came to our house and posted a quarantine stamp on our front door. The number of cases never reached what we have today with the covid epidemic.

Our Florida governor, Ron De Insanitas, has created a political issue out of a health issue. What he should be saying to the citizens of Florida is, “My fellow Floridians, we are faced with an insidious enemy called covid 19, or more specifically the Delta variant. The problem is we can’t see, smell, or hear it. While it is here and spreading like wildfire if we don’t get it under control sickness and death rates will be unmaintainable. We are averaging 248 deaths a day, and 23,000 cases a week. Our total case figure to date is 3.04 million and counting. 42, 252 deaths have occurred. We have a controversy about children wearing masks to school, which I created, and I was wrong. No parent has the right to send their child to school unprotected from an insidious killer or to infect other children. Unfortunately, we now lead the country in hospitalized children with Covid-19. Consequently, we need to follow all CDC recommendations. The loss of one child is too much. We know masks, cleaning our hands and things we might touch, and maintaining social distancing all work since the common cold has almost disappeared. Be a responsible Floridian and wear a mask. They work, the common cold, a virus, decreased significantly last year but is having a come-back since there is less mask-wearing. If wearing a mask, washing hands, and social distancing serve to avoid the common cold, it will then work with Covid-19 and its variants. A virus is a virus.” (See: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03519-3.

Rather than admitting he was wrong he is now trying to distract with the monoclonal antibody therapy. This is a good therapy, but it is a therapy not a prevention and is for those who tested positive and had symptoms for ten days or less and/or a person who is at high risk, such as the elderly, asthmatics, and others. Consequently, the best thing for anybody to do is get vaccinated, wear a mask when around others, wash the hands frequently, and practice social distance.

I heard parents making presentations before school boards arguing that they have the right to decide whether their child has to wear a mask. The school boards are giving them the opportunity to exercise, not a right, but the privilege to choose whether their child can wear a mask or not, and that choice must be based on specific medical reasons. I want to make it clear that when one has a child, the parent(s) does (do) not own that child. They have the duty to see to the health and welfare of the child. Failure to do so can and does lead to the State removing that child from parental care. No child belongs to anybody, he or she belongs to the State who is allowing parents to care for the child.

The school is an arm of the State and has the duty to see to the health and welfare of children from the moment the child boards a school bus or enters the grounds of the school’s confines. The school board decides the safety measures to employ in securing the health and welfare of the student, not the governor. In order for a governor of any state to interfere in the operations of any agency concerned with the health and welfare of any child would in my view have to have a Doctorate Degree in Sciences, in Education, in Human Health, in Child Psychology, in Child Development, in Family Health…. We see that one cannot achieve such a level of expertise so we have different branches of government saddled with different responsibilities to serve the public with expertise in their area of concern.

I recently read an editorial by a local pastor, R. L. Gundy, in our newspaper and he made an excellent point in his discourse on Love Thy Neighbor and I feel it imperative I share. It is a political address,” We must remember to ‘love they neighbor as thyself’, not ‘love thy party.’ And believe me I know and listened to politician party members who love their right or wrong party at all costs.

I suggest for further clarification the perusal of page 28 section C. Isolation of Patients Who Do Not Adhere to Treatment of CDC Tuberculosis Control Laws and Policies, A Handbook for Public Health and Legal Practitioners. https://www.cdc.gov/tb/programs/tblawpolicyhandbook.pdf.