Introduction
Both individually and collectively, the decision of what is ‘real’ or ‘true’ and thereby ‘important’ dominates all levels of society and determines customs, morality, and ethics as well as politics and law. It defines obligations, freedoms, and responsibilities along with options and alternative choices. These beliefs then become indigenous to the prevailing culture and lead to expectations of behavior as both written and unwritten rules of conduct that reflect wide extremes of value systems. Cultural myths influence and often even define the relationships of the population as well as the structure and function of government itself.
The human mind presumes that the commonality of a belief system is evidence of truth, and, of course, history is full of obvious examples to the contrary (e.g., Extraordinary Popular Delusions, Mackay). Some centuries ago, everyone believed that the sun rotated around the earth and that the earth was flat. These examples merely demonstrate that all information is presumptive and not absolute because even the ‘laws’ of science are constantly changing (e.g., there are now only eight planets instead of nine as of August 2006).
The foundations of government and societies reflect a wide variation between reality-based altruistic belief systems resulting in governments that are benevolent, or their alternative, governments that are oppressive and exploitive. Historically, dominant cultures were established by force of conquest and militancy and were governed by sovereign caprice. In those days as well as now, religions were established and enforced by the sword and political alliances of rulers.
In every culture, the necessity arose to define the relationship between the ruler and the people, as well as between religion and the state, and to define parameters of authority. Conflicts of allegiance frequently arose between the state and the religion, and failure to resolve the conflicts often resulted in dire consequences, such as excommunication, beheading, or being burned at the stake. The Inquisition (cal. 35) was the extreme example of the conflict by which totalitarian theocracy brought extreme oppression that fueled subsequent distrust of ecclesiastical authority. This is specifically reflected in the United States Constitution, which grants freedom from government-enforced religion but also guarantees freedom for religion.
The importance of religion in the establishment of the United States government cannot be overlooked (Gingrich, 2006) because historically, the very purpose of the Pilgrim founders was to seek religious liberty and freedom of expression, which is therefore intrinsic to the very founding of democracy as expressed in the Constitution. The argument continues today over what it means to ‘establish’ a religion or ‘prohibit’ the free expression thereof.
Political structure therefore reflects the organization and expression of belief systems that are revealed to be the true seat of power. The government is merely the formal depository of ideas in a legalistic structure to facilitate enactment from the conceptual to their concrete application. The true source of power and authority, however, is the faith of the citizenry in the alleged truth of basic premises. Thus, government is the mechanism that transforms the reality of nonlinear truth or the illusions of falsity into pragmatic, operational expression in the linear domain.
The forms and expressions of politics represent the distillation of moral/spiritual/religious premises to their practical application via law in everyday life. Thus, there is no possible way to avoid that universal human requirement for discernment between ‘right and wrong’; even the extreme iconoclast or criminal abides by this primordial distinction. Codes of right/wrong behavior are inviolate in criminal gangs and as well as in the animal world. Even the antimoralist is paradoxically caught in the dichotomy by making ethics and morality ‘wrong’ (e.g., ‘politically incorrect’).
As history has so aptly demonstrated, the processing of concepts in political dialog is often passionate to the degree that millions of people die in the heat of the fray. Political frenzy begets violence, fanaticism, and extremes of belief systems whereby worship of the state becomes a religion in and of itself, as exemplified by the worship of Chairman Mao, Kim Jong-il, the Ayatollah, Adolf Hitler, and many others over history as well as in today’s world. Pathognomonic of fascist totalitarianism is the military goosestep at calibration level 90. (Note Iran’s current military display.)
While such societies may still give lip service to God or religion, mass demonstrations are actually staged consequent to the malignant messianic narcissism of the God-substituted leader in whose presence the multitudes weep openly with extravagant over-whelms of emotion and awe.
As noted previously, the Constitution and the basic structure of the United States government were created by theists or deists who were not overtly political religionists. Thus, Divinity was given formal recognition as the sole source of equality and freedom (‘common law’) without establishing the primacy of any particular religion that could have resulted in the establishment of a theocracy.
Another source of the right to the expressions or displays of religions as a cultural/social reality is accorded by the basic dictum of ‘free speech’. In some decisions, the courts have extended great latitude by which free speech has been expanded to even include behaviors or physical actions that are then regarded as ‘symbolic speech’. Ironically, such extreme liberality is not afforded the free speech of mentioning the word ‘God’ in public places. This is again a paradox inasmuch as all high public officials, including the President and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, have for centuries traditionally taken their oaths of office with their hand placed on the Bible.
The juxtaposition of such divergent rulings brings into question the operationally prescriptive sovereignty of political slant, cant, and deviant rhetoric for the presumptive rewards of political gain. Such distortions occur as a consequence of the willful manipulating of interpretations that argue the letter of the law but, at the same time, obviously violate the spirit of the law, the intention of which is quite obvious to any person of integrity whose innocence has not been programmed by positionalities. One might naïvely presume that the high judiciary would be somewhat above catchy memes or the transient popularity of relativistic ideologies that calibrate at the consciousness level of only 160.
When people shrug their shoulders at recognizing the importance of sociopolitical fallacies, one could ask, “Would you like to have a surgeon who calibrates at 160 operate on you?” Or even an auto mechanic, or your legal representatives?
Historians have noted that democracies seldom last more than a few centuries for the same reasons that were initially pointed out by Socrates. He viewed that integrity would unlikely prevail as the voting masses would award themselves more and more benefits to the point of eventually losing their freedom. Notable in this regard, as previously mentioned, is that at the present time, approximately eighty-five percent of the world’s population calibrates below 200 (in the United States, it is approximately fifty-five percent), which denotes a significantly narrow margin of safety.
The social expressions of spiritual reality as levels of consciousness were extensively documented in previous works (e.g., Truth vs. Falsehood, Chapter 9). Modern man is profoundly influenced by the media whose presentations of ostensible truth include even extreme falsehood, which is then given publicity as though it were of equal, integrous validity. Due to its importance, this subject will be discussed more fully in a later chapter. Because the mind is intrinsically unable to discern perception from essence or truth from falsehood (as detailed in Truth vs. Falsehood, Section 1), a common presumption of the naïve mind is that truth is established by popularity and commonality of agreement. Thus, the mind looks for confirmation and searches for reliable information.
In this regard, it is important to note that the Encyclopedia Britannica calibrates at 465, whereas fifty percent of the information on the Internet (as well as fifty percent of blog sites) calibrates below the critical level of 200. Thus, even the integrous search for truth leads to misinformation. The percentage of error overall in the Britannica is only approximately five percent. This is not surprising in that the Britannica has long-established, rigorous requirements.
That the media include fallacious material is a consequence of the illusion created by the catchy meme, “Fair and balanced.” The implication, of course, is that, via relativism, falsehood is of equal value to truth, a rather absurd presumption just on face value. As an example, we can take that the earth is flat as a fair-and-balanced affirmative to the view that the earth is round. This can be further elaborated based on the fallacious meme, “There are two sides to any question.” (This calibrates as false and was actually the comment of a public official caught red-handed on video while stealing cash and stashing it in tin cans in the basement of his house.)
Social validation is thus of little value in trying to discern truth. Even basic religious texts show extremely wide variation in levels of truth in various verses, some of which can calibrate as low as 70 (see Chapter 16, Truth vs. Falsehood) as do some popular belief systems noted (see Chapter 17). Cynically, it has been said that political/economic/social truths depend more on the price of oil than on any verifiable yardstick of validity. Consideration of drilling for oil within the United States has itself created an intense battle between ideologies where litigious environmentalism has blocked the drilling of any new wells or the construction of any new oil refineries. This has resulted in throwing enormous amounts of money to the regions of the world that are most vociferously hateful of America. The shift of power enables the terrorists to become even more aggressive, which enhances the overall tension of the clash of civilizations between Islamic triumphalism and the traditional values of Western civilization.
Whether cultural trends or belief systems are integrous actually depends on the multiple factors of both intention and context as well as on content itself. This is revealed by the fact that truth is often distorted and utilized to implement and paradoxically support falsehood. By this curious device, a provable fact is then reinterpreted in such a way as to appear to be supportive evidence of its exact opposite, which is then used to support the false accusations (e.g., the ‘straw man’ fallacy). Malice is often disguised as feigned innocence.
In contrast to the twisting of truth for surreptitious ends, open honesty is inclusive of both context and content. This is the basis for situational ethics, which recognizes that whether an act is to be judged as right or wrong and to what degree depends on the context, including contributing circumstances and, importantly, intention. This is exemplified by the everyday application of evidence in courtroom law in criminal cases to establish motive and also Federal laws to protect citizens in times of war.
Although commonality of belief is persuasive, it is not indicative of truth. As will be pointed out later, media play into this back-and-forth gaming of manipulation as politicized ‘spin’. Threat of media attack is now used to intimidate via orchestrated ‘blog’ attack composed of well-crafted malevolent falsity (i.e., blogger blackmail). Under the banner of “free speech,” plus propagation via the Internet, ‘hate’ Web-site malevolence has gained ground and facilitated the decline of Western civilization.
Independence from Social Programming
Safeguards against being programmed by society are (1) emotional detachment, in which all information is viewed as provisional, (2) awareness that ordinary mentalization is unable to discern perception from essence, and (3) knowing that the wolf often hides beneath sheep’s clothing. This suspension of belief is the practical application of the basic dictum to “wear the world like a light garment.” To “be in the world but not of it” is a mode of attention that nevertheless still allows spontaneous interaction and function in society.
To avoid entrapment by the world, many spiritually aligned people take advantage of retreats, and some even become renunciates and join religious communities. In this regard, it needs to be pointed out that true renunciation is actually an internal attitude and discipline where what is denied is not external appearance but the ego’s attraction to its own projections. Traditionally, the Sabbath was a day of contemplation and detachment from ordinary activities whereby the overriding importance of the long-term life of the spirit was given formal recognition and implemented by devotion and withdrawal from worldly affairs and monetary concerns, such as business.
To what degree and in what style one wishes to continue to participate in the world are a consequence of one’s prevailing level of consciousness and overall spiritual intention, as well as degree of dedication. The world offers maximal opportunity for spiritual growth and motivation, which is characterized as gaining spiritual merit and undoing the effects of prior negative choices and their spiritual consequences.
A traditional avenue has been through humanitarian efforts and selfless service (Karma Yoga). Major disasters often elicit significant outpourings of this inner spiritual awareness in which compassion and altruism are genuinely expressed by all levels of society, and even the government itself. Thus, under what appears to be society’s veneer of cynicism, materialism, or sensationalism, there still resides the very active, influential heart of humanity.
Despite all the critics and naysayers, as mentioned previously, America is the most generous of all the world’s nations, and its humanistic philanthropic aid is hundreds of times greater than that of any other country. This effort is the result of individuals (eighty-nine percent of the households in America), plus humanitarian organizations, corporate America, and philanthropies, including nonprofit organizations, churches, and the like (Philanthropic Research, 2006). This unique quality of United States’ society was noted as long ago as 1835 by Alexis de Tocqueville in his famous book, Democracy in America. Note also that the United States rebuilt all of war-torn Europe after World War II and still currently pays twenty-seven percent of the overall expenses of the United Nations.
In contrast to the above, the countries that are the most virulently hostile to the United States consistently give little or even nothing at all to the poor or to destitute regions of the world despite their enormous oil profits and accumulated wealth. Fortunately, generosity, benevolence, and philanthropy are not commonly labeled or viewed as ‘spiritual’ values or presumably they would also be under attack by radical secularists who might argue that by humanitarian programs, the federal government is illegally supporting religious/spiritual practices.
Wisdom versus Popularity
Government is the expression of the ideology associated with political systems that vary from the extremes of savage, oppressive, totalitarian regimes and monarchies to benign rulers who brought peace and prosperity. (The following is reprinted for convenience from Truth vs. Falsehood.)
Political Systems
| Benevolent Sovereign | 500 |
| Oligarchy | 450 |
| Democracy/Republic | 410 |
| Iroquois Nation | 399 |
| Coalition | 345 |
| Socialism | 305 |
| Monarchy | 200 |
| Feudal | 145-200 |
| Tribal | 200 |
| Theocracy | 175 |
| Collectivism | 175 |
| Communism | 160 |
| Dictatorship | 135 |
| Fascism | 125 |
| Anarchy | 100 |
As can be seen, the most beneficial governments arise from benevolent rulers, such as those responsible for centuries of peace and prosperity in ancient China, where social accord and cooperation were the consequence of respect for integrous wisdom. Leadership by oligarchic counsel is also based on reliance on proven wisdom as was practiced by American Indian as well as other tribes for centuries. The Iroquois Nation served as a model for democracy and significantly influenced the foundation of the structure of the United States government. The Presidential cabinet is analogous to the oligarchic council. (The current United States cabinet calibrates at 455.)
As previously noted, despite populist critics, the value of the solid fruits of wisdom stand on their own and result in the United States being the most philanthropic of all nations via the generosity of private United States citizens, the American business community, the United States government, and the giant foundations. (Buffett, Carnegie, Gates, Ford, Rockefeller, and other foundations donate more than all the rest of the member countries of the United Nations combined.)
United States society collectively calibrates at 421 (November 2007). In contrast, the populist (e.g., Hollywood) critics collectively calibrate at 190. (The most recent Sundance Film Festival calibrates at 165). Thus, while populism appeals to narcissism, nobody, as pointed out before, wants a surgeon, an accountant, a lawyer, or even a bus driver who calibrates at 190. Interestingly, while the consciousness level of America is at 421, Singapore, which arose from an oligarchy, calibrates at 440, and crime is almost nonexistent.
The application of the basic principles of wisdom requires self-discipline, personal integrity, hard work, respect for self and others, and often self-sacrifice, meaning delaying immediate gratifications for long-term goals (the ‘Protestant ethic’).
The most destructive government leaders have characteristically been dictators whose effect on their countries has been that of devastation. This popularity reflects an inflation of value due to mass hysteria and promotion of a personality culture. Thus, Chairman Mao’s collectivist regime calibrated at 175 and resulted in the starvation of thirty million peasants. China has now risen to calibration level 385, and oddly enough, represents the benefit of establishing pragmatic business principles (paradoxically as exemplified by Sam Walton). Thus, the old dictum proves that the way to success is to imitate it rather than to envy it or jealously demonize it.
Countermeasures to Cultural Illusion
A study of Western civilization indicates that its overall level of consciousness is currently in decline for the reasons that have been stated succinctly by Pope Benedict (relativism plus Islamic aggression and ‘cultural Jihad’; see Burton and Stewart, 2007.) The decline is the result of social and intellectual influences via the media, academia, and politicalization from lower consciousness levels which have been heavily financed from sources that calibrate below the critical consciousness level of 200 (‘power brokers’). The net result is the progressive dominance of narcissism, which is aggrandized as ‘progressive’, ‘free speech’, or human ‘rights’ and appeals to egocentricity. Thus, even formal education is no longer a safeguard against blatant nonintegrity and gross falsehood.
The most practical countermeasures are:
1. Spiritual alignment with truth (which facilitates a favorable shift in brain chemistry).
2. Intellectual sophistication via familiarity with the Great Books of the Western World.
3. Awareness of the Map of Consciousness.
4. Advancing one’s own level of consciousness by following and practicing verified spiritual teachings and principles of discernment.
Limitations of Wisdom and Valid Social Truth
Although integrity and collective intelligence support happiness and survival, they do not guarantee omniscience or immunity from error or defect. Humankind overall is on an evolutionary path, and life on earth is not a celestial realm. The innate value of human life on earth is that it affords maximum opportunity for spiritual growth through the mechanism of freedom of the will via choice and option. Thus, human life represents the maximum opportunity for the transcendence of negative traits and the gain of positive merit. Acceptance of human limitation, both individually and collectively, allows for forbearance, forgiveness, and compassion rather than condemnation. Human progress is evolutionary, and, therefore, mistakes and errors are inevitable. The only real tragedy is to become older but not wiser.