The aim of the United Nations resolution was to observe a day of peace and nonviolence but on the same day a lot of violence occurs. The same people who are in the forefront to observe the day allow violence and bombardment to achieve their commercial aims.

 Although an ever-increasing number of people worldwide, representing a wide variety of religious and spiritual traditions, have joined the purpose yet violence is on the increase.

The following objective:

“To encourage worldwide, 24-hour spiritual observations for peace and nonviolence on the International Day of Peace, 21 September in every house of worship and place of spiritual practice, by all religious and spiritually based groups and individuals, and by all men, women and children who seek peace in the world.” are the words only as scribed by the scriber to mitigate the intensity feelings of those who want real peace in the world.

In the Indonesian language, ideology is often referred to as, Äúdasar state, Äù or, Äúfalsafah state, Äù, in Malaysia is called, Aurukun state, Äù. Because it gives validation to the government, confirmed the status quo ideology. But ideology can also be used by the other party (the rebels, the opposition or the party of reform) in order to blame the government, attacked the policy of the government to change the status quo. Even if the government can oppress citizens by appeal, Äùhak divine king, Äù or, Äùkehendak history, Äù, but others can justify their violent actions by relying on the principle, fundamental rights Äùhak, Äù or, Äùkehendak the power, Äù. Considered to be laden with ideological interests of the working class does not can not be used to oppose the bourgeois state power, but also to legitimize dictatorial power of the working class. Ideology in the sense that the functional can be briefly described with the following example. In the United States, ensuring national security means a significant increase in weapons production industries also benefit the weapon. Increased agricultural growth means an increase in the production of fertilizers and other chemicals, which means the profitable industries of fertilizers and chemicals. For the sake of national stability in developing countries often means reducing the political freedom of citizens. Ideology in the sense of functional typology classified in two types, namely doctrinaire ideology and the ideology of pragmatism.

An ideology can be classified if the doctrinal teachings embodied in the ideology was formulated in a systematic and detailed with clear, indoctrinated to the citizens of the community, and its implementation is closely monitored by party officials or government officials. Usually the value system or ideology that is allowed to live in a society like this is a doctrinaire ideology is. However, if the teachings contained in this ideology is not formulated in a systematic and detailed, but is formulated in general (principles only), then ideology is classified as a pragmatic ideology. In this case, ideology was not indoctrinated, but functionally socialized through family life, education systems, economic systems, political systems and religious life. On that basis, implementation is not monitored by the party or government officials, but by institutional arrangements. That is, anyone who does not conform to the values ​​embodied in the ideology will not be more equitable. Liberalism is an example of pragmatic ideology. Usually no one is allowed to evolve ideology in this society, but there is a dominant one.

Pragmatic liberalism as an ideology emerged in medieval European society. European society at that time largely divided into two, namely the aristocracy and the peasants. The aristocrats are allowed to own land, feudal class is also a master of political and economic processes, while the resident farmers as cultivators of land owned by the patron, who must pay taxes and contribute energy to the patron. Even in some places in Europe, farmers are not allowed to move to the desired place without the consent of the patron (nobles). As a result, they are nothing more than a patron’s personal property. In contrast, the welfare of the tenants should be borne by the patron. Industry is managed in the form of the guilds are rigorously set, how the goods are produced, how the number and distribution. Activities were monopolized by the aristocracy. That is, ownership of land by the nobility, the privileges of the church, the political role of the king and the nobility, and the power of the guilds in the economy are the forms of institutionalized domination over the individual. In the context of community development that emerged in the industry and commerce on a large scale, after the discovery of several new technologies. To manage the industry and trade in a massive scale is clearly necessary that workers are free and in large numbers, room to move freely, high mobility and freedom to be creative. New needs that knock on the rules that applied institutionally by the feudal class. Which helps the new economy class regardless of difficulties it is the emergence of liberalism.

Liberalism is not created by traders and industry groups, but was created by a group of intellectual unrest driven by scientific and artistic common in those days. Intellectual restlessness was welcomed by merchants and industry groups, even it is used to justify political demands which limit the power of the nobility, the church and the guilds. They are not intended solely to be able to undertake economic activities freely, but also seek profit maximization. Society is best (the best regime), according to liberalism is allowing individuals to develop individual abilities fully. In a good society, all individuals should be able to develop the minds and talents. This requires the individual to be responsible for his actions whether it is something or someone for him. A person acting on its own responsibility to develop the ability to act. According to this assumption of liberalism, John Stuart Mill argued that more supportive of government based on liberal democracy. She said that the main purpose of politics is to encourage every member of society to be responsible and mature. This can only happen manakalah them participate in making decisions concerning their lives. Therefore, although a king is wise and kind, may be able to make better decisions on behalf of the people than the people themselves, somehow democracy is much better because in a democracy the people make their own decisions for themselves, regardless of whether The bad decision. Thus, the characteristics of liberal ideology as follows:

    First, democracy is a better form of government.
    Second, members of the public have full intellectual freedom, including freedom of speech, freedom of religion and freedom of the press.
    Third, the government has only a limited set of community life. Decisions made just a little to the people so that people can learn to make decisions for yourself.
    Fourth, the power of a person against another person is a bad thing. Therefore, the government is run in such a way that the abuse of power can be prevented. In short, the power of things that tend to be suspected of being abused, and therefore, as far as possible be limited.
    Fifth, a society where every individual is said to be happy or largely happy individual. Although society as a whole happy, happiness most individuals do not necessarily maximal. Thus, the goodness of a society or regime is measured by how high indivivu succeeded in developing the abilities and talents. The ideology of liberalism was embraced in Britain and its colonies including the United States.

For starters, Engels in the English edition of 1888 made a footnote regarding the renowned expression “The history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggles”. In the footnote, Engels limits the extension of the expression to written history as to not include pre-history. What does this mean? That in pre-history, lacking social classes, there was no ideology in the way considered above. Without class struggle there could be no dominant ideology to justify the oppression of the weaker class. Now, in the view of the means of production, as long as they are very low in valuation, there will be no social divisions. The problem here is that there is a direct relationship between sophisticated means of production and exploitation. Having said that, communism, in order to be reached, has the problem of coordinating very complex means of production with the inexistence of social classes in socialism. To specify the problem in another way, how can socialism end up creating the conditions for a world without social classes if, to do this, it depends on sophisticated means of production which are directly responsible for the emergence of social classes? 

In second place, the dominant ideas of an epoch are the ideas of the ruling class or the soon to be ruling class. Generally speaking, these ideas are presented as universal ideas and other times also as eternal truths independent from history. Nonetheless, it is not so clear with the ideas presented in The Communist Manifesto, in other words, the main ideas of the proletarians for their particular historical moment. The authors exalt the proletarians to defeat the bourgeois and, ultimately, create a new society where there are no social classes. All this is done without introducing the interests of the proletarians as universal, much less as eternal truths call to the bourgeois or the other classes. Why is it that the proletarians can do this as opposed to how it was done by the earlier dominant classes?

In third place, if as stated in the first paragraph, the class that owns the means of production owns the means of mental production, the question to the birth of the revolutionary ideas cannot be delayed. The typical answer is that these ideas developed in relation with the coming of new economic forces, therefore, a new material power. And yet, the Manifesto  clearly asserts that the social classes are reduced more and more to proletarians and bourgeois. Hence, the problem is that in what moment did the proletarians acquire enough of the means of production to allow them to consolidate ideas that are necessary for them to become the dominant class?

All people think, thereby all self imposed measurements encounter ones uncalibrated bias. The differences between people can be traced to their fundamental traits outlined by upbringing and genetic make up. We must be truthful with ourselves, because not one person has all the information on any other; thereby, we can’t use this as a prerequisite. We are not trying to spawn more prejudice so elaboration is now required to note errors about the concept of race. There is one race called the human race. Humans are people. There is no evidence to support enough genetic differences exists to make hybrids between people. It doesn’t mater how different we may appear. In other words, we can’t create a non-reproductive species from ourselves.

Everyone should know human DNA doesn’t repeat in a whole. One person’s DNA is different from every other person’s DNA making DNA a reliable resource in distinguishing between individuals. Genetic make-ups are passed down family lines. We are still talking about thinking, but we are relating capacity in memory and supposedly thinking by the building blocks mapped in our DNA. Truly, this is more in line with brain construction, but thinking starts in the brain. Many more areas of health may be involved so we are looking at the world because humans can inhabit every nook and cranny on this planet.

Is their a person among you that knows of another person with perfect mental balance? Obviously, in an evolving species perfection doesn’t exist. If you were perfect, you wouldn’t need to evolve. Evolution exists in mentality and in thought too. DNA designs your organic being, but it is learning that is changing the blocks in thought. Growing pains relate to the mind equally as ones body and it is expressed biblically. Your body is stopping you from going beyond. Rhetorically deciphering a simple statement. Does it mean your mind is not stopping you?

It is perception of reality that makes reality seven billion fold. Yes, seven billion people have separate realities, making reality another distinguishing item between individuals. Concepts come from thinkers and ideologies are built from these concepts. Societies are developed through organizations, and concepts of governments propagate contagiously with the purpose of control. Notion epidemics become the prejudice of people between their societies and their governments. These generations of thoughts come from instinct passed along to every body, because survival is perhaps the most basic instinct. People incorporate instinct in thought to justify there feelings, but feelings haven’t meaning with an objective system.

Objective thought may sound cold, but those who have objective thoughts can have feelings. We must return to the balance a person uses to impose self-evaluations about thoughts, because objective thinking is a corrective action against bias. The method of operation becomes an objective removing feelings from their performance.

The better political leaders and business people are thought objective, however were is the line drawn for their services and their desires. In other words, what is stimulating their motives? Motives are usually generated through desire when one’s needs are surpassed. This now opens up a bag of worms, because who can recognize pathologic personalities from taking control of organizations and altering societies?

In summation The Law of the People must have a force within all governments to test the reasoning of leaders, and the reasoning of CEO s to stop pathogenic societal influences. The World Economic Meltdown seems to show purpose behind such a force.

You are the people. Take action and make it happen.

The first feature is temporal in nature: that is, it is related to a specific period of time. Modernism refers to something which has happened comparatively recently, if not at the current time. Certainly it has occurred after a previous historical period that might be considered ‘traditional,’ ‘feudal’ or ‘primitive.’ It is also generally considered to mark a definite transition from the previous historical period to the modern period which occurs in a comparatively short period of time and is signaled by a number of political or cultural events (e.g. revolution, book, social movement and so forth).

Second, modernism is generally (although not universally) considered to be a positive thing: this is evident on the political left, for example, since left-leaning politics are involved with rectifying the structural and systemic inequalities endemic in society. However, it has also become more evident in right-wing politics, which has taken on the concept and discourse of ‘reform’ as a means of cementing equalities inequalities and creating and sustaining new forms of inequality. In general society, it is evident that young people in general prefer new and different products – to some extent, of course, this is stimulated by the relentless churn of capitalist production but there does seem to be something within human nature that is also influential here, as new generations (and previously suppressed minorities) want to take the opportunity to demonstrate their own creativity and their own preferred genres that highlight that creativity. It is also the case that the use of ‘traditional’ items of cultural production – historical items defined as ‘classic’ or ‘classical’ – are used as markers of class through supposed possession of taste and refinement in a society in which ostentatious display of wealth and privilege is no longer considered acceptable.

Third, modernism is generally conflated with technology, broadly defined. Technology incorporates much more than the use of new machines and different ways of making and doing things; it includes also varieties of managerial and organizational innovation and administration. Doing things in a different way (even if with the intention of keeping things exactly the same according to the ‘reform’ agenda of the right) is considered an important sign of modernism and one which no serious person or institution can afford to ignore.

Superficially, a Third Way approach seems attractive to many people because it suggests moderation, the avoidance of problematic extreme positions and, hence, limiting the possibility of conflict. Many religious and philosophical traditions favour a middle position – Aristotle spoke of the ‘golden mean, for example, while the historical Buddha established by trial-and-error a similar position as half-in and half-out of human society by his rejection of asceticism as the sole means of approaching enlightenment. Research in a variety of fields indicates that people, when they do not have a strong opinion about a subject or reason for thinking in a specific way, will respond to uncertainty by joining a central position which is also occupied by many other people. A whole raft of discourse has been invented as a pretext for this avoidance of thought or proper acquisition of data, from ‘moderation in all things’ to ‘not rocking the boat.’ The dangers of mutely joining an apparent majority are evident from many dictatorial regimes of the twentieth century.

In the case of Third Way politics, the concept was to eliminate socialism as a means of transforming society – indeed, it abandoned any claim to transform society radically – and instead to rely on different types of ‘compassionate’ capitalism or ‘capitalism with a human face’ as a means of delivering not social justice but a sufficiently flexible means of distributing state resources to ensure the continued preservation of the privileges, wealth and status of the rich. The Third Way concept has of course been incorporated by the right wing into its ‘reform’ agenda that claims that the concept and practical details of social welfare belong to the now abandoned left-leaning past. It has been used as a supplementary pretext in some cases to justify slashing public services, privatizing state-owned organizations and all the other aspects of the neo-rightist approach.

However, there have been some more positive aspects. The changing demographics of human society, with its ageing and greying population, for example, requires some response with respect to provision for elderly people and their responsibilities to society.

Politicians are “polished chronic liars” deceiving the people they swore to serve. The Supreme Law of the people is the Constitution. A quote from Thomas Jefferson, “let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.”

An odd title for a small essay, but fitting. There are many disturbances happening on many fronts in the world. There are elections, business negotiations, economic unrest, civil and undeclared wars, religious zealots, and the list continues. Extremism is based on some sort of ideology, and it is a weight on the mental bearing of people. It generates the sense of unbalance in some social situations or it could be said it generates bias in an unbalanced community. Ideologies in general are counter weights. Opinions are the makings of all human groupings. Through Bush’s conceptualisation everyone in the world are extremists.  They are not within his group thereby the world filled with terrorists.

This conjecture or grandiose reasoning is behind The United States profession as the World Police Force. It doesn’t make sense. Don’t buy it. This thinking could only be true, if extremists equals terrorists and only when you’re not a loyal American, if you don’t think this way. The counter weight grows so heavy balance is lost again. You are damned if you do or damned if you don’t creating a non-functional Congress. These enigmas are popular in psychological analysis. For instance — in a drug councilor’s database, alcoholics always negate they have alcohol problems. The test starts with “do you think you’re an alcoholic.” What is your answer?

By all indications, forethought generated the Wars in Afghanistan and Iraq through an over simplistic whimsy to show the US citizens they should be the “World’s Police Force, and rest of the world they need a “World Police Force.” The linear events states, expedience is “How To Show” everyone, while using the presentation of concern.  It paints the portrait the world needs to see. 

Over zealousness is extremism by-passing fundamentalism. Politicians are very similar to used car sells people. Hard sells relate to the consumer’s condition and consumers require to test drive a car. The people of the United States got their test drive before they could look for any alternatives.

When you buy a car, you look long and hard not wanting to make a mistake. You take your time walking around and kicking multitudes of car tires. You are about to make a decision that will affect you for several years. You are weighing your needs and/or the needs of your family. Family is perhaps smallest and the most basic community based on emotional unification, however status is also a social requirement on the world scale. By the way, Presidents don’t choose their automobiles. Their vehicles are chosen for them, and protocol is in the mix, however the President (George W. Bush) made the people’s choice in expedience.

Newt has problems and his political career grew during the same years of George W. Bush. His past has more controversy and still the Republican Conservatives want another conservative to do their bidding. This ideology is doing the same thing, and balance has been lost. If you make jam, you preserve the fruit in a rich sauce. To preserve and to conserve is the same thing so to keep a reactionary in office, to Hell with The Constitution Newt’s the choice. In my opinion, The United States needs a leader and not a thoughtless reactionary.

Christians and Ideologies

A Christian, if that is indeed what you call yourself, is called to be primarily a citizen of the Kingdom of God, a kingdom indeed, that is based on such different principles that it is not of this world. All the systems and ‘kingdoms’ of this world, whether they be based on capitalism, socialism, democracy, communism, and whatever else, are NEVER going to be perfect. And the minute we are willing to admit the imperfections, that is when we are able to move towards improvement. What is the motto of alcoholics anonymous? The first step toward recovery is: admit you have a problem. And perhaps the improvement does not lie in blindly living out yet another ideological stance we may come up with, but rather in simply following the moral and spiritual principles which Christ calls us to, principles that talk of changing what is within, and letting His kingdom reign within us. Then loving our neighbors, dying to self, being equal in the sight of God, being free to choose His way, loving God and only Him, not hating, murdering or slandering, living pure lives – then those things will no longer be equal to any –ism, or have to equal any –ism but rather will be much beyond them. We are called to live holy and blameless lives first before a holy God. You see, it isn’t about living in the perfect ideological system, but it is about living according Christ’s principles despite the false principles an ideological system may feed us. And let us be honest for once: every ideological system feeds us something (if not everything) that is false, being rather fleshly and worldly rather than anything remotely God-centered. And the only true freedom we will ever find is in Him.

Kingdom of God or an Ism?

Let us admit it: the problem always run up against in all systems and spheres, is that the human being is inherently selfish, and no system can hope to counteract that nor completely eradicate that. Jesus is our only hope for salvation and then true transformation. We have not come to the earth to be wealthy; neither have we come to be poor, we have not come to ‘lord over’ others; neither have we come to be slaves, we have not come to give in to the bad things of this world, nor have we come to be the final judge,…and so the list can go on. We have been called to have the fruits of love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control, humility and many more be apparent in us. We have come to free the captive, bind up the brokenhearted, to declare Jesus as Lord, to die to our fleshly selves and instead be servants, friends, sons and daughters of the most high God and to ultimately be co-heirs and rulers in the Kingdom of God (so not this world). Christ’s freedom and His Kingdom are sometimes shown in the flesh, but really it is a change that happens in the spirit, a Spirit that will last for eternity.

And we are certainly not called to lives of mediocrity wherein we are not overtly greedy or selfish, but also not quite free of the grips the social, political and economic systems have over us. That is what getting caught up in imperfect ideologies is all about: they get us caught up in world much more mediocre, distracting, and petty then anything Christ calls us to.

Typical themes of concern to ideologies include nation, class, race, environment and relationship to the kland, gender, and religion, among others. Most ideologies talk about, or are concerned with, these themes. In some cases, it may even seem as though one or two themes predominant in an ideology —for example, Marxists concentrate heavily on the theme of class, and capitalists emphasize the theme of freedom.

Progressivism is an umbrella term for various ideologies that advocate moderate political and social reform through government action, such as using anti-trust laws to prevent corporations from establishing monopolies in the marketplace.  Progressive ideologies generally support social justice and the rights of workers.

         Andrew Carnegie is a defender of the duty that is held by all men of wealth; that wealthy are obligated to help even the poorest in their own area. Even the poor strongly agree that surplus of money should be accumulated and directed towards the greater good, to be spent on public purposes which help. Although he is for helping the poor he still argues that a higher class should be maintained. He e argues that he has found “the true antidote for the temporary unequal distribution of wealth”. His ideology may be pronounced Communist but as the article says”… differing, indeed from that of the Communist…” He believes that the justification of the accumulation of wealth should not be taken lightly and should be invested in public matters which will strengthen brethren amongst the country and bringing the to the poor wisdom, experience and opportunities to flourish.

         Within his ideology he proposes what the wealthy should invest their riches in. He has strong beliefs that institutions should arise where art and literature may flourish, great fortunes should not squandered on unnecessary objects and in wills for their children. He believes that upon death, all wealth should be given to public purposes, to strengthen the brethren bonds between rich and poor