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

There were five victims of understanding that needs to be understood:

1. Isolation

If you are invited to meetings, seminars, or any of its regeneration isolative (enclosed) Please immediately turn the alarm within you. Brainwashing always done in isolation conditions. The victim need only remember that the attempt to isolate is the first attempt of the brainwasher.
Escape from their grip at this stage is much lighter than when the victim had entered the next stage. Note the importance, that in this condition, the victim was still met with the recruiters have not seen smoking gun, so the negotiations to them much easier.

2. Mind clouding

This technique is unethical ways of the brainwasher to reduce cognitive functions victims. There are many ways mind clouding, which is often used is to reduce food intake and reduced hours of sleep. At some stage there are several attacks on the minds of victims while cognitive function is reduced so it can not think critically anymore. Lack of food intake and lose hours of sleep within 48 hours is usually enough to make one’s mind weakens. In this episode, brainwasher installs the identity of the victim for later exchanged for a new identity.

When the victim is aware of this mind clouding practice, the wisest way to do is save energy as much as possible. Do not perform movements that are spent calories, stay calm and keep your sanity of mind.
3. Attacks against identity

The third sign that can be felt by the victim’s identity is assault. At this stage the victim is no longer stimulated to believe who he is, what’s his name and who his parents.

Unfortunately, attacks on the identity of the technique are performed in conjunction with mind clouding. Just imagine, physical endurance and mind of victims were reduced, cognitive function at zero out, in the same time the identity of the victim attacked him.

How to survive the two attacks at once is to remain true to his identity. Strengthen your resolve in your heart that you are. Sensitivity to self-identity will become a benchmark of what brainwashing is not forwarded. If his physical weakness, reduced cognitive function, but the victim stayed with her identity, most likely brainwasher be frustrating as well.

4. Feel guilty

At this stage brainwasher will strive to bring the hearts of victims of excessive guilt situations. Guilt will be closely related to a new understanding be installed in the understanding of victims. When guilt is already integrated in the victim, then brainwasher will make the gap between the victims with a history that makes him feel guilty about it.

Up here, the family began to accept the consequences. Jobs, schools, religious institutions that have invested a lot of confidence in him started as an enemy entity “miserable” life. Sociality victim began to change.

5. Ideological trance

In the above conditions, the victim had entered the ideological situation Trance. Trying to straighten out the understanding will only produce a futile argument. They have no power against a new understanding of life in his mind. In this condition fully rescue relies heavily on family and other parties.

Melissa C. Simmons

James Madison University

As many of us were informed as freshman, and never allowed to forget, before graduating from JMU there are four important “Duke-Do’s” every student should complete. In no particular order these activities include skinny-dipping in Newman Lake, streaking the quad, finding the underground tunnels, and “studying” in the stacks. But as far as our parents’ college customs go, are our modern adaptations to school spirit traditions and activities majorly changing the way we think about sexuality and gender in general? Granted we can agree that exciting stories about phenomenally graceful streaks and the action packed epitome of close calls in the stacks may not outwardly say “straight, promiscuous, sexually rebellious dukes are the coolest”, we should critically think about what our rituals actually represent, and how those underlying meanings can create gendered social control on campus. If we investigate what these traditional college rites of passage actually represent in terms of constructing gender ideologies, we’ll find our “Duke-Do’s” are rather culturally gender norm abiding.    

In U.S. culture heterosexual marriage is treated as the ultimate form of romantic expression and our culturally based assumption that every individual wants to be heterosexual, happily marry and have a nuclear family is called heteronormativity. So how are our rather bold rituals constructing this gender ideology right here on campus? Well we can begin with the three that are most alike. Skinny-dipping, streaking, and sexual activity in a public space are all behaviors which generally involve a focus on social nudity as well as generally involve mixed company. Statistics show that as one might assume students strive to balance the social activities taking place on campus, that men are often stringently not allowed to participate if unaccompanied and women are just as strongly encouraged to be accompanied by other female counterparts. Although traveling in couples or groups of friends may seem the foundation of any social recreational activity, the social nudity aspect and mixture of company adds the element of sexual rebelliousness and exhibitionism to these acts.

Streaking the quad actually began as “the West Hall Naked Quad Run” on a different campus in the 1990’s and comprised of generally intoxicated students undressing as a group in the basement of a dorm building which would eventually lead to a mass exodus of nude students on campus. Many students bolstered phone numbers on backs and buttocks further encouraging students to act on their natural sexual arousals. As for the only JMU must do that doesn’t imply nudity, even searching for discretely discussed tunnels encourages students to conform to activities that promote rule-breaking and rebellion of some manner. JMU is just one of the institutions in where the interactions that we have will take place, and will contribute to what we accept as normal, gendered behavior. Every year that students take part in and identify with practices and customs that include contextual factors such as mixed company, nudity, and sexual activity, we normalize many forms of activities inclusive of this context.

Investigating further still, aside from provoking modern society’s obvious curiosity and acceptance of nudity, how do these rituals act as a social control for dichotomized gender and more specifically, heteronormativity? Although a more subtle practice on campus, if we truly look we can find many forms of social isolation, stigmatization, formal, and informal forms of rewards and punishments present. As a part of identifying with JMU culture, college rituals represent a rite of passage. As physiological changes mark the onset of our young adulthood and biological sex, college rituals act as marks of social, gendered adulthood.  Any student would obviously want to complete the Duke-must-do’s in order to identify with JMU culture. However, if these ritualistic activities imply requirements of conforming to gendered scripts of the dominant ideology represented by the activities themselves, where does this leave those students who do not qualify? Overall, chances of completing all four Duke-must-do’s are much higher if you are a student who is an open, sexually explorative, social-rule abiding, authority-rule breaking, heterosexual  willing to discover the myriad of public activities related to the body, nude exploitation, sexual objectification, social nudity, and romantic interaction. Mind you all of these rituals supported by this gendered, dominant culture are all very inclusive of expectations physically standard of heteronormative qualifying as well.

Although you may have completed the Duke-must-do’s or be rather opposed to any form of scholarly rebellion, we should keep the origins and meanings of the rituals we are a part of in mind. How our everyday or even once in a blue moon customs and traditions allow socially gendered ideologies to dominate and vice aversely subordinate. Rituals have implications for those persons not meeting the gendered norm which is implied as standard within the behavior.  Some even hold implications for those who do qualify; we must critically evaluate our actions as even if we meet the standard, we might be unknowingly encouraged to prescribe to a norm which alienates others and even parts of ourselves.  

Rosa Luxemburg’s objections about WWI arose from an excellent understanding of the Great War. Her first objection states WWI was an imperialist venture leading to annihilation. As a socialist, she did not believe the propaganda of a defensive war espousing feverish nationalism, but championed international worker unity to prevent destruction. Luxemburg recognized imperialism was the forerunner of capitalism. Thus her second objection states WWI is about mature capitalist countries competing for “world domination and exploiting remain zones of the world that are not yet capitalistic.” Her third objection states war time production of essentials such as arms, food and clothes would make large businesses thrive. Her fourth objection states proletarian slavery to the bourgeoisie is evident because they support the war. She was aggravated that the working classes and even many socialists succumbed to the bourgeoisie’s ploy of a defensive war instead of staying truthful to Marxist doctrine. Her fifth objection states victory or defeat is meaningless to the working classes because gains or losses are measured in annexations, colonies and military predominance which do not serve working class aspirations but imperial cravings. She deduced the onslaught of war as catastrophic for all working classes because of the deaths and crippling of millions and post war economic hardships.

Luxemburg objected to the war based consequences that were likely to happen. The first consequence she saw was WWI would end not in a decisive military victory but because of mutual exhaustion. The second consequence she saw was WWI would lead to economic ruin of all belligerents and neutral nations. She foresaw that the victorious states could not expect reparations to immediately heal the wounds inflicted by the war, because she knew the economic regression of the losers would seriously affect the victors’ economy because of interdependence. The third consequence she predicted had two scenarios. The first is if the central powers were victorious, Germany would acquire some useless territories ravaged by war.  These would include Belgium, French colonies, Turkey and Middle Eastern provinces. The Habsburg monarchy would continue with additional lands. She predicted a second world war would begin under English leadership to throw off German hegemony and a “feverish arms race” would commence after WWII. The second scenario is an Anglo-French victory would lead to Germany losing her colonies and Alsace-Lorraine. Austria-Hungary would be partitioned and the Ottoman Empire would be liquidated. Also, the Balkan, Persian and Chinese people would be subject to Russia, England, France and Italy. An allied victory would force Germany to spearhead WWII and a post war arms race. The fourth consequence she saw was the capitalist world order would cease to promote societal progress. The fifth consequence she saw was capitalism could continue only with military hegemony, imperialism, secret alliances and multinational states.

Luxemburg had an uncanny method of predicting the future, most of which turned out to be correct. Her first prediction about WWI ending in mutual exhaustion was correct because opponents eliminated each other in a war of attrition. Her second prediction about economic ruin for all was correct. The British lost considerable investment in shipping because of unrestricted submarine warfare and went through debilitating crises. France was the battleground reducing French infrastructure and economy to rubble. Russia suffered terribly from economic crises because of scorched-earth policy, terrible defeats by the German army and the communist revolution. Germany dipped into severe inflation and crises in the post war years. The failure of large Austrian banks spelled the doom of the once mighty Habsburg and German Empires. Luxemburg’s third prediction of the first scenario predicting a German victory was wrong. Her second scenario was very accurate regarding the victory of the allied powers, the end of Habsburg and German imperial domination, the presence of the allied powers in the Balkans and the occupation of Germany’s Shandong province in China. Most astounding about her predictions was WWII would be started by the loser of WWI, which in this case was Germany. What is still amazing is Luxemburg’s prediction of new alliances in Europe post World War I. Some of these new alliances included Germany allied with U.S.S.R. and Japan, which historically were not considered feasible. Moreover her prediction of a “feverish arms race” in the world also came true between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. during the cold war. Her fifth prediction about capitalism collapsing was wrong because capitalism survived WWI, the Great Depression, WWII and the cold war and is still the leading economic principle of many nations. Her sixth prediction about capitalism surviving because of military hegemony and imperialism is incorrect. National capitalism has transformed into transnational capitalism where the latter is not subject to the state, eliminating the need for military support and imperialist ventures.

Rosa Luxemburg was viewed as a traitor because her opinions did not match the emotional jubilation of the public. However, her concerns for the working classes and accurate predictions convince me otherwise. I believe she was a brilliant and intuitive woman. She objected the war because she knew not even the victors would gain anything they were expecting. She analyzed that military victories would not bring immediate recovery as expected because of the interdependence of European economies. Her analysis of WWI as not a decisive war of gain, but mutually assured destruction was accurate. European investment, infrastructure, industry, society and people were marred beyond recognition.  Furthermore, she was correct by saying the working classes were dying unnecessarily for this destructive war. World War I recorded the most number of military and civilian deaths ever recorded in history. The people who died were not big capitalists, but poor wage workers emotionally charged by nationalism. Her prediction about the certainty of another war initiated by the loser was remarkably accurate. Rosa Luxemburg is certainly not a traitor. Though I disagree with her misgivings about capitalism and the greatness of socialism, her assessment about the nature of WWI makes her a great visionary. Though hindsight is not fully accurate, if Germany’s working classes listened to her predictions of the consequences of WWI leaving aside her firebrand version of Marxian Socialism, they would not have suffered as much.

Works Cited

Luxemburg, Rosa. “The War and the Workers.” Internet Modern History Sourcebook. 22 November 2008. http://h-net.org/~german/gtext/kaiserreich/lux.html