THE WAY
A Theory of Root Cause and Solution
A view shared by many modern activists is that capitalism, free enterprise, multi-national
corporations and globalization are the primary cause of the current global Human Rights problem
and that by striving to change or eliminate these, the root problem of what ills the modern
world is being addressed. This is a rather unfortunate and historically myopic view,
reminiscent of early “class struggle” Marxists who soon resorted to violence as a means to
achieve rather questionable ends. And like these often brutal early Marxists, modern
anarchists who resort to violence to solve the problem are walking upside down and backwards,
adding to rather than correcting, both the immediate and long-term Human Rights
problem. Violent revolution, including our own American revolution, becomes a breeding
ground for poverty, disease, starvation and often mass oppression leading to future violence.
Large, publicly traded corporations are created by individuals or groups of individuals,
operated by individuals and made up of individual and/or group investors. These business
enterprises are deliberately structured to be empowered by individual (or group) investor
greed. For example, a theorized ‘need’ for offering salaries much higher than is necessary
to secure competent leadership (often resulting in corrupt and entirely incompetent leadership),
lowering wages more than is fair and equitable and scaling back of often hard fought for
benefits, is sold to stockholders as being in the best interest of the bottom-line market value
and thus, in the best economic interests of individual investors. Likewise, major
political and corporate exploitation of third-world nations is rooted in the individual and
joint greed of corporate investors and others who stand to profit from such
exploitation. More than just investor greed, corporations are driven by the greed of all
those involved, including individuals outside the enterprise itself who profit indirectly from
it.
If one examines “the course of human events” closely, it can correctly be surmised that
the “root” cause of humanity’s problems comes from individual human greed and similar negative
individual motivation. The Marx/Engles view of history being a “class”
struggle ¹ does not address the root problem and is thus fundamentally flawed from a
true historical perspective (see Gallo Brothers for more details). So-called “classes” of people, unions,
corporations and political groups are made up of individuals who support the particular group or
organizational position based on their own individual needs, greed and desires and thus, an
apparent “class struggle” in reality, is an extension of individual motivation. Likewise,
nations engage in wars of aggression, not because capitalism or classes of society are at root
cause, but because individual members of a society are individually convinced that it is in
their own economic survival best interest. War, poverty, starvation and lack of Human and
Civil Rights have existed on our planet since long before the rise of modern capitalism, free
enterprise and multi-national corporation avarice, thus the root problem obviously goes deeper
than this.
Junior Bush and the neo-conservative genocidal maniacs of modern-day America could not have
recently effectively gone to war against Iraq without the individual support of individual
troops and a certain percentage of individual citizens within the U.S. population, each lending
support for their own personal motives, whatever they individually may have been. While it
is true that corrupt leaders often provoke war, using all manner of religious, social and
political means to justify, often as not, entirely ludicrous ends, very rare indeed is a battle
only engaged in by these same unscrupulous miscreants of power. And though a few iniquitous
elitist powerbrokers may initiate nefarious policies of global genocidal oppression, it takes a
very great many individuals operating from individual personal motivations of survival, desire
and greed to develop these policies into a multi-national exploitive reality.
No economic or political organization and no political or social cause exists unto itself
but rather, individual members power a collective agenda. A workers’ strike has no hope of
succeeding if individual workers do not perceive a personal benefit. And similarly, a
corporation will not exploit workers if doing so is not believed to be in the economic best
interest of those who run the corporation and who in turn, must answer (at least theoretically)
to individuals who collectively through purchase or other allotment of shares, own the
corporation. Companies have often been known to appear benevolent, offering both higher
wages and improved benefits, if doing so is perceived to be in the overall economic best
interest of the immediate company and/or larger corporate entity. Non-unionized business
enterprises frequently offer ‘carrots’ of appeasement to workers in order to discourage them
from organizing and historically in the United States, concessions such as the forty-hour
workweek, minimum wage, workers compensation and proscribed holidays have been grudgingly
capitulated to by greedy capitalist masters as necessary concessions to avoid profit-crippling
strikes and outright revolution.
It is important to understand that so-called workers ‘rights’ and benefits were not
volunteered by American capitalists or their political stooges (including several U.S.
presidents) without extreme and often violent worker coercive persuasion over a great many years
of prolonged strikes and similar worker revolts. Modern supply-side Adam Smith inspired
economic pipe dreams of unencumbered markets freely moving toward the common good are clearly
and fundamentally, based on outright lies and not very well-masked, deliberate capitalist
deception (again, see Gallo Brothers for more information. Those who proclaim the twisted
gospel of modern supply-side economic theory are generally those who have a lot to gain from
its acceptance, both economically and politically.
Large political and other problems are historically created gradually stemming from
negative individual leading to negative group motivation, in turn leading to negative individual
and group action. The correct root solution to humanity’s problems becomes, by historical
default, changing individual negative motivation towards positive motivation. This is not
at all a new theory, as it was first stated over two thousand years ago by Jesus, historically
the founder of Human and Civil Rights and not at all, the founder of Christianity or of any other
religious movement; virtually everything Jesus said and did goes directly to human motivation,
is community oriented, has little to do with modern conceptions of religion and is the
antithesis of modern Christianity (see Revolution for more information). Contrary to many current views painted
of him, Jesus was extremely political, the correct political (and other) solution from true
perspective being to center on and change individual motivation. That is, if we wish to
constructively change the extensive political and social problem plaguing our planet today, the
root cause of negative individual human motivation leading to negative action must be addressed
at the fundamental individual level.
This correct political theory is seen as successfully initiated by early followers of
Jesus, who practiced extreme communism, having no law “but to love one another”, sharing all
things in common, allotting to each according to their need and giving the excess to the poor
(which since they were mostly very poor, was a true sacrifice). ² This was a
way of life foreign to their culture, was viewed as a severe threat to the established religious
and political order and thus, they were thrown to the lions accordingly. The arising
extended movement, called “The Way” by those who joined (it was not called “Christianity” by
them, nor did these early followers view themselves as founders of a
religion ), ³ represents extreme far-left radicalism even by modern liberal activist
cooperative standards. It has thus been historically demonstrated that if people practice
the Human Rights foundation axiom set down by Jesus to treat other people as we ourselves wish
to be treated, established ways of living will change, including non-violent elimination of the
entire idea of capitalist oppression based on individual gain and private property
ownership. In practicing The Way, economic oppression is dealt with from the root cause up
and thus, is overcome with love and peaceful unselfish collective co-existence. It is
important to note that claiming to be a follower of Jesus and actually practicing “The Way” are
today usually two entirely different realities; the modern 21st Century world has plenty of
examples of the former and virtually no examples of the latter.
Lenin and the Communist party overthrew a very oppressive capitalist Czarist
system. It did not take long for one corrupt system to be replaced by another, where even
without capitalism and free enterprise to aggravate the Human Rights problem, people of power
within the Communist political structure began, similar to their counterparts of capitalistic
excess in Europe and America, exploiting the mass population for their own individual benefit,
comfort and excess. Thus the root problem is exposed as going deeper than simply changing
an oppressive capitalist or other system. Quite obviously, changing a corrupt system does
not by itself, change the corrupt people who invented and supported it, neither does it change
negative individual motivation leading to group oppression based on irrational disparagement of
others regarding sex, color, intelligence or other perceived difference and neither does it
prevent waste, laziness, murder, theft and rape by individuals within a perceived economic
“class”.
In attacking the root cause of the problem the following diverse modern individuals are
perhaps, good examples of practicing the same root solution: Mohandas Gandhi, Martin
Luther King, Jr., Mother Teresa, Albert Schweitzer, Nelson Mandela, Helen Keller, John
Steinbeck, Jimmy Carter, Pete Seeger, Jacques Cousteau, Jonas Salk, Buffy Saint-Marie,
Eleanor Roosevelt, Joan Baez and Cesar Chavez. It is a serious error to criticize one
type of outreach that these names represent while supporting the other, as they all have their
valid place. As Mother Teresa said, “you can do some things and I can do some things”,
borrowing from Paul in the New Testament who taught that within an effective body of activism,
the hand cannot say it has no need of the foot. 4 Modern activists who promote
otherwise, claiming those who actually help other people are not correct because they are not
attacking oppressive systems (which they naively assume to be the root cause of the problem),
are blindly stepping on their own foot, are fundamentally wrong from true historical perspective
and are anti-Human Rights and anti-Civil Rights.
As discussed in Notes on the Great War and Influence,
helping other people greatly inspires others to do likewise. Thus, coming to the aid of
the less fortunate not only directly aids the people who are actually helped but also, helping
others works to change individual negative motivation, the root cause of the problem,
encouraging others by example to practice Human Rights; that is, to treat people as we also,
wish to be treated. This is the foundation of Human and Civil Rights and the fundamental
theory of The Way, the true root solution to the many grievous problems that plague our fragile
planetary home. Believing in and claiming to stand for the great and just cause of Human
and Civil Rights without practicing treating others as we ourselves wish to be treated in the
reality of our daily lives is no better than a sham conservative religion supposedly based on
the founder of Human Rights, for as wise James of old clearly outlined and defined, faith
without works, is most assuredly dead 5 (see also Key of
History). *
Helen Keller National Center For Deaf-Blind Youth
and Adults
Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Disease
Research
Minneapolis Medical Research
Foundation
A Partial Celebrity Charity Listing
DEDICATED TO: Thomas Edison, a rather remarkable individual who, though himself being
severely hearing
disabled, spent a lifetime attempting to help the hearing impaired and in the
process, became perhaps human (and certainly American) history’s greatest inventor; when Edison
died, the New York Times devoted four pages to his obituary, more space than for most
presidents, popes and other personages of world renown. Also dedicated
to actors Sidney Poitier, man of integrity and far reaching influence
and Michael J.
Fox, in honor of
the very many fine celebrities who devote time and effort to a great many worthwhile
causes. As only a few modern activists seem to fully understand, people from all walks of
life, the wealthy, the working class and the poor, must needs work together if we expect to
achieve any semblance of peace and social justice in the modern world
reality.
Credits:
1. Frederick Engles (German; Friedrich), sometimes considered the ‘brains’ behind Karl Marx,
was on the right track regarding his insistence of human history being an economic struggle,
but his thesis of class struggle is fundamentally flawed, as it does not expose the root
causation of individual negative motivation. And the insinuation by Marx of violence
being necessary to gain political and social progress clearly has no historical
validity. Historically, violence invariably begets more violence, as seen in our own brief
American history of war after war after war, including the American Civil War emerging as a
direct reciprocation of the Revolutionary War victors failings to abolish what soon became
governmentally sanctioned human economic and literal bondage (including both literal slaves and
the severely overworked, poorly fed and under paid working masses). It is no more fair or
accurate to blame Marxism and Frederick Engles (or Marx) for the rise of the grossly imperfect
Soviet Union than it is to blame democracy and Benjamin Franklin, probably a genuinely
fair-minded individual, for the rise of modern neo-conservative supply-side crass
class capitalism.
2. Acts 2:44-46 -- The idea of sharing all things in common is not historically unique
to the early followers of Jesus. Some North American Indian tribes practiced extreme
communism as well, a few isolated tribes actually having no word or concept of the idea of
“mine” in their language. However what may be unique to early adherents of The Way is the
fact that within a single generation, they did an about-face from one way of life to another,
obviously influenced to the extreme by the persuasive personal presence and foundational Human
Rights teaching of Jesus. If all of this sounds rather foreign to modern day individuals
familiar with Western Christianity, suffice it to say that there can be little historical
doubt that if Jesus were walking the streets of London and New York today teaching the same
radical ideas that he did in 1st Century Palestine, modern conservative Christians would be
loudly calling for his crucifixion.
3. Paul and the early followers of Jesus referred to themselves as followers of “The Way”; the
early movement is referred to as “the way” at least five times in the book of Acts
alone. The word “Christian” is found three times in the New Testament, each time apparently
referring to what people outside the movement of The Way called those inside. Christian
appears to have been a derogatory term similar to modern words of degradation such as “nigger”,
“kike” “coolie”, “redskin” and “squaw” (and even “hippie”) and was not in reference to an
established religion but rather, referenced what must have appeared to
outsiders living in that historical timeframe to be a very strange group of people who actually
believed in forsaking violence and abandoning the idea of personal property ownership. As
noted in The Greatest American; FootNote, the word church itself apparently derives
from an original term referring to a gathering of the common people for political or social
cause and was adopted by members of The Way to define both individual groupings within each
individual community, each community itself and all of the early communities as a singular
whole. This adoption of “church” clearly indicates that the original followers of The Way
viewed themselves as a socio-political movement. Original adherents of The Way eventually
practiced extreme freedom from societal and religious rules and traditions (though many members
were slow to give up certain ingrained practices) and apparently viewed themselves as
establishing a new way of life, free from traditional laws, rules and regulations and grounded
in the basic Human Rights axiom of loving one another. In this view, most civil laws are
obeyed out of a desire to live in peace and out of respect for the rights of others, but
religious laws, rules and customs, self-help and similar rudimentary philosophies and traditions
and other concepts that get in the way of personal freedom are counted “as dung” (i.e.,
perceived as so much bullshit).
Though the terms Human Rights and Civil Rights are of relative recent invention,
the fundamental idea of loving one another as being the defining sum of what matters traces
directly to Jesus, who is the only known historical person of note to place such an
all-important emphasis on treating others as we ourselves wish to be treated. Similar
ideas (but not all-encompassing emphasis) abound throughout the historical record of
civilization, both before and after Jesus, indicating that the basic concept of Human Rights is
fundamental to the conscience of the human species, helping to define what is “good” (positive
for our species) as opposed to what is “evil” (negative for our species and everything else on
our planet, extending to our planet itself as a whole). (See also Revolution for
more information.) Modern theory of evolution by Natural Selection has no valid
explanation for the existence of this decidedly human concept of Human Rights, for the
existence of conscience itself or for the existence of concepts such as good and evil, nor does
it satisfy any rational explanation for why our species needs to be taught the necessity of
Human Rights as opposed to naturally practicing such from birth, that is, if indeed the idea of
Human Rights is positive for our species. If the concept of Human Rights is not positive
for our species, then modern scientific theory has no valid explanation for why the concept
exists at all (sort of like being caught between a sedimentary rock and a primordial hard
place---see Of God and Monkey Business for more information).
After the death of the original followers of Jesus, the “church” and the
sharing-all-things-in-common mandate of The Way appears to have gradually deformed into what in
the modern 21st Century is truly a putrid historical perversion of original intention if there
ever was one. As Jesus clearly taught, the defining root of Human and Civil Rights
corruption traces directly to individual human greed and similar negative motivation, clearly
defined today in warmongering, Bible-thumping, capitalism and free enterprise espousing
Christian conservative fundamentalism, a precise mirror-opposite of the extremely liberal
forgiving and entirely communistic Jesus. To which all the “sinners and common people” of
modern-day America say “amen” before vomiting profusely, accordingly. (See also House of
Ill-Repute and Judas for more information).
4. I Corinthians 12:12-26
5. If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food and one of you says to them,
"Depart in peace, be warmed and filled," but you do not give them the things which are needed
for the body, what does it profit? Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works,
is dead. --James 2: 15-17.
*FootNote: There is no intention to imply here that peaceful changes of negative
governmental and economic structure are not important, as this book frequently validates the
non-violent efforts of Gandhi, King, Chavez and others. Rather, if one wishes to truly
change our world toward the positive good, then it is logically first necessary to correctly
understand the fundamental problem. And as both Jesus and Gandhi insisted, unless we first
address our own personal negative motivations, we cannot have much hope of improving on the
extended collective problem of our immediate, national or world community, for where our
“heart is, there will [our] treasure be also”). It is ludicrous for those attempting to
help other people to criticize those who are trying to peacefully change negative systems;
i.e., as exemplified by Mohandas K. Gandhi
and Martin Luther
King, Jr. and it is considerably more absurd for those protesting against oppressive systems
to claim that ‘hands-on’ helping of other people is not the correct and viable solution; i.e.,
as literally practiced by Mother Teresa and Albert
Schweitzer---Schweitzer also worked considerably to advance positive political and social
theory). (Related information can be found in Revolution, Key of
History, Influence, Notes on the Great War, Solomon’s
Song and Physician---for more information on economic oppression, struggle
and theory, see Gallo Brothers and Conspiracy
Theory.)
|