“When in the Course of Human Events.... It becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.....” Today we are going to refer to the United States Declaration of Independence (introductory quote shown above). This important work was an act of the Second Continental Congress on July 4, 1776 as a unanimously voted for item which set the stage for the American revolution from England. We can ask ourselves if in fact the revolution was ultimately for nothing. Is King George back? King George as a new despot, a tyrant with another name and face, but still a tyrant? Did the United States return to a state of despotism after a period of clarity and liberty, or were the seeds of tyranny always there, just lurking beneath the surface? “We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.....” One of the opposing arguments to The Declaration of Independence and the original tenets of the Constitution and Bill of Rights is that people of color and females were excluded - that this was a white male only rebellion. White male subjects of the new America were battling white male subjects of England, and everyone else was rather on the fringes of the whole thing, used as needed, spit out when not. Of course, most of the people working on the revolution documents were more educated and literate than many of those who actually fought in the war. And being males in the 1700s, they were naturally prone to cultural dispositions that any of us, given the same circumstances, might have been prone to. Female or a person of color today, we might have had the same viewpoints toward women, Negros and Native Americans that most of the population had at that time. Even those who had slaves, as did Thomas Jefferson, seemed to have complex associations with slavery. To refer to 18th century white males is to suggest that we know something about what was going on and how they were, but we never always have the whole situation nailed. What we can say is that a primarily white male society demanded for itself equality from a parent society that was mostly run by white males, claiming that that this equality came in the form of eternally intractable rights. This does not discount the power of their passion and sincerity in coming to terms with something many people at some point or another must do: Who am I really in the middle of all this, and where do I stand? And in identifying where I stand, will I be so firm in my convictions in this matter that I will die for it? For now, why don’t we explore the feeling quality of The Declaration - it’s intuitive and humanistic nature - and replace the word ‘Men’ with ‘Persons.’ Let us imagine that we are feeling a connection with some unifying quality that touches upon the broader needs and drives of all humankind. If we are Americans who have felt betrayed by a country’s duplicity in topics of freedom and equality, let’s give the writers of The Declaration the benefit of the doubt that they were in fact tapping into some form of universal pulse reminding people that at birth humans are all equal and that a higher power of some kind, here termed a Creator, does not distinguish among them as higher or lower, better or worse. And in the final analysis, that equality as connected to a higher power can be thought of as Rights, inseparable, inalienable Rights, and that they are like permanently attached fixtures to a house. The concept here seems to include the notion that a being active in the long-ranging as well as daily details of personhood has applied a characteristic - that of Rights - and that they are not detachable. They come with the person - and all persons have these with them at all times. The Rights might be on the surface denied, supplanted, stepped on or revoked, but all of this is an illusion in contrast to the idea that no matter what goes on externally, intrinsically those rights were and always will be attached to the original person who had them in the first place. These Rights exist in a pre-form world, a priori, and no matter what happens to them in the world of forms (the material), they will always be there and will always really belong to their rightful owner. We might wake up tomorrow not able to find our body, but we still be able to find our rights. You might break my bones with sticks and stones, but you will not be able to destroy by eternal rights. This goes hand in hand with the idea of birth rights which were an issue historically in the sense the oldest son usually received the benefits of land and inheritance, while later children usually missed out. By reminding people of the true intentions of a being of equality, The Declaration is saying that no matter where we stand on the ladder of hierarchies, whether first born, rich, poor, good looking or ugly, famous or little known, we all have basic eternal rights which do not fall away at the first signs of trouble or because someone has applied another system of ordered tiers to the situation. Our charge is to remind ourselves of our rights and to reclaim them in the face of others who would force their will upon us or otherwise suggest we are lesser persons by some standard they have created for themselves. Equality might be thought of as the feeling you have when living alone naked in nature with no one there to tell you which side of the line to stand on or whether you are good enough. You simply sink into beingness and go about your business of basic raw survival. You feel so equal with the natural world at large you don’t even think twice about it; it is a non-issue. Of course you are equal! Equal with the plants and trees, animals and roaring streams, glittering stars and heaving ocean waters. You become part of it all and the question of equality and rights is only found when humans come together and start identifying differences and parting out privileges. Something about animal behavior in packs as it is replicated in humans creates pecking orders and competition which might ultimately be counter-evolutionary and self-defeating. Large numbers of people competing for increasingly reduced supplies might escalate the winner takes all mentality past our carrying capacity. By going to America, the now-defected British had found a way out of the packed world of competition and hierarchies back home; they discovered boundless nature and a taste of entry level freedom. It was a return to their birth state. Once they had gotten a whiff of true freedom, they were loathe to give it up. The language of The Declaration reflects both idealism and romanticism. It is referring to a world of ideals that is knowable through the intuition or senses. We must make the assumption from its choice of language that this knowable world is self-evident because something inside the human being can feel it. There is a ring to the language which seems to have men calling out while also being called to as if demonstrating a dialectic between Man dealing with the travails of the Earth and something beyond which is eternal, profound and beautiful speaking to the hearts of Man. This is probably one reason The Declaration of Independence has appealed to people of many generations and often inspires feelings which seem to take people to another level of their knowing/feeling nature. The language seems to draw us into a salutary space which evokes the best in people, reminding us of our true value and worth beyond the measures of man and society at any given moment in history. It reminds us there is a place to go and a space to be in the world of equality no matter the onslaughts to our dignity and personal power. “That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.....” This is the Government clause, bringing in the why’s of government and the operating motivation behind replacing a parent government with a new one. In short, according to this declaration, government needs to be there to empower humanity by greasing its inner works and maintaining a protective shield. It’s there to make things safer and easier, designed to not detract from the flow of natural humanity. The idea of consent is big here; the people have a power, and the power is about consent. As a consenting power, life is breathed into the government from that consent. With non-consent, air goes out of the government, the balloon shrinks. We have to acknowledge that The Declaration is reminding humanity that ultimately people have a choice and when the government becomes larger than the power of choice, “it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it.” This clause reminds us of a mathematical if-then contigency: If the government is for us and acts in our best interests, then it should be permitted to exist. If it is against us and does not work for our interests, then it must be changed or dismantled. The power must come from the people. This is vital to our experience and understanding today because many people have forgotten that the United States was originally set up to create a government leaning on the powerful consent of the people, and when that government “becomes destructive of these ends”, our integral beginning lays claim to an ongoing heritage that says when enough is enough, King George must go! Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed. This is perhaps the most important part of the document. This is a call for a modern day Burn Bash of all technology being used against the people, as well as the systems eating away at the guts of our rights and liberties. Considering the concept that people will maintain at increasingly lowered standards of governmental behavior toward them is key to understanding why they do not revolt sooner and why resistance can be hard to conjure up. Citizens grow increasingly accustomed to poor treatment by the power games going on around them, usually at the hands of the government which is in turn connected to people with money. Sometimes it is the actual King with the money; sometimes it is the businesses around the puppet leadership, but in either case, what dominates is the money, and people already with money are set up to obtain even more money. Governments might “not be changed for light and transient causes” once long established, but we can find ourselves in a take-over whereby the external name of a country or business remains the same but new leaders are actually running the show. King George ultimately might be a titular head run by a business conglomerate bent on taking over the world, but people still pay deference to King George out of habit or from some kind of directly visible or hidden internal force. It could be the perpetrators of the take-over are waiting for the final day of denouement. They are letting things build up until the moment they finally let everything out of the hat. By then it will be too late for the general population to do anything. Every escape potential will have been removed or blocked. This particular phrase is the wake-up stance for today’s United States because the privileges of citizenry have increasingly been destroyed by a quiet and malicious take-over that very few people are truly able to identify or grapple with even after all of the publicity and whistleblowers. The people taking away our freedoms are not Red Coats plainly visible with weaponry showing up on our doorsteps, but quietly hired people we never see or hear. Because we cannot see them directly, most people go around hoping they are not one of the ones on their hit list. Many people still wonder if these strange spies reputed to be reaching out into every corner of our lives even exist or if things are really that bad. People make guesses about who is being watched and who is not, and many assume there are certain types more likely to draw heavy levels of negative attention than others. This is likely a grave misconception. While we try to guess at who is likely a target of excessive monitoring and Psy Ops abuses, the list of victims probably keeps growing and the depths of the violations even more staggeringly negative. Many people today are still immune to acting upon the truth and finding the drive for true resistance. Resistance begins with a thought. If we cannot even consider what resistance might feel like, we have a problem. It is fueled by intention. It is brought into form through action. The Declaration of Independence is an excellent reminder of what resistance looks and feels like; it brings us home to ourselves in the face of tyranny. It is of value no matter whether we are Americans, British, Chinese, German, French, Indian, or any other nationality on the planet. This is a human issue, not just an American one. We still buy the cell phones and use them, use email and perform most of our activities through the internet in one way or another. These things leave us all open to abuse and we truly have not yet gotten a handle on this issue. We are all exposed and vulnerable because The Watchers are still watching - guaranteed. We “are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable” than to correct the situation by doing something apparently extremist or radical - like destroying the cell phones and internet. Becoming accustomed to not finding the energy to fight back might be promoted by a variety of programs designed to keep people flattened out. Destroying the will through a variety of planned processes is not beyond a take-over system bent on monetary domination of the planet. The United States is likely seen as one of the countries to be toppled even if it was originally a primary platform for the descent into global totalitarianism. People don’t realize how truly serious this whole thing is and keep assuming discussions about it only come from radicals. It seems some people are well read enough, but manage to intellectualize themselves out of doing anything meaningful about the problems. Please keep an image of Nazi troops taking over Berlin with lightning speed once Hitler came into power, and realize the take-over had been planned and piling up for years before that. We are likely in a pre- Berlin fall state in the United States while the people with the plan keep taking over every last way that we have to communicate with each other. As part of this, people are taught, why does anyone with nothing to hide need privacy? That is one of the most destructive elements of Liberty there is, that one approach alone. The idea is if you have nothing to hide, why get in a dither about surveillance? After all, the good guys are the ones watching the show, and it is for your own good. Freedom Day (A New Day of Revolution) might be the day all people in cities and towns everywhere in the United States designate several Burn Bashes (although since plastics when burned usually give off poisonous fumes, the actual manner of destroying the objects properly should be considered; perhaps the materials can be recycled or reconstituted into other materials) to get rid of the endless streams of gadgetry designed to erode our privacy and rights. True resistance might not be the institution of laws demanding protection from illegal search and surveillance tactics, but the actual destruction of the means of surveillance and the removal of all such objects from the public domain until such time as the perpetrators have truly been backed off and put through the criminal justice system. This includes running down politicians who have voted for the policies which eroded our rights, one by one, even if it means going back many years in time. These people should be held accountable. How likely is such a form of resistance to occur? Has King George, then, finally found his day? But when a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a Design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security. It is important to note that the wording clearly indicates that after a repeated of violations to human freedom, people have not only a right but a duty to counter the negative power behavior. They also have a need to put up protection. One interpretation of this is that people need to treat their countries as extensions of their bodies, minds and souls , and as such, as sacred turf. We owe it to ourselves to keep the grounds hallowed and free of negative forces. We have a duty to respect ourselves enough to not permit heavy hands on our natural rights and liberties. SOURCE Wording of The Declaration Of Independence in this article: The Constitution of the United States and The Declaration of Independence. Pocket Version, 23rd ed. 110th Congress, 1st Session/House Document 110-51. July 25, 2007. Printed Under the Direction of the Joint Committee on Printing. updates 06/25/2017; 05/30//2016

IS KING GEORGE BACK?