The Last of the Mohicans — A Brief Review

The Last of the Mohicans — A Brief Review
Lon Clay Hill, Jr.
[25 June 2019]

The Book:
James Fenimore Cooper (1826) The Last of the Mohicans; A Narrative of 1757 (2 vols). Philadelphia: HC Carey & I. Lea.
James Fenimore Cooper (1983) The Last of the Mohicans; Introduction by Wayne Franklin. Belknap Press of Harvard University: Cambridge, MA, USA & London, England. xxxii+478 pages, paper.


James Fenimore Cooper’s The Last of the Mohicans is a book I read in high school (1954-1957) following a suggestion by my English teacher. I recently saw a Turner Classic Movie inspired by the book and was prompted to reread the book ~53 years later for a second time. Let me make it clear, I make no claims for my overall knowledge on the subject of those people who came to the “New World” before the first Europeans came upon the two continents, their peoples, and the outlying islands of what are now commonly referred to as North and South America. However, I can report a couple of experiences which have informed my thinking and which lead me to some comments about what I think about some issues which are confronted — however adequately or inadequately — in Cooper’s book.

I grew up in Eastern Kentucky and many of my views of the Amerindian or native peoples were influenced by the general notions of the area — reinforced by many movies about what has been described by many US citizens of primary European ancestry (restricting ourselves  to the past 2-4 centuries) as the “Winning of the West.” However, my own thoughts were especially influenced and irrevocably altered by a 1973? trip from Phoenix, AZ to Gallup, NM after a young native American activists was apparently murdered by the police. We (5 native Americans and myself) rode for several hours o join a protest on his behalf. I still remember several incidents during the trip and the protest — but I mention only 3. I myself am usually a somewhat sociable and even a little garrulous at times, but this group (except for a couple whispering to each other on the other side of the back seat) was a very quiet and taciturn group. So I restricted myself to an occasional comment every 10-20 minutes. I was, however, quite pleased that they responded with interest when I pointed out a double rainbow well off to the left or right of our path. However, the most memorable event for me occurred as we approached the large group preparing for our protest march which would occur over the next couple of hours. I heard the rhythms of the tom-toms accompanied by the distinctive “hi-ya hi-ya…” chants that I knew all-too-well. But these beats and chants were right here in the lived moments — and not in the nearly forgotten movies of my pubescent youth in which John Wayne and others gloried in their struggles with no less than “God” on their side (No less than  "THE ALMIGHTY GOD" many would have said).

The story of the native peoples in the Pre-Columbian 10-20 millennia before 1492 is quite complex and varied — and, it is, for me, mostly an undigested background where only a few strong images emerge. However, there are — it seems to me — several ways in which Cooper touched upon the genuine problematics which accompanied the realization by Europeans, perhaps a century after Columbus’s accidental encounter with the islands of the Caribbeans, that besides plunder and gold, there were vast tracts of land where people might settle to live. Of course, that is the rub — were there indeed any of these vast tracts of land places where equitable relationships between newcomers and the earlier inhabitants might cohabitate in relative peace and harmony? Now, it is quite obvious to me that the actual history has been that harmonious and fair relationships between the newcomers and the earlier peoples have been much the exception than the rule. Furthermore, even if we were to grant that some traders, missionaries, homesteaders, and farmers lived in peaceable harmony with the earlier inhabitants [And many would not grant that stipulation] — even if we granted that a few newcomers acted honorably many would argue that the “good deeds” of such persons were largely superseded by the great majority of European-derived settlers who either believed (1) that “the only good Injun is a dead Injun” or (2) stood by in cowardly silence as treaties were broken, the land was stolen, and other misdeeds occurred. While massacres of native people such as those occurring in King Phillip’s War (1675-1678) and at Wounded Knee (1890) did not occur every day — they were not rare and they were — understating the case — all too common!

With these (unresolved) issues in mind, however, I would like to say that when Cooper published his novel in 1826 he portrayed in his characters some cultural-social-political realities which even now may help us to get beyond the mere tallying of “good and evil” from any perspective. So, after a few words about the novel’s structure, we detail some marked qualities about the main characters.

First, as one can surmise in the movies — and is even clearer in the novel (serially presented as 33 chapters — Cooper delivers a crisp heroic and romantic tale which is tailored for a relatively large public readership. The extraordinary tightrope in managing the main characters in the book — only in Chapter 32 is the story’s main villain killed shortly after two of the novels heroes are themselves tragically dispatched (Uncas, the last Mohican Warrior; Cora, a noble frontier maiden). The serial nature of the novel with its unlikely turns reminds me of the improbable escapes of Box Office Action Film heroes which enthrall so many of the younger audiences, especially. Cooper established himself financially with this book. However, while there are indeed clearly delimited heroes and villains in the book — there is much more to these heroes and villains than their virtuousness and villainy. To begin with — none of the main characters is a pure villain or a pure hero. Indeed, some of the characters [Bumppo & Chingachgook, especially] are portrayed slitely differently in other Cooper novels which suggests that Cooper’s understanding of relationships between the native people and the onsurging Americans was both tentative and evolving. Secondly, the prominence of the forested land [both the earlier, sparsely populated virgin forest and it present more populated and partially cleared status] is much more than a backdrop for the story. At some level the land in this novel is more prominent in this novel than the chorus of a Greek tragedy. At times it seems that Cooper tends to believe that “geography is destiny” and at other times he intimates that some of the characters are haunted by the ‘ghosts’ of uprooted tribes — indeed, this pervasive whisper suggests to me that he himself was haunted by such ghosts. The novel is set during the Seven Year’s War (1756-63), known in the USA and by English Canadians as the “French and Indian War.” If one reads Cooper’s other novels set in different time periods, it is clear that Cooper is preoccupied with the influence of both the land and the native people upon, especially, the character of those people who came here as British settlers but who had become “Americans” (USA variety).

In this context, I briefly describe and characterize, in my own words, the 7 most prominent characters in the book:

(1) Natty Bumppo (“Hawk-eye”; “La Longue Carabine”), the ostensible narrator, is a young frontier man. (2) Uncas (“The Bounding Elk”; “le Cerf Agile”) is the son of Chingachgook and a superb and noble Mohican warrior. (3) Cora Munro is a dark-haired young, virtuous, and courageous frontier woman. (4) Major Duncan Heyward, a brave — but sometimes unwise — British officer who is in love with Alice. (5) Magua (“Sly Fox”; “le renard subtil”), an unusually intelligent demagogic and vindictive Huron nursing wounds from former indignities — including an introduction to the British “fire water” — which would drive him to inflict other cruelties upon others. (6) Alice Munro is a young, protected and emotionally fragile frontier blonde woman. She is Cora’s sister by a younger mother. (7) Chingachgook is an old man and, at the end of the book, the last surviving Mohican. Leaping forward in time to Fenimore’s day — we would say that Bumppo and the two Munro daughters are “Americans” [USA variety], Heyward is an Englishman, and that Uncas, Magua, and Chingachgook are native Americans. We have mentioned that none of the main characters is a pure villain or a pure hero. Bumppo, Uncas, and Cora are clearly on the very virtuous end of the scale while, standing almost alone, Magua represents a very dark side of humanity. However, even Hawkeye indulges in some gratuitous scalping which characterizes the supposedly inferior behavior of the native people rather than the military necessity of a “civilized” man. Similarly the noble Uncas is killed by Magua at the end of the novel partially because his headstrong love for the captured Cora allows Magua to take lethal advantage of his foolishly headstrong rush to save her. Even Cora — it is suggested — is tainted somewhat by her modest African “blood” (apparently a “quadroon” or even an “octaroon” in the more precise lexicon of Louisiana and Caribbean slavery”. [Who is actually tainted we will discuss below.]

Cooper uses proper names and nicknames in both English and French to convey that the various parties in the story themselves have different perspectives on good and evil. And, while I believe that a fair reading can sometimes indicate the general perspective of Fenimore’s tale — it is true that Cooper usually writes in an indirect style that leaves many options still on the table. I myself have only two serious explicit objections to his tale (speaking, of course, with the “benefit” of historical hindsight). First, while Cooper is quite willing to honor friendships between persons of different tribes and skin “tints” [still crudely lumped into the term “color” in US English even today] — he has some deep reservations about interethnic and, especially, “interracial” unions and marriages between men and women. Cooper usually tries to be fair and dispassionate about such matters — but by suggesting that the tragic deaths of Cora and Uncas were “inevitable” suggests to me that he should have studied the history of single Frenchmen alone on the North American continent and their interactions with native women. Of course, the study of French colonialism — like the study of British colonialism — will reveal many public wrongs and private abuse. However, the Catholic French — with all their “sins” if you will — never adopted the lie (later developed into a full blown ideology) that separated the “races” of children of African slaves and/or native American women (& men) from the “races” of their parents. When Cora and Uncas are murdered, they are not fully exonerated as Romeo, Juliet, and Desdemona were exonerated in Shakespeare’s tales. In actual fact, I believe, no murder is inevitable — not surprising sometimes, or sometimes even “predictable”  — but not really “inevitable”. The ubiquitous pejorative use of the term “squaw man” used for fair-skinned men of predominantly European ancestry who lived with native women bespeaks a profoundly personal-disorder which gives the lie to any claim of genuine or true “civilization” on the part of countless settlers of predominantly European ancestry

Secondly, while is usually stays in the background and only comes into the story “as needed” Cooper makes quite a point of the seemingly “uncivilized” savagery of the Indians during their scalping, murder of women, and unusually vicious murders of infants at the Fort Henry scalpings [which comes front-and-center in Chapter XVII, and is well-documented in historical records]. Cooper argues (often thru Hawkeye’s internal monologues) that this is a step beyond the excesses of British and Western Civilized society. I am also quite prepared to accept that some of the ugly and revenge-driven practices utilized by native peoples against each other and against European settlers are sui generis — just as today some of the Isis beheadings, orgies of destruction, and rapes in the name of an “Islamic” caliphate are sui generis. These are wanton acts of violence which are utterly unjustified — chosen acts of evil by human actors. On the other hand, the fact that these deeds are evil — does not mean that other acts of evil chosen by persons of predominantly European ancestry are somehow less ignoble. The slave trade was still active while Cooper was writing. And, by the middle of the 19th Century many a soldier and outlaw of predominantly European ancestry had learned to scalp native women as well as native warriors. The culture-social-political implications of “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone” are more profound, I believe, than the fact that as individuals most of us are, at least modestly, non-judgmental with our friends and family. Nietzsche stated that “Insanity in individuals is rare, but in groups, nations, and epochs, it is the rule.” I myself would say that claims of moral superiority by groups, nations, and “races” are usually reliable indicators that deep-seated and morally questionable blinders are in play.

While I have alluded to the role of women in Cooper’s female characters above, the pervasive reality of generic “feminine” traits and generic “male” traits — and conspicuous exceptions to these trends — remains with us today in a multiplicity of controversial formats. These pervasive complexities prevents me here from doing much more than making a suggestion. The two major females are quite present and Cora is in many ways quite a strong character. However, neither they or any other of the minor women characters are as public as historical characters such as Heloise, Joan of Arc, and Abigail Adams, writers such as the English feminist Wollstonecraft, or as characters in books by the contemporaneous Jane Austin. Of course, I would not expect that Cooper would have made the necessary effort to become aware of the near contemporaneous Wollstonecraft or to know the writings of his contemporary Jane Austin. What I am suggesting is that there is an implicit aura in this book which suggests that women, like children, may be seen, but they should not be heard in public in anything other than a subservient role. As this problem is hardly an exclusively USA “American” problem, I refer to this problem more as as perhaps a necessary consideration in addressing our contemporary cultural-political landscape rather than a particularly “stand-alone” problem in considering Cooper’s work.

During this past week of June 2019, there have been protests and problems at a US detention facility in Fort Sill, Oklahoma where the Trump nativism machine wishes to house “undocumented” migrant children in a manner apparently inconsistent both with existing law and standing court orders. Fort Sill is also a place where native people were once separated from their parents to be educated into the supposedly superior culture of the “pale faces” and, later, where native US citizens including wives and children of Japanese ancestry were separated from their families during War World II. So, the problems present in Cooper’s The Last of the Mohicans are still present with us today. However, in spite of these persistent problems involving the relationships between US Americans of predominantly European ancestry and those people whose  ancestry is predominantly non-European, Cooper’s work points to some solutions to the problems involved in the confrontations between the people of the [European] “Old World” and the inhabitants of what most of us call the Americas. [We are again restricting ourselves to the last 400 years.] In some ways this novel is more pertinently complex than many more seemingly up-to-date contemporary perspectives. I elaborate:

(1) When human beings from Europe came to the Americas, they began to change — their language, their customs, and their political loyalties. They did not plan to change. The simplest example is the development of American (USA-variety) English. These Americans did not plan to use “non-standard” English when they said “corn” instead of maize — they simply used in a new way the fact that the amerindian-developed plant was now in so many instances their primary grain. Thus, it was, that new primary dialects arose in the USA as well as in Australia and New Zealand. Other changes such as spelling color, favor, and humor for the French-derived standard British “colour”, “favour”, and “humour” are — I believe — not neutral, but positive changes. [Whether, the British or the Americans wish to believe it or not — the archaic spellings of almost all varieties of English are a treasure trove for those who are interested in the fascinating etymological changes of the English language. They are, however, a practical disaster for the millions of children and foreigners who wish to learn our language.] Nevertheless, while the changes in American English are usually only mildly controversial, other changes in the American landscapes, and the populations were much more complex — and, in their very nature, of continuing disputed consequence.

(2) As the United States of America is gradually, but inexorably, beginning to pay an increasingly expensive price for its reckless pursuit of “slash and burn” and “Drill, baby, drill” exploitation to fill the coffers of the rich — it is becoming clear to those who will not blind themselves that we do need to learn from the pre-Columbian guardians of the Land. Today, insects, fish, and birds recognize that global warming is a reality — many of them have changed their migration patterns by several hundreds of kilometers and by 2-4 weeks as they adjust to the new weather patterns. However, human beings have the capacity to deceive themselves and/or each other — especially with respect to the costs of their short-sighted immediate gains. Part of the recognition of our actual present straits involves relearning from contemporary native Americans the rich insights they had earned over hundreds and thousands of years from the rich earth.

A friend of mine once said after a visit to a small Hopi village that she recognized that the lore still held by this small, out of the way village, was just as essential to our survival on this planet as the science and technology of the rest of the country. The smell of fresh water, the call of a bird, the rustling of leaves, the stealth of a squirrel, and the quiet opening of a flower are still every bit as essential to the health of our land and peoples as they were believed to be by the first inhabitants of this continent.


A scientific note: The long view

Almost all humans on the planet have mitochondrial RNA derived from an African “Eve” who lived 100,000-300,000 years ago; a relatively few humans (contemporary Africans with apparent partial “Pygmy” ancestry) have a moderately distinct female gene pool — another very early “mother” than the great majority of humans. After early Africans made their way into Europe they interacted with Neanderthals to provide a relatively small assortment of non-African genes to the subsequent “European” populations. Of course, over time a number of genetic mutations arose in the relatively isolated populations that have inhabited various continents of the earth. The most distinctive “colors” of humans are critically dependent upon two essential and sometimes conflicting needs of any human population — (1) the need for protection against too much exposure to the sun’s UV radiation and (2) an absolute need for adequate amounts of vitamin D. Consequently, most human groups that have lived in the tropics for many generations tend to be very dark and most  most human groups that have lived far from the tropics zones for many generations tend to be much fairer or lighter than other humans. Two very interesting intermediate groups are the Maori of New Zealand, usually moderately dark in skin color [but distinctly lighter than most Polynesians] and the brownish Bushman of the Kalahari [again, distinctly lighter than those Africans who have lived nearer to the equator]. There are some exceptions: Eskimos who consume large amounts of fish oil in their diet are much darker than Swedes or Norwegians who live at similar latitudes. With Vitamin D already in their diet there is no need to risk the debilitation of occasional sunburns. For individuals and groups who have moved from their ancestral homes within the past few centuries, of course, their “color” may reflect their ancestry more than their present environment. Other words — the ‘red man’ for native Americans and the “yellow race” for Chinese and Japanese  are derived from a more complex stock of physical features. One hears for example of the ‘rainbow’ of colors found in human beings. As a metaphor I find this an attractive descriptor. However, the actual tints that are seen in human beings are not well described by the physics of laboratory measurements. People use eyes to see and the receptors in our eyes are differentially sensitive to 3 different ranges of light — the Red, Green, and Blue of some color wheels. These tints were well described by Goethe and, in actual fact, represent a much richer range of hints and hues than does a scale based on wavelength measurements alone [i.e., blue ~ 400 nm; red ~650nm]. And, of course, in human beings variations in skin tones and hues are often accompanied by variation in physical features. Thus an albino with soft wooly hair and large lips might self-describe hemself (herself, hisself) as “black” or “Afroamerican” to emphasize connections to known familial and ancestral roots. It would simply be impossible for almost all humans to avoid “color” in short and long descriptions of other human beings.

Personal caveat:

Cooper actually gives considerable attention to the physical features of his characters — with perhaps special attention to the color of the “Red” man. These comments and speculations are, admittedly, usually expressed in tentative or suppositional terms.  First, I simply assert my own belief that there is and has never been a pure “White” “Black” “Red” or “Yellow” or “Aryan” race. There have been and still are relatively homogeneous populations which can be innocently described by various terms which include color terms. However, and this is the more important point. It seems clear to me that when such terms are used with the supposed moral superiority of the speaker’s group in mind that these terms have become reference points for Western Civilizations greatest crimes — (1) the Holocaust; (2) Slavery (esp. chattel slavery in the USA; (3) numerous genocidal episodes in the subjugation of native peoples of the Americas.

Current Hypocritical Landmarks (I) — “Evangelists” and the Right to Life

Current Hypocritical Landmarks (I) — “Evangelists” and the Right to Life

More Complete Title: Current Hypocritical Landmarks (1) — Self-described “Evangelicals”, the Right to Life, and a Total ban on Abortion. Focus: 3 Hard Questions for self-described “Evangelical” Christians who support legislation which would make all abortions criminal offenses punishable by imprisonment or fines.

Short Prefatory Remarks: The issue of the definition of the “right to life” and our collective responsibilities for protecting those fragile unborn, born, and living entities which may, are, or have become a young human child is a very complex issue. Human beings here in the USA and elsewhere have and will continue to differ in their responses to such issues for both rational and irrational reasons — and in their motivations. The issue of the definition of the “right to life” and our individual responsibilities for protecting such fragile creature is also a very complex issue. However, the issue of any human’s individual responsibilities includes such diverse motivations and individual experiences that I normally hesitate to make anything more than somewhat vague remarks on specific issues. However, whenever our responses involve either public words-and-deeds and/or blatantly partisan, often self-contradictions political activities — then such responsibilities often require rather sharply focused remarks about religious hypocrisy — most especially with those who proclaim their own righteousness and are investigated with ascendant political power. I begin, however, with a brief explanation of why I find myself concentrating on these issues as a living human being who has himself also read many of those Scriptures — some of them many times — so seemingly important to those who describe themselves as “religious” or “Christians” and — most especially — as “Evangelists.” There are, of course, an extraordinary number of diverse people who might describe themselves with such words. However, I am here concerned primarily with those prominent persons who believe and assert that they and their cohorts are “more righteous” than those who differ or oppose them by disposition, belief, or deeds. For myself I find myself in a situation not unlike Martin Luther who in 1521 asserted 'Hier stehe Ich, Ich kann nicht anders. (Here I stand, I can do no other).’ As one who grew up in a predominantly Protestant environment I am also acutely aware that whatever the merits of Luther’s challenge to the entrenched corruption in the Roman Catholic Church of his day and its hierarchy, it is true that other things he later said in the Peasant Wars and, towards the end of his life, about the Jews rivaled in wickedness the ills he had challenged as a young and intrepid monk.

An Assumption: The Author believes that the shortest way to hell (God’s awful grace) is to commit one’s self to fundamental Religious Hypocrisy.
A Confession: The Author must also must stipulate (1) that there are many roads to hell, (2) that he himself has traveled on too many of these roads, and (3) that he cannot assert that his own efforts should be believed by any specific human being. However, he must also assert (4) that he himself will not and can not remain silent!  What others will do is in their hands and hearts — with the author believing that the resolution of all such matters remains in God’s Rule over History and the Heavens.

An Aside: In this Short Series, the Author is addressing himself as an imperfect Christians to a prominent contemporary group of self-professed “evangelicals” who have sometimes outdone themselves in professing their own righteousness while engaged in acts that are notably shorn of charity. The author himself grew up in the Southern Bible Belt and at a very early age was exposed to a number of important (Christian) Biblical teaching. Furthermore, both in his childhood and his adulthood he has been exposed to other Christians whose acts, thoughts, and beliefs were more obviously related to the charity and love that should characterize self-professed Christians than many activities of the author himself. In other blogs which attempt to make a more explicit regard for a decent respect for the opinions of all mankind — the author will refer more explicitly to those who do not share such Christian beliefs or, indeed, any explicitly religious beliefs. The author (quaintly perhaps to some) believes that heretics and atheists are here to remind all of us that Christians and other “religious” persons are all-too-frequently prone to hypocrisy and other human weakness.

Concerns such as the author’s are not new. We provide a couple of them with each of our “Landmarks”.
I. Woe is me! I am lost, for I a man of unclean lips and I live among a people of unclean people — and my eyes have seen the Lord! [Isaiah, Chapter VII, paraphrase of the New English Bible]
II. In the Kingdom of the Blind, the one-eyed man is King. [An ancient and, apparently, pre-Christian saying]

The Hard Questions
Question#1.
(1a) Do you believe your attempts to criminalize all abortions will earn you a first row seat at St. Peter’s Table in Heaven?

(1b) [ 1a Alternative] Do you believe that fervent opposition to all abortions makes you a better person than those persons who participate in any abortion.

Note #1a — Jesus of Nazareth is quoted as saying “Why call me good, only the Father is good.”
Note #1b — This witness (lchj) believes that “Hell” or “Gehenna” is a spiritual or purgative fire  — which is not to be confused with revengeful fantasies of “everlasting torture” concocted by human being who hide their unloving side behind an uncharitable “faith”.
Note #1c — There are, of course, a multitude of reasons why various people are generally opposed to abortions. However, it is quite apparent that among the loudest of those who oppose abortion are a prominent horde of politically active persons who call themselves “pro-life” and are simultaneously missing in action when it comes to our responsibilities for life after birth of the poor and downtrodden.

Question#2.
(2) Do you believe that a woman who has a headless (“acephalic”) fetus within her body has a duty to carry that natal being to term?

Note #2a — A relevant passage here, I believe, is Jesus’s question — "Is man made to the sabbath or the sabbath made for man?" Of course, St. Paul said that we should be “fools” for Christ. However, Paul did not say that we should be damned fools for Christ. Paul meant that truth — including key Christian truths partially seen thru the eyes of faith — may very well seem to be foolish to those who do not or have not yet been able to recognize them. Women are no under no obligation to undergo the pain and danger of childbirth to bring forth the partial semblance of a human being which does not have a brain. A dog or a monkey is higher in the order of creation than a headless human torso.

Question#3.
(3). Do you believe that a woman who has a dead or dying fetus within her body has no right to an abortion??

Note #3a — A few years ago the Catholic hierarchy in the Irish Republic succeeded in delaying an abortion until the fetus died and the woman herself was killed by the dead corpse within her body. I personally believe that the hierarchy’s behavior was (1) an act of murder [a public deed] and (2) an apparent ‘mortal’ sin [Actual “Judgment” always in the “Hands” of a Merciful God.]

Genuine Problematics 
Continuing Commentary, Discussion, and (mild) Confessional Statements
[“Further comments including some with my own hair down.”]

When I was quite young (perhaps 10 years old?) my father told me that  — if it were ever come to it taht if he were in the position that he might have to choose between saving the life of our mother and one of his children [me or one of my siblings] that in such an event he would opt to save my mother’s life. It was an odd conversation that did not last very long and seemed unprompted and somewhat awkward. I have simply gathered that he felt that I should know this important perspective of his. Fortunately, he was never presented with that choice. I did not, however, at any time feel that I myself was obliged to follow his example.

At my advanced age, it is now relatively easy for me to believe that my own son’s survival is more important than that of myself or my spouse. However, I also know that such questions do sometimes present themselves in more difficult circumstances. In the mid-1960s there was a war-induced famine in Nigeria’s suppression of the Ibo attempt to create an independent “Biafra” nation. The general Ibo general practice then was to preserve the mother’s life because she might be able someday to raise new children — and because the earlier brood would almost never be able to survive on their own.

On the other hand, I can respect the fact that many women [presumably the great majority] — once pregnant — are predisposed to carry the pregnancy to term. I also respect the fact that many (often poor and/or young) who are unable to foresee a viable future for a prospective newcomer may/will [often with painful reluctance] put their newborn child up for adoption. Still there are also a number of physical, psychological, and diverse personal circumstances which lead other prospective mothers to choose an abortion [again, often with painful reluctance].

Because other living person’s are involved, I will make a brief remark about my own experiences. In an earlier time I was quite disturbed and made some very regrettable mistakes with someone whom I knew and loved and who sought an abortion against my advice. [At thirteen she had been left with 2 twins after a traveling Arab seduced her and went on his way…].

In such difficult matters of the heart, it seems clear that unless we are personally connected to people who very well may be making a mistake, that the words of Jesus to the people who would stone the woman accused of adultery “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone!” [John 8:11]. In a few cases, we may be close enough to a person to provide some advice as Jesus did when he instructed the woman to go and sin no more [John 7.53-8.11].

On a related matter, it is also quite clear that love operates in realms that require some people to break taboos that many of us would almost never consider [e.g., while my own sexual joys and temptations have been directed towards members of the other sex, in my mid-thirties my male roommate fell in love with another man — and I and other friends of his observed that he became a better person!]

As the Good Book says, Not all those who say “Lord! Lord!” will enter the Kingdom of Heaven. True religion does not provide us with a prescription for spiritual ‘safety’. Rather, it requires us to embark on a dangerous journey with A God who is adventurous beyond our wildest dreams.

There are some people who describe themselves as “evangelical” Christians who say they want a “Seat at the Table” with the power elites and, especially, with our current president (DJT). However, while it is true that Jesus certainly upset the normal working of the commerce inside the temple [“You have made God’s House as ‘Den of Thieves’”] — when Jesus was hauled before Pilate he was mostly silent. Jesus was politically relevant, but as the story of the Temptation in the Wilderness (Matthew Ch 4: 1-11) makes clear — Jesus was not prepared to make a deal with the devil as the politically-ambitious hypocrites of his day (Caiaphas) and of our day (Reed, Falwell, F. Graham…) were and are more than willing to do. We all have an individual voice and we may join with other so that we are more readily heard — but to seek an outsized voice is not a spiritual directive. When we sing “We’re going to sit at the Welcome Table” we are not seeking a Table with those who have committed themselves to seeking dominion over their fellow human beings. When Jesus rejected the entreaties of “Satan” [Matthew 4: 8-10] he set a general standard for which every natural leader must work out the details for himself or herself. There is, however, no valid Christian exception that allows a Faustian bargain for the conservative Christian or for a liberal Christian because they have a righteous concern.

More generally, of course, there in no moral exception for those of other religions, secular and/or atheistic beliefs. The Faustian bargains of Isis and Stalinism and various ills of the non-Christian or non-Judaeo-Christian world are every bit as reprehensible as those of the Christian world. The primary Christian responsibility is to remove the Beams from our own eyes [ Cf., Matthew Ch 7:1-5] — we can then share our message with integrity with others as well.


Dr. Lon Clay Hill, Jr. (retired)
Miramar, Broward Co., FL, USA, Planet Earth, The Universe

Impeachment! — Will they Cry “Peace! Peace!

Impeachment! — Will they Cry “Peace! Peace!

Short Title: Impeachment!— Will They Cry “Peace! Peace!

Full Title: Impeachment!!? — Leaders and/or Followers who Cry “Peace! Peace! when there is no Peace!

“Gentlemen may cry ‘Peace! Peace!’ when there is no peace!”  [Patric Henry, 1775]

OUTLINE:

The Myth!?; Primary Reality (4 Horsemen); Political Reality; Moral Reality; Physical Reality; Subsidiary Considerations [No Magic Bullet for the righteous or the unrighteous]; Time and the Tide…

THE MYTH OF “SEPARATE” ISSUES WITH RESPECT TO THE IMPEACHMENT OF ONE DONALD JOHN TRUMP [Rhetorical preliminaries]

I have been hearing, seeing, and reading a number of comments about the complexities of “impeachment” proceedings versus the absolute need for defeating said DJT in the upcoming 2020 US Presidential election.

THE PRIMARY REALITY [4 of several prominent Deadly Horsemen…] 

Every day that Donald John Trump remains in the White House People will Die for want of the Health Care provided in The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka, ACA [abv.]) signed into law in 2010.

Every day that Donald John Trump remains in the White House Foreign-born Children will be Willfully Separated from their parents and relatives by the Actions of the Trump Administration and the border patrol.

Every day that Donald John Trump remains in the White House Foreign-born the Destruction of our Environment will be Augmented by the foolish words and deeds of DJT, the willful actions of his Administration [accompanied by the continuing dominance of Energy Conglomerates over politicians in both parties as well as by the simple inertia of most Americans].

Every day that Donald John Trump remains in the White House Foreign-born the ungodly profit driven-assault by the NRA upon the lives of our children and the equally ungodly assault by sectors of the banking industry upon the financial health of higher education seeking young adults will be augmented by the foolish words and deeds of DJT and the actions of his Administration.

THE PRIMARY REALITY — ITS MOST PROMINENT POLITICAL COMPONENT

Every day that Donald John Trump remains in the White House People will Die for want of the Health Care provided in The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (aka, ACA [abv.]) signed into law in 2010. They will die for three distinguishable, but inextricably entangled realities:

One, there are arguably hidden costs in the ACA which would usually prompt any conservative executive to proceed very slowly in implementing the law.

Two, the present administration is simply refusing to fully implement the law because the President and many opponents of the ACA have been driven by a sense of entitlement blind to the spiritual, political, and social consequences of an economy which celebrates greed.

Three, the president and members of his administration are both willfully and secretly breaking the law because they are both blind and indifferent to their oaths of office and their shared humanity with all people on this earth — including even their political supporters.

Both reasonable and unreasonable people will disagree about the relative effects of these three components of the President’s motivation, but the third component is both real and deadly.

THE PRIMARY REALITY — ITS MOST PROMINENT MORAL COMPONENT

Every day that Donald John Trump remains in the White House Foreign-born Children will be willfully separated from their parents and relatives by the Actions of the Trump Administration and the border patrol. Many of these children will be deeply scarred by these events even if they are eventually returned to their families. Others will never see their family again. While merciful humans on both sides of the US-Mexico border will be wonderfully helpful for some of these children & their families and while the ACLU and a few judges will blunt the force of these policies a significant fraction of the US citizenry are as deaf to the cries of the children at our border as were the citizens of Germany were deaf to the screams of those murdered by German planes, tanks, guns and ovens. It is, of course, quite common for humans to think that the evils that befall others will not befall themselves. Even the Poles were largely silent when the Germans marched into Czechoslovakia! [“Do not ask for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee!”]

THE PRIMARY REALITY — ITS MOST PROMINENT PHYSICAL COMPONENT

Every day that Donald John Trump remains in the White House Foreign-born the destruction of our environment will be augmented by the foolish words and deeds of DJT, the willful actions of his Administration, the continuing dominance of energy conglomerates over politicians in both parties, and the simple inertia of most Americans. Birds, fish, and insects already recognize global warming — in many instances they have already changed the timing of their migrations by several weeks and the geographical limits of their migrations by tens or hundred of miles or kilometers. Humans, however, are somewhat different — they have the capacity to deceive both themselves and others. Even worse, they are often strengthened in their self-deception when others share the same illusions. We will not escape the consequences of our failure to care for the world that nature has given us — and while, as always, the poor and the dispossessed are already suffering the effects of severe weather, aridity, stronger hurricanes, and fires — the high and the mighty as well as the dispossessed will be brought down by the continuing the careless addition of carbon dioxide and methane into our atmospheres, untreated sewage into our rivers and lakes, and plastics into our oceans. While we are not in the situation of Jor-El on the doomed planet Krypton, the disasters will continue to come. Each of us can work for our world — and the recipients in the next civilizations will be grateful. But don’t be fooled — collective moral filth in a government and economy is already wreaking havoc. Plutocracy is simply one of the most obvious roads to a terrestrial hell. Long before the prophets and the early Christians proclaimed that the fruits of ill-gotten wealth can destroy a person or a society, other societies had experienced this reality. The original story of Midas didn’t teach that “all that glitters is not gold” — it taught that the overzealous search for gold itself will destroy the searcher.

SUBSIDIARY CONSIDERATIONS — “Irrefutable” evidence of impeachable offenses.

House Speaker Pelosi, overly mindful of the dangers of an overzealous political offense that targets only Donald J. Trump and his Republican allies and sycophants without simultaneously addressing other important issues [such as those listed above] has stated that we need irrefutable or “ironclad evidence” before proceeding to formal impeachment proceeding against Donald Trump. There are no ironclad cases! There was never an “ironclad” case even against Hitler — Hitler was right that the Treaty of Versailles (1919) had placed a terrible burden upon the German people as if the German government were the sole instigator of the 1st World War. But, here back in the USA, DJ Trump’s refrain that he always imposes tenfold punishment upon those who “cross” him is sometimes a boastful lie and, at other times, a sign that he has already — like Hitler, Huey Long, John Calhoun & other demagogues before him— jumped deep into an Ocean of Lies.

We should not fool ourselves. The German Communist said to themselves that they must keep to their ‘regular’ partisan activities — and that, after experiencing Hitler, the German people would naturally turn back to the communists. Before Allied and Soviet tanks rolled into Berlin — almost all of the communists, albinos, and gypsies had already been murdered well before the 6 million Jews, 7 million Poles, 20 million Russians and even several million Germans were dead from executions, starvation, and the other murderous consequences of the 3rd Reich.

Let me be clear, I do not think that DJT is either as intelligent or as fundamentally focused as was Adolf Hitler. DJT himself (reminiscent of Mussolini with Hitler) admires “strongmen” like Putin and Kim who do not admire other dictators. However, it does not really matter where Donald is on the scale of willful malevolence by a human being. When the poisons of blind ambition, greed, religious hypocrisy, fear, and cowardice reach a critical point fear-driven mob action may impel nation states and empires into self-destruction — and the United States of America may very well be very far upon a similar road to destruction.

There is, of course, hope that some Republican Senators may find their manhood or womanhood and there is — perhaps — a somewhat more realistic hope that the 3rd Branch of Government will check major excesses of the Trump administration. Whether our present Supreme Court — with a majority of members who functionally celebrate wealth as a reward of liberty and with a membership which includes at least one new member who was untruthful during his confirmation — can or will be courageous enough to avoid a second ‘Dred Scott’ decision may be determined in 2-3 years… If most Democrats think that their standard is only to be “better” than the Trumpites or Republicans, then those of us who are democrats are ourselves already deep into one of those sewer lines just below our political ‘swamp’. Today, our children now go to school knowing that this may be the day when it will be their individually specific duty to confront a gun-wielding outlaw and that he/she may need to step into the line of fire…

[Those of us who consider electability important need to keep other even more critical realities in mind. The notion that either sports or politics is only about winning is not a criteria for political behavior — especially for our highest offices in any branch of government.]

Three more things on the historical records …

For me, one often curious and perplexing characteristic of human behavior is the tendency for societies under stress to turn to a problematic “strong” leader who presents the semblance of consistency over more “rational” and “humane” leaders who think they can oppose such demagogues with half measures and other forms of “leadership.”

I, personally, do not honor Trump for his consistency in hating immigrants and praising retribution any more than I retrospectively respect Hitler for his consistency in hating Jews and Slavs. I see no ‘honesty’ in the consistency of such wickedness. However, I recognize that stressed and often fearful human beings frequently follow one who is “all in” on a downward turn over one who displays lukewarm virtue and compassion. Political leaders who do not know when it is high noon for a civilization will reap no rewards in heaven or in human memory if they think they themselves can decide when it is ‘smart’ to look away when a political whirlwind approaches…

A very personal note:

While I am myself an American-US Citizen with very deep democratic family roots, I do not myself believe that patriotism is the highest virtue — I live on a single planet within a universe of trillions of galaxies each one containing enormous numbers of stars, planets, and possible intelligent life. However, I very much believe that true morality consists in understanding how our own families and social-political realities are connected to other persons and groups — and acting upon those realities. I therefore celebrate the fact that some US citizens believe and act on the belief that loyalty to the United States is of a higher order than loyalty to one’s political party. It has been said that “All’s fair in love and politics” — and it is true that human beings often act as if it were so. However, I do not believe that it has ever been true. Furthermore, I am very clear in my own mind that a fear-driven “patriotism” or “nationalism” is one of the quickest roads to national disaster.

TIME AND THE TIDE AND THE NOONDAY SUN

Time and the Tide and the Noonday Sun…  

Human beings can choose and even plan to catch a wave, the high tide, a Spring tide, and to a lesser extent, they can even plan for a Tsunami. They cannot, however, choose the time the time of a tide, a wave, or either the first, second, or third wave of a tsunami — or the passage of the noon day sun. This, I believe, is as true for political waves as it is for those waves consisting only of gravitationally and wind-driven water.

Dr. Lon Clay Hill, Jr. (retired)

Miramar, Broward Co., FL, USA, Planet Earth

What Robert Mueller Got Right and What Robert Mueller or Somebody Got Wrong: A Report from the Gateway to Hell

What Robert Mueller Got Right and What Robert Mueller Got Wrong: A Report from the Entrance to Hell

 — Lon Clay Hill

"If you live outside the law, you must be honest."
— Bob Dylan

"As a human being born in the United States of America, I owe fealty to the Constitution of the United States to the extent that I am not compelled to hear a voice of conscience that is outside and beyond the norms and normal give-and-take of my/our existence. Today that outside voice or sound that I hear most clearly is the combined voice of children in cages on the Mexican-American border and the spoiled and willful child entrapped in the soul of one Donald J. Trump."
— The author

Contents:
I. Context
II. What Robert Mueller got right!
III. What Robert Mueller got wrong!? [Or…!?]
IV. This is not exactly without relevant precedents ("There is never an entirely new thing under the Heavens…)

I. Context

The fact that there are children in cages near the United Sates-Mexican border — cages paid for by US taxpayers — is not a problem for the United States of America and its citizens. Rather, it is an infamous inditement of the nation and its people which will scar it history as long as records remain. The additional fact that many of these children have been or will be separated from their parents and guardians — in most instances — only compounds the problem as the present policies and practices of this country with respect to immigrants are largely inconsistent with the standards of reason, religion, and love of country which many US citizens espouse. [There are, unfortunately, a few instances when a child must be separated from its family— and the problems at the United Sates-Mexican border were certainly not created by the United States alone.] Still the present U.S. government's policy on immigration and its contemporary implementation at our border constitute one of the darker chapters in the history of our nation — a nation whose people tend to think of their country as a remarkable and exemplary nation.

II. What Robert Mueller got right! (Why we usually should follow the law and then some …)

As a matter of fact, almost all of us have some significant advantages in various large and small corners of our existence — whatever large and small tribulations have also come our way. So, given those privileges it is usually a good thing — even a very good thing — for those of us who have had our own fair share of privileges to obey the law.  And, parenthetically, it is often it a good thing for those of us who have not had a fair share of such privileges to obey the law as well. Furthermore, given that many of us who have had the blessings of privileges — due to the efforts of others and to the seemingly unfathomable blessings of the Almighty — have a tendency to overemphasize the efforts of ourselves, our families, and our nation to the detriment of others and other forces [call them what you will (nature, evolution, Allah, happenstance, virtue…] it is usually better for most of us to obey the law even more faithfully than is our actual practice. And, very unfortunately, it seems that those of us who have had more than their fair share of privileges tend to imagine that they, their family, and their cohorts have earned most of their privileges to the point that they will call them "earned". Indeed, some of them even refer to themselves and their social-economic heroes as (mostly or entirely) "self-made" — an imaginary species of humanity which has never existed. And, as a complicated consequence of many such considerations, one Robert Mueller has led an investigation of various activities by one Donald John Trump, several members of his family, and a relatively small number of close associates. During his investigation he has uncovered a significant number of crimes committed by Donald's associates and an even larger number of crimes committed by foreign actors who appear to have had Donald's short term political interests in mind. Mueller's tactics in his investigations have all the earmarks of those frequently undertaken against various mob bosses — (1) collect evidence against various subordinates, (2) prove or be able to prove the subordinates of serious crimes, and (3) offer them a significant reduction in jail time (or, sometimes, an elimination of all jail time) in return for significant information about their superiors in the crime network. In this case, it is important to consider that mob bosses in our country often have considered themselves the heads of "families" [e.g., the costa nostra imported from Sicily, etc.]. And, of course, equally important in Donald's economic and political shenanigan's is the fact that the main actors in Donald's close-knit legal-and-illegal enterprises over the past four+ decades have, in the main, involved only his family and a very small number of close associates.

Brief Interlude. Generic Comments about the Written Constitution of the United States
 ["A nation of laws rather than men…]

Now, for those of us who are citizens of the United States of America realize that in the period between 1775 and 1891 the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights accompanied the birth of a nation with a Written Constitution. There are, of course, within the US citizenry as many opinions about the US Constitution as there are citizens. However, I speak first about only one aspect of the constitution that I believe most readers will agree to. To wit, when there are serious and partisan issues within a country, it is usually a very good thing if the interested parties can resolve their difference to a reasonably fair-minded or "neutral" arbiter instead of resorting to bloodshed.

…What Robert Mueller "got" right (continued)

In the last decade or so, in the U.S.A. — partially because various parties complained about the tactics of various special prosecutors, the laws about them have changed.  Along with changes in the laws, the U.S. Justice Department has determined that as a matter of policy a sitting President of the United States should not be indicted when a special prosecutor has found credible evidence that the President has committed crimes. And, during the period of 2017 until late March 2019, special prosecutor Mueller found no compelling evidence (in his judgment) that either President Trump or any of his immediate family members had committed crimes in 'collusion' with agents of the Russian government with respect to the U. S. Presidential Election of 2016. Mr. Mueller submitted some interrogatories to the President, but he did not interview the President nor did he subpoena the President to obtain such an interview. Mr. Mueller — apparently — did encounter evidence of possible criminality and/or constitutional breaches of faith by President Trump and/or members of his immediate family. In any case, Mr. Mueller has submitted his findings to Attorney General Barr.

[Another brief note: Mr. Barr, an avuncular and quite skillful lawyer as well as a former Attorney General, is described as "respected" by many commentators of various political persuasion. However, while I am not a lawyer, I am a man. And, speaking as a man or, more to the point, as a thinking human being, I have listened carefully to some of Mr. Barr's well-chosen words and even parsed carefully some of his written statements. Mr. Barr believes that the President was not a proper target for the Special Prosecutor…But, returning to our story.]

Mr. Mueller has — following Justice Department Guidelines — submitted his report to the Attorney General. I do not know who he thinks is going to read his report or, more importantly, when anyone besides the Attorney General is going to read any particular portions of his report — especially the declinations [decisions about non-indictments] and the underlying evidence. I do not know whether Mueller will testify to Congress. As far as I can see, Mr. Mueller is much less boastful than almost all political persons who come on the political stage for whatever reason. He, apparently, has done what he believes his duty to have been — and he has submitted his report. And, there is the further fact, that he has also passed on a unknown number of apparent misdeeds over to the consideration of others within the justice department. Still, it is now as always up to us — the living citizenry of this nation — to do our own individual duties and our collective duty.

A postscript.

A story is recounted in Matthew 19:16-22 of a young man who approached Jesus about how he might obtain eternal life. It developed that he had been quite observant of the laws and commandments and yet still felt that he had fallen short. Jesus, having sized him up, told him that if that were the case he should (1) sell his possessions, (2) give the proceeds to the poor, and (3) come and follow him. At the end of the brief meeting, it is written that the young man turned away with a heavy heart as he was a man of great wealth…

As for Robert Mueller — although well paid — he does not at all seem to have been even mildly interested in becoming a man of acclaimed wealth or fame. And, furthermore, he has engaged in some activities which are presently unknown to the public… However, it still remains true that there are times when to stay strictly within the boundaries of the law — or, more specifically, to go strictly "by the book" — may be the very worse place to be.

III. What Robert Mueller got wrong!? Or, perhaps, more precisely, since the quality of Mueller's own work is not the precise issue before us — what has gone Wrong with this investigation up to this point. [Something, at least, has not been done right — even if Robert Mueller's work has not really been completed…] (Or, more fundamentally, why you must believe the Testimony of your own Eyes and Ears and why Truth trumps legal procedures…)

"There is a tide in the affairs of men, Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune. Omitted, all the voyage of their life is bound in shallows and in miseries. On such a full sea are we now afloat."
William Shakespeare.

"If you live outside the law, you must be honest. Now, then, about Donald and his lawyers…"

For a moment we provide a bit more context by continuing with our comments about the quite skillful lawyer,  Attorney General William Barr. Many of us have noted his use of unusually well-chosen words. Mr. Barr believes that the President was not a proper target for the Special Prosecutor. Indeed, in his unsolicited and initially private memo for the President's entourage he voluntarily suggested — in regard to the President's own exposure to legal and political jeopardy — that the President is virtually immune to any criminal exposure from the Mueller Probe while he remains President. In plain English, when it comes to currently relevant issues— Mr. Barr is very strongly predisposed to treat the President as if he were in fact above the law. Now, to be sure, there are some limits to his support for the President. For example, Mr. Barr has not declared himself ready to 'take a bullet' for the President. Still, he apparently believes that he himself need not commit any crimes to perform his own role as the President's Attorney General. And, in his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee and elsewhere he certainly has done a much better job of concealing his own intentions while simultaneously trying to avoid perjury than did, say, [for example] one William Jefferson Clinton. Mr. Barr is not as ossified in his thinking as Mr. Trump, so one can imagine him stepping away from the Donald — but for now he stands before us as an accessory in a Constitutional Putsch. So, for now, we are unable to determine the overall merits of Mr. Mueller's frequently meritorious work because — for the present — some of his most important findings are entangled in procedures-and-activities now being performed by U.S. citizens in high offices who — blinded by their own ambitions — have unfaithful, immoral, and sometimes treasonous intent. [Incidentally, the author is not making any generalized statements saying that political opponents are not excessively ambitious or that — given similar temptations — would not succumb to similar temptations. Such important realities and/or possibilities are simply not the current main event in U.S. politics…]

Problematics of evidence.

So, while Mr. Mueller was trying to execute his strategy for discovering what Trump and his closest associates were doing by collecting evidence which might convince a jury he ran into two difficulties. First, Trump and his associates were dangling promises [Technically speaking, they were "intimations" — but Donald J. Trump does not normally use direct speech to give directions to his  subordinates when he undertakes illegal and/or unethical deeds. Trump uses "Trump Speech" — his own idiosyncratic from of mob speech. To focus exclusively or primarily on conventional "direct" language while investigating Donal Trump would like trying to break the Japanese Code using only Classical Chinese.] In the present instance, such artificial restrictions upon "direct evidence" investigation is, at best, linguistically confused and trenches upon prosecutorial malfeasance. Mr. Trump has already offered to his minions his intimations of corrupt intent in broad daylite. These public encouragements by Trump and his associates of perjury and/or witness tampering with actors such as Manafort and Stone have already been quite effective in several instances!

Secondly, there is the question how to proceed in the legal thicket of the directives and personnel of the current Justice Department. It strikes me that — normally speaking — a prosecutor should not seek an indictment unless (1) most importantly, he or she believes that the person to be charged is indeed guilty of a crime and (2) also importantly — but not always determinatively so— he or she believes that there is a reasonably strong reason to believe that the prosecution will be successful. However, the case of Donald John Trump is not normal — and, furthermore, involves criminal or immoral activities that have not been seen in the previous 43 Presidents of the United states. Whether, (1) the President, his immediate family members, and/or his associates intended to directly cooperate with and/or guide the activities of the Russians during their meddling with the US election may be difficult to prove to a jury [made up of ordinary people who —like the reader and the author — have their own biases] or (2) whether the President has interfered with the Mueller investigation primarily because he wanted to keep his financial crimes and misdeeds secret is, of course, an interesting and vitally important issue. However, the overriding fact is that the President of the United States has acted — as all of us know who have a moderately active memory of either ourselves or other young children — like a young spoiled brat that knows he has done something wrong.  This particular spoiled brat has for ~65 years been able to get away with his behavior because he has discovered that many of those around him will allow him to continue. That is the human dimension of the stream of moral filth that comes out of this man's mouth and is reflected in the equally ugly policies full of vengeful excess that he and his minions produce. And, if we wish to survive as a nation, a large number of us must face that reality.

In this issue, Robert Mueller is not merely a servant of the law,  he is a privileged witness to the activities of one Donald John Trump —who with "Legal" assistance from others — has been involved in the subversion of the United States of America. The United States of America has been an inconsistent, but sometimes important contributor to the General Welfare of Our Nation and Its People and to the World and All Humankind. How Mr. Mueller proceeds in the near future is yet to be determined. However, if he deserves a genuine place as a genuine legal hero [as many have stated], it will be necessary either that his evidence is made public and/or that Mr. Mueller speaks publicly at an appropriate time about what he has beheld. It is, of course, quite possible that Mr. Mueller was blindsided by Mr. Barr's recent appropriation of his report so that he [Barr] could maim or delay the Constitutional Duty which the executive branch has to the legislative branch. We shall see. The wheels of genuine justice — like the wheels of the gods — grind slowly, often very slowly. [A important principle: It is quite true that many prelates and bishops had difficult decisions about how to use confidential information about priests who had seduced young children. It is also true that those who empowered these priests to continue to seduce multiple additional children sinned against both God and man.] The misdeeds committed by one Donald John Trump, his family, and his political associates against cannot be allowed to go quietly into that good nite… The Constitutional Standard is — and the legal standard should be— that improperly and flagrantly delayed justice is Actual Justice Denied.


IV. This is not exactly without relevant precedents. Some additional thoughts about various miscreants relevant to our U.S. American history.

According to the author of Ecclesiastes "There is nothing new beneath the Sun!" Having been alive when human beings first walked on the moon, when new discoveries about human history have been revealed by studies of DNA and RNA, and when new types of cyber crimes have been committed I, personally, do not believe that to be true. Still, there are numerous parallels between various events recorded during the past five millennia when written or inscribed records began to appear in large quantities upon the earth. I wish here to discuss briefly some episodes and themes in the history of the United Sates which seem especially appropriate in understanding our present political-moral crisis. I  will concentrate on various elements and actors important to understanding the American Civil War and the Second World War. And, again, as prologue I add a few quotations that strike me as especially pertinent.

"If this be treason, make the most of it!" — Patrick Henry (1765).
"Gentlemen may cry 'Peace! peace' when there is no peace." — Patrick Henry (1775)
"A House Divided against itself cannot stand." — Abraham Lincoln (~1858)

IVA. Prominent Demagogues in the United States (Highliting the American Civil War).

In the history of the United States, there are several "treasonous" episodes that are also episodes that exhibit moral depravity among human beings. To be sure, (1) I do not believe that treason is necessarily either an immoral action or, necessarily, a matter of great constitutional importance. Treason is by definition a political activity and always involves a political perspective. Thus, as an American citizen who believes that separation from the British Crown was a good thing — I do not believe that Patrick Henry's remarks against the British Crown were treasonous. But there are 3 human beings who have in our history committed — in my opinion — especially egregious and morally reprehensible acts of treason. Two are related to the Civil War — a product of a twenty-four decade legal (and, eventually) and constitutional policy that will always be reminder of the evil that U.S. citizens have been capable of doing.

First, Aaron Burr with his schemes for wresting control of what were then 'Western' portions of the young United States (Early 1800's). Secondly, John C. Calhoun, with his early (~1830) arguments for "nullification" and his concomitant rhetoric about the benefits of slavery for supposedly "inferior" African-born slaves and their descendants. Thirdly, Jefferson Davis, the President of the Confederacy [1861-1865] with his commitment to the "property rights" of slaveholders accompanied, of course, by rhetorical appeals to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.  I don't usually argue about the "principles" involved or, more precisely, whether the Slaveholders and the Southern Confederacy leaders were "sincere" about their beliefs. I consider it simply a fundamental consequence of the Declaration of Independence that freedom and slavery are and always have been incompatible — and it took a terrible Civil War for most citizens of the United States to realize that chattel slavery was not only wrong, but an albatross around our neck that would destroy any "blessings" of freedom we might enjoy. I mention the Civil War  — not because I think that the Civil War ended the terrible legacy of slavery, but because it was a very real — if flawed — beginning of the process which sees neither black nor white — nor any of the actual hues and colors of our people — as valid markers for receiving the liberties and blessings of living on God's Good Earth.

Now that we have entered what is frequently a cold civil war we are in a situation in which — in spite of Donald John Trump's publicly vented racial spleen and the all-too-frequent murder by police of innocents, especially those of very dark hues — our inequalities are becoming based upon criteria that are usually more diffuse than such "simple" issues of "race" and "color" (as if "race" or "color" were ever simple matters). And, when it comes to the environment — the consequences of our foolish self-centeredness about nature's bounty (whether we are centered on our self, our family, our friends, our social/political cohorts, or our nation) are increasingly spread over any boundaries we imagine for "us" and "them". And, furthermore, we cannot even separate our fates from those plants and animals over which we have a certain dominion. It is indeed a single earthship we inhabit within an enormous and wondrous universe — but if we do not get our act together we can just as easily vanish in the twinkling of geological eye as did the trilobites, the dinosaurs, the mammoths, the neanderthals, the dodo, the passenger pigeons, the Roanoke settlers and countless peoples and species which have proceeded before us.

Let me be clear I do not view Donald J. Trump as a cause of the small number of plutocrats and attendants who try to profit from his success as they crowd together into smaller and smaller sets of self-aggrandizing elites. Rather, I see Donald as one who tries to personally profit from these contradictory cohorts. One can imagine that Donald can continue to "successfully" distract his various critics and political opponents — but it is all based on a set of contradictory lies about unearned privileges. And lies are just that — lies. Broken cisterns that hold no water; shimmering glitter that has no value. As far as I can tell he is the most successful and ruthlessly indifferent of our many demagogues [any country with a history has had demagogues as well as heroes]. Furthermore, he appears to have less shame than any of our previous presidents. One of his heroes — Andrew Jackson — had, at least, members of his own family killed by the British and known of real massacres by Indians before he began his own ugly and murderous attacks on native American people. Donald's attacks seem to be drawn from an even deeper reservoir of spleen and imagined victimhood. Which is all simply to say that everything that Donald touches dies — and when it all collapses his legacy will be simply the ruins of souls and fortunes when human fools can excite other foolish or craven souls to enter on their highways to hell.

IVA. Western Civilization's most Dangerous Demagogue  (Adolf Hitler and the Second World War).

Here I make only a few general and mostly unexceptional remarks[I claim no particular expertise, other than that of being relatively informed citizen who has given some time to the subject.] I also add a number of reflections from my own family history [important to me, but again not terribly unusual]. Both the 'remarks' and 'reflections' may help the reader to better assess bias or agenda on my part.

While I was growing up I heard a number of stories about my maternal grandfather, one John Alban Allen, referred to within the family simply as "Daddy Jack." As a child he had visited Germany for ~ a year, but — during World War I, he served as a balloon spotter for the Allied Forces. His older brother, Emer, was killed in France and is buried there, but Daddy Jack returned home — and in events that may have been related to earlier physical wounds or perhaps to other causes he died when my mother was three years old. In due time, aggravated by (1) reparations imposed by the French against the Germans [essentially giving the Germans sole responsibility for the European Debacle which brought on the War] and by (2) long standing military jingoistic traditions within Germany, Adolf Hitler became Germany's Dictator (Der Führer) and gradually initiated a series of Wars as well as the planned extermination of Gypsies, Albinos, Jews, and others. During  a week late in May 1940 [ I learned from a college assignment to write about the week I was born] the British were trying desperately to bring trapped British soldiers back from Dunkirk, France to the relative safety of Great Britain. Shortly before I reached the age of 5, one of my cousins reached the beaches of Normandy around 10 AM in the morning. When he reached the European mainland, the bulldozers had shoved most of the corpses out of the way and he and his company were able to proceed directly to their front lines.

So for these and other reasons, I have been interested in Germany — both its literature and its involvement in the Second World War. As an adult I have never thought of the 2nd World as a simple German initiated event or as a simple Hitler-led event. It seems quite clear that the Holocaust was so catastrophic in Europe precisely because many of the "Christian" populations were so deeply infected by anti-Semitism that they cooperated willingly with the Nazis. Still, the ability of Donald Trump to publicly air his filth about immigrants, reporters, democrats, prisoners-of-war, and handicapped persons strikes some people as so low on the empathy quotient that many have compared him to Hitler. In truth, Donald has been so preoccupied by his immediate fancies about both the glitter of wealth and his desire for revenge that he does not really compare to Hitler. Hitler was more focused on power — esp. military power — and could bide his time and, when opportunity arose, he could strike at the ready. Donald, however, seeks the opportunity to bask in the approval of dictators like Putin and Kim Jong-un. Indeed, with Putin he has become a real — if somewhat inconsistent  — stooge. It strikes me that there are important similarities between Hitler and Trump — both have been extremely cynical about their followers, both have discovered that the Big Lie is often surprisingly more effective than a simple lie, and while both of them have had moments of charm and even graciousness — they have been in their separate eras operating with hearts that are usually colder than those of most "hardened" criminals. Both men have been unusually skilled at identifying the (dishonest) sense of "victimhood" within their live audiences. There are occasional moments of surprisingly obvious humanity [These men are not the Devil himself; rather, they are men who have struck bigger bargains with the devil than most of us are wont to consider.] However, their claim to fame is the inability or, better, unwillingness of most people to confront their striking moral chutzpah and filth in any serious fashion. He/she who has ears to hear — let hem hear!

I do not really believe that any reader would share all or even most of my views. I am saying, however, that some of the most villainous of all human actors have had such disastrous effects precisely because so many human beings have downplayed events beheld by their very own eyes and ignored words heard with their very own ears. The Mueller probe has told us that the problem is not in Denmark. Whether we are to be or not to be a democracy is the issue that stands right before our eyes.



Lon Clay Hill
Miramar, Florida, USA
[29 March 2019]


[A Simplified Subsidiary Issue. — "Climate Change"]    The author has only touched the main components — in his mind — of a morally, politically, and legally complex set of issues surrounding the Mueller Probe. However, my approach is better understood by considering a somewhat simpler issue. Countless birds, insects, and fish have already accepted the reality of climate change — they have altered their migration patterns by distances of hundreds of kilometers or more and they have altered their migrations schedules by 2-3 weeks. Human beings have, however, an additional problem that creates additional problems. When they face difficulties — they often lie to themselves and/or to others. Human solutions to the problems of climate change are — like solutions to human migration — are quite difficult and complex. As a general rule it seems to me that discussions about whether climate change is "real" tend to be exercises in group evasion.

There are a number of reasons why people follow demagogues. One of the most important of them is that the evils in their own lives may have been partially or substantially produced by enemies or opponents of the demagogue. As for the politically active supporters of a demagogue, the blindness of those who first make a 'deal' with the devil that they imagine they can dissolve when matters get worse is simply difficult to overestimate…

The Devil's Workshop: Michael Cohen, Donald J. Trump, and Redemption

"Woe is me for I am an unclean man and I live in the midst of an unclean people and I have seen the Lord of Hosts, High up as His Train filled the Temple!" — Isaiah

Lon Clay Hill
Miramar, Florida, USA
[11 March 2019]

A Spiritual-Political Discussion-and-Argument which begins with metaphors.
In the Harbor: Michael struggles to keep from drowning

When Michael finally realized that the "Family"-supplied air tube had actually ensnared him with an ever-diminishing oxygen supply and inevitable asphyxiation as he was performing his mission in some of the deepest and darkest waters of the remarkable New York harbor, he immediately tore the tube away and sought to turn-and-return his body towards the surface which lay high above his landformed body. Those of you who have seen action movies where even those with superhuman strength must struggle to escape the physical and spiritual schackles which confront and tempt even the greatest of our heroes may be able to imagine better than I how Michael struggled. As he first realized that his salvation lay high above him he began to strive — as he had never striven since he had burst from his mother's womb — to reach the surface where he could once again engulf the life sustaining air. I can only really tell you that it was difficult — desperately difficult. I can also offer you a few words which may suggest the mood and the travail with which his arms flailed, his legs kicked, his torso twisted, and his eyes sought the dim lights which would lead him to temporary release. And, I must also add that once he had begun to seek the surface he was immediately bedeviled by the realization that his Family-supplied face mask was making the already dark waters even more murkier and muddled. So within seconds he had first pulled out the tube and torn off the mask — and late at nite he found himself in waters polluted by a filth that would not only make clean water dirty, but would make even the most polluted waters even darker.

Additional Problems: Sewage from the Family's Gilded Tower makes the already Dark Waters murkier and even darker…

You see, Michael knew that in the harbor — and not far from his family-supplied mission yacht — there were shoals near a dimly lit "Statue Liberté where he might repair for a temporary respite in his journey. However, there were other lights — including lights from a Golden Tower — which would confuse and distract him briefly as he strove upward into the light and toward the nearest shoals of refuge. The Golden Tower (or, more accurately, the Gilded Tower) was indeed covered with a microscopically thin layer of pure Gold (element #79) which would shimmer even on the darkest moonless nites and during the worst of blackouts. In addition to its shimmering exterior within the Gilded Tower were some remarkable elevators, escalators, and other more expensive human artifacts — but, unbeknown or unrecognized by most, the bulk of the Tower is made almost entirely from fine fibers of Camel's Dung. Indeed, this Camel's Dung spontaneously breaks down at somewhat unpredictable rates and is, in fact, responsible for most of the dark waste or filth that was making the dark waters around Michael so incredibly murky. The waste is actually transported from the Tower's basement out into the harbor in large new Tungsten-ceramic Pipes that have — so far — experienced no leakages or breaks and delivered the waste directly into the waters in twelve dispersed pipes which enter the water approximately 50 meters below sea level. However, the most important finding I can report to you is this: The often whispered rumors that a lost child can be found inside the Tower are not rumors!! It is true — a lost child is indeed within the Tower. It turns out that this lost child resides in the soul of a tall, ambitious, crafty, foolish and, unfortunately, somewhat senile old man named Donald J. Trump. It is, you see, this Donald Trump who had sent Michael on his — we now see — Mission Impossible.

So much for the particulars. For a moment we leave Michael and the deep, dark New York Harbor— he has actually reached the shoals of the small island with it small statue and he has made some important steps to reconnect with his family, his honor, his nation, and even — to some extent — within his own soul.

An outside perspective:

Michael cannot undo most of the damage he has done to his family, his friends, his family, strangers, and to his own reputation. However, he is now helping to unmask some of the damages done by the President and his Political Allies in the Tower, in Washington and thruout the Land. Undoing and repairing those damages by these groups — and any misdeeds by his political opposition — will be a task for the rest of us.

We return to the Harbor and the Observers in a nearby Ship of State:

While Michael has finally approached the shoals of a small island, we must turn to a few of those participating observers who are closest to the scene of action. We look first in a small group hosted by a nearby yacht, a small ship of state.

Looking thru what they believe are protected windows which allow them to look with satisfaction upon Michael's struggles are the most prominent of the Family's political supporters. This collection of (1) ideologues, (2) ambitious politicians, and (3) unusually rapacious capitalists who may see a few or even many of the Don's follies. However, if the Donald perchance fails, they will — they believe — be able to bail out of their privileged chambers. Unfortunately, they do not realize that their protective windows are in fact a peculiarly transparent form of camel's dung which has made invisible both (1) the raging fires which are beginning to ignite inside the waste flowing from the Tower and (2) aggregates of hardened-and-frozen debris created by the fall of gutted buildings and gutted dreams now sliding silently into the Harbor as the bills for their (Faustian) bargains with the devil come due. In any case, whether the cause is greed, hubris, ambition, or revenge and whether the end is accompanied by fire or ice, these contemporary self-blinded men and women will be as powerless as those wealthy men and women who proudly rode blindly into death after purchasing their first class steerage upon the Unsinkable Titanic. …

A few religious leaders — the Caiaphas-Billy Graham, Jr. coterie — are also watching from a Long Island Hillock in a small building with at Secret Gateway to Hell

A more important set of witnesses have been watching these events from a small and somewhat distant hillock across the Harbor on Long Island.  These are "religious" supporters in the "Caiaphas-Billy Graham, Jr." coterie. These ladies and gentlemen like to remain close to the corridors of power — and, while they, individually, are often quite wealthy — their actual "spiritual" temptation is quite distinct. They would like to trade in their stated convictions for a token which many of the faithful believe would confirm their self image as "good people" or, even, "morally superior people". Indeed, among the Christians in this group it is sometimes whispered that they will be able to sit next to Saint Peter himself!! This group, of course, has deep — but ever shifting — "roots". Two and three millennia ago they would have been seen blessing human sacrifice, the stoning of prophets, the crucifixion of Jesus, and the burning of Christians. Today, they have different targets — and some unusual alliances. In the United States they are mostly affiliated with certain Christians who call themselves evangelists. Others in their group appear to believe that Muslims are lower than the lowest untouchables. A few of them, of course, have gotten very mixed up about the relationship between the cross of Christ and the "right" to purchase and sell a firearm, a machine gun, or an AK-47. What they have in common, however, is the belief that they themselves are good and entitled to the full panoply of rights of good citizens and that those who are dispossessed of such rights are "undeserving" of such privileges. Unfortunately, these religious hypocrites are about as close to hell as we humans can be — and most of us are already much too close for self-satisfied comfort. The thin floor of their den of self-congratulation is an abyss which is deeper than the deepest trenches of the ocean. It is indeed one of the most direct of all the many roads which can serve as a Gateway to Hell.

Returning to Michael and the rest of us.

So Michael bestirs himself while those who reside in the Gilded Tower, the Ship of State, the Den of Hypocrites, and virtually all the rest of us seek to find some way to make our selves better than him. But that is not our task.

Dropping the metaphors.

I do not believe that Michael has completed his journey to recover his honor and his soul. Indeed, as far as I can see I know that I myself have far too far to go to spend my time comparing myself to Michael or to his chief financial and immoral supporter of the past decade, Donald John Trump. Of course, some of Donald's lies and acts must be openly opposed, but the strength of Donald is rooted in moral failures that are much deeper than the misdeeds of the Donald and the blindness of his supporters. The particular Hell into which the evangelists have stepped will not last — lies do not last forever even if they may be powerful for years and even Centuries. And Michael's Hell, Donald's Hell, the hypocrites' Hell and the Hell of any individual — such as you, the reader, or I, the author — is a burden which is carried by the all of us. According to Scripture the most important evangelist in Christian history, Paul of Tarsus, was — before he became a spreader of "the good news" of what we now call Christianity — a zealot who was involved in the murder of Stephen and, perhaps, other followers of the crucified Nazarene.

I rejoice that Michael has taken the first steps of reclaiming his soul — even if a major part of his motivation was his simple realization that the Donald was almost totally bereft of the loyalty which is sometimes found among Godfathers and Strongmen and that he, Michael Cohen, was simply on his own. Many of us make better decisions after we have been punished harshly for our own foolish misdeeds. This is my belief. I believe that those fakers who would support the self-interested love of their own group — religious, economic, political, or social — into professed faithfulness to God, Allah, Truth, Nature, the Force or any other name they would apply to the power that sustains us all — are already in a hell of their own making. They are not beyond the reach of God's love and all the rest of us will in various ways have to share in the pains of their redemption — whether and if we, too, are adding our own faggots are to the fire. And, if and when others come to power and they too will face similar promises and temptations…

But, if you have got this far, I have made my point. You, the reader, must make your own determinations. What I add next are simply my own musing as I try to understand better this unexpected moral-political-spiritual-social thicket into which my country has stumbled even as I am myself coming towards the end of my days upon this small planet within a marvelous universe where most mornings I can still see a few planets and other much more distant stars on my morning walks.

*     *     *     *     *     *     *
Notes:
The Quote from Isaiah:
The "translation" is mostly from Isaiah Chapter 6: verse 5 with a few words from verse 1. There are many translations, Christian and Jewish, old and new….  I would presume that all or almost all translations are much better and/or more complete than mine. I do not read Hebrew.  I have chosen instead to be guided mostly from what I remember from over 5 decades ago when I first encountered Isaiah. The memory of that encounter stays with me these many years hence as (1) children are placed in cages bought by taxes that I and others have paid in taxes and (2) crowds and individuals, including may children, are murdered by guns bought in a country where many say that they can share two masters: an extreme love for both guns and their devotion to God.

THE GENERAL APPROACH.

There are dimensions of our lives which are deeper than our logical minds and deeper than even our consciousness. Poetry, parable, and music often can express these dimension better than our more conventional speech or writing. I am not a poet — but like all humans — I have a poetic dimension of some minimal nature. So, I have proposed some metaphors. Even an idiot may be a witness as William Faulkner demonstrated in The Sound and the Fury.

Sinking of the Titanic and Ships of State.

Unfortunately, an even larger portion of the poorer passages plunged into the darkness of the earth's coldest waters on the 15th of April 1912. And, unless the Almighty stays his hand, the sinking of this particular contemporary ship of state is likely to bring a large number of unwitting, innocent, and other humans and fellow creatures along with them.

Challenging Nature

While today, the United States is a leader in creating climate change, the problem is much deeper than that. When discussing climate change it seems important to me to recognize that wordless birds, fish, and insects recognize climate change — in many places they have already changed their migratory patterns by two-three weeks and/or by two-three hundreds of kilometers. The problem for human's is that that humans can deceive both themselves and each other. Climate change is — of course — a quite difficult challenge and is bringing out the worst and best in our species. There are, of course, teachable moments — but one should, I think, be aware that there are times — whether a disaster comes from human action, from nature, or from God or wherever you, the reader, wish to assign the cause — you must take what you have and leave your trust in whatever is deepest and true inside the deepest part of your mind-or soul-or-self. The only enemy, I believe, is despair. We have been thrust into one of those profound revolutions in human history where, as usual, our temptation to utilize our newest discoveries for the most foolish, temporary, and selfish reasons is upon us and we must resist that temptation.

Forewarning: A Longer Exposition on the Question of Religious Hypocrisy

I would like to stress that some people who know me best think that I seemed predisposed to be a little more dramatic or hyperbolic than I really need to be.

The Longer Exposition (Argument) — Version #1

A more important set of witnesses have been watching these events from a small and somewhat distant hillock across the Harbor on Long Island.  These are "religious" supporters in the "Caiaphas-Billy Graham, Jr." coterie. These ladies and gentlemen like to remain close to the corridors of power — and, while they, individually, are often quite wealthy — their actual "spiritual" temptation is quite distinct. They would like to trade in their stated convictions for a token which many of the faithful believe would confirm their self image as "good people" or, even, "morally superior people". Indeed, the seriousness with which these self-described "faithful" pursue their beliefs suggests that some of the leaders and some of their loudest supporters 'imagine' that this political support will virtually guarantee themselves front seats in Heaven itself. Indeed, among the Christians in this group it is sometimes whispered that they will be able to sit next to Saint Peter himself!! This group, of course, has deep — but ever shifting — "roots". Two and three millennia ago they would have been seen blessing human sacrifice, the stoning of prophets, the crucifixion of Jesus, and the burning of Christians. Today, they have different targets — and some unusual alliances. In the United States they are mostly affiliated with certain Christians who call themselves "evangelists" and sometimes target the "crime" of abortion to the exclusion of all other deeds, misdeeds, or crimes. Others in their group appear to believe that Palestinians or Iranian or Muslims are lower than the lowest untouchables. A few of them, of course, have gotten very mixed up about the relationship between the cross of Christ and the "right" to purchase a firearm, a machine gun, or an AK-47. What they have in common, however, is the belief that they themselves are good and entitled to the full panoply of rights of good citizens and that those who are dispossessed of such rights are undeserving of such privileges. They are, of course, in these beliefs not only misguided — Jesus of Nazareth asked "Why call me good? — only God is good!" — they are about as close to hell as we humans can be. The thin floor of their den of self-congratulation is an abyss which is deeper than the deepest trenches of the ocean. Camel dung and Moral filth has many forms. And it is indeed a Gateway to Hell.

The Longer Exposition (Argument) — Version #2

A more important set of witnesses have been watching these events from a small and somewhat distant hillock across the Harbor on Long Island.  These are "religious" supporters in the "Caiaphas-Billy Graham, Jr." coterie. These ladies and gentlemen like to remain close to the corridors of power — and, while they, individually, are often quite wealthy — their actual "spiritual" temptation is quite distinct. They would like to trade in their stated convictions for a token which many of the faithful believe would confirm their self image as "good people" or, even, "morally superior people". Indeed, the seriousness with which these self-described "faithful" pursue their beliefs suggests that they 'imagine' that this political support will virtually guarantee themselves front seats in Heaven itself. Whatever, the motivation of these leaders and their followers, they tend to accept a political token — and then give their political support to leaders will commit crimes and misdeeds — whether openly or secretly — that are directly counter to their own stated credos and, most especially, the leaders who founded their movements. In the past — keeping here within the Judaeo-Christian traditions —their foreparents' and ancestral misdeeds have included support for the stoning of prophets, the crucifixion of Jesus, the burning [at different times] of Christians, heretics, Jews, and gays. Keeping strictly within the traditions of British colonists and the United States, religious leaders and their followers have enthusiastically supported slavery and segregational peonage as consistent with the Will of God.

And, TODAY, in these "United States" some so-called or, better, self-described "evangelists" have consistently supported politicians — including the Donald of New York — who will (1) throw children in cages [they call it "patriotism"], (2) who will support the profits of reckless, shameful, utterly foolish, and murderous gun manufacturers [they call it "supporting liberty"], (3) support the disenfranchisements of the unpowerful in order to more firmly enable their own unearned privileges [they call it "preventing voter fraud"], and (4) and will look on in silence as God's earth is despoiled and in obeisance to willfully blind multinationals [characterized as the "blessing of economic liberty]. To be sure, outside of the United States and, to a much smaller extent within these United States, there are people and parties who commit their own collective and individual misdeeds. But, the historical record — including the texts of the New Covenant — tells us that Paul of Tarsus, a Jewish zealot, was involved in the murder of Stephen and, probably, various other followers of the deceased Jesus of Nazareth before he became the most effective proponent of the "good news" of Jesus's message. Paul, I believe, has spoken some of Western civilizations most enduring words. He stated that in Christ there is neither Jew nor Gentile, slave nor free, male nor female" and that "If I have not love I become a clanging cymbal." While our USA has its very incomplete and sometimes utterly hypocritical record, the statement that "all men are created equal" has been used to implement part of this principle and if we can say that "all humans are created equal" we may be able to move ahead more easily. Still, even the very transformed Paul was not always up to the task. Some of his words about the advantages of permanent chastity are not always helpful guidewords for most of us. But let's get to the Scripture's themselves.  In Matthew Jesus is quoted as saying that not all those who say "Lord, Lord" will inherit the Kingdom of Heaven. For myself, I would never claim to be an expert about "Heaven" and I certainly would be disinclined to say that I am "better" or "worse" than anyone I have ever met — altho it is true that I, like you, do have a few talents [as well as blind spots] and that others clearly have skills and talents which I do not possess. But there is one thing I do believe. If your or my religion helps me or you to be a better person than I would otherwise be or if helps us to live in hope [instead of the despair of unfaced fears], I believe that is good. And I do not believe that any religion makes one better than anyone else and I certainly do not believe that any religion give you or me or anyone else special privileges that have any other design which do not directly or indirectly help us to serve others and live in peace. That is my belief and I believe that those fakers who would support the self-interested love of their own group — religious, economic, political, or social — into professes faithfulness to God, Allah, Truth, Nature, the Force or any other name they would apply to the power that sustains us all — are already in a hell of their own making. They are not beyond the reach of God's love and all the rest of us will in various ways have to share in the pains of their redemption. This applies whether and if we, too, are adding our own faggots to the fire. And, if and when others come to power, they will also face similar promises and temptations…