Into the Heart of Lightness

INTO THE HEART OF LIGHTNESS - PART 1 of 5 - Work in Progress

PREFACE

References in any work are screened according to the perception of a writer and so can take away from, rather than add credibility. Today, unguided searches on the Internet provide a superior method for obtaining further information. Mainstream search engines and social media platforms can be a good starting point to better judge the less compromised information sources accessed by other means. 

PART 1

Out of the Heart of Darkness

Our problems are man-made — therefore, they can be solved by man. – John F. Kennedy.

Say goodbye to work drudgery, heavy taxation and environmental degradation. This sounds like a late night infomercial. Yet we have the technology to do this and more. So why the disconnect between what is doable and what is possible? Powerful actors and institutions are often blamed, but these reflect society in general. Suspect leaders and organizations fall away through the ages, yet the gaping separation between human potential and political reality remains. 

The misdeeds by overt and covert rulers are part of a deeper, systemic problem. At root, humanity’s evolutionary path is the culprit. Like all life, it led through a jungle environment, where force and deception are the cardinal virtues. The brutish instincts required for survival in this milieu are still within us. Automatic reflexes, hormones and selfish genes are among the impulses that drive irrational behavior. In the words of a cartoon character, we have met the enemy and he is us. 

The good news is that people change all the time, and societies along with them. The development of civilizing structures nurture our better nature. The law of the jungle is slowly giving way to laws loosely based on justice. As a result, there is far less violence today than in times gone past. The most dangerous neighborhood would be considered a relatively safe space by our not so distant ancestors. The exception to this is during times of war. World War II General Dwight Eisenhower put it well when he stated “the clearest way to show what the rule of law means to us in everyday life is to recall what has happened when there is no rule of law.”

Not only does law break down during warfare, history has shown wars are inevitable in the absence of overarching laws. When tribal law was the highest level of social organization, there was constant combat between the tribes. As tribes coalesced into rules bound confederations, the fighting between erstwhile deadly enemies dropped off precipitously. Once these alliances amalgamated into nation states, warfare again diminished dramatically. Peaceful times were longer and covered more territory with law settling most disputes. However, when war did come, it naturally scaled up with the larger national groupings.

As nations grow closer together through technology, trade and treaties, warfare is again decreasing. It has been generations since conscription in many nations. War between the democracies is almost unthinkable today. There is still constant warfare on the world stage. Nascent international laws are often ineffective or applied selectively. However today’s warfare is on a much diminished scale compared to the past. The final step to ending war is to create more effective global laws. The question of our times is whether this is done through the imposition of a secretive global oligarchy with dictatorial ambitions or with the participation of a more educated, informed public. Properly done, individuals could have significantly more freedom within global governance than they have today under national governments. Conversely, the current short sighted, unimaginative, dictatorial approach will end up like all dictatorships, back in the jungle.

The Emperor’s Old Clothes

 “The higher I go, the crookeder it becomes.” - Michael Corleone, Godfather Part III

Understandably, many are strongly opposed to the idea of global law. The more distant the government, the more difficult it is to keep it accountable. The higher concentration of power also tends towards more corruption. Stories that leak out of existing international bodies do not dispel this concern. Nationalistic conditioning, complete with flags and anthems, creates yet more resistance to the idea. Above all, our daily experiences with national and lower levels of government are rife with abuses of power and other forms of corruption. Politicians often finish dead last in surveys on the trust accorded to a profession. Who in their right mind would want more of this, at a higher almost untouchable level, where already secretive meetings are coming to light that show disdain for transparency and democracy.

The first question to ask is how is it that those elected to high office are ranked so low? To be fair, politicians are in the spotlight along with their shortcomings. Constituents can condemn the human failings of a politician while ignoring their own similar transgressions. That said, the lack of trust is ultimately justified. Politicians are integral participants in what has been accurately termed a lying structure. This method of ruling occurred long before any serious moves towards world government.

The lying structure social model was codified some 500 years ago in a book entitled The Prince, by high court diplomat Nicolo Machiavelli. When the term Machiavellian is used today, it is a pejorative, meaning sneaky and unethical. However, Machiavelli was simply being forthright about what he observed and what it took to survive and thrive in the ruling structure of his day. His conclusion was that we cannot do good without power but we cannot gain power, nor keep it, without doing evil. The reason he gave for this was the people themselves. Many would abandon and not protect their leader if they thought another, often unscrupulous, power seeker could offer them more.

Machiavelli wrote: “One can make this generalization about people: they are ungrateful, fickle, liars, and deceivers, they shun danger and are greedy for profit; while you treat them well, they are yours. They would shed their blood for you, risk their property, their lives, their children, so long, as I said above, the danger is remote; but when you are in danger they turn against you.”  If people see a greater personal advantage in supporting someone else, their loyalty turns out to be a loyalty of convenience, no matter what you have done for them in the past. In other words, wise leaders don’t trust the people any more than the people trust their leaders. 

Because rival claimants to power can be unscrupulous, it was necessary that the current leader act likewise to defend themselves. Nice guys usually finish last was Machiavelli’s observation. Consequently, he advised “It is necessary that the prince should know how to colour his nature well, and how to be a great hypocrite and dissembler”. He went so far as to argue that it was irresponsible to apply to political action the moral standards that are appropriate to private life. Disorder would result and the people would suffer more.

Machiavelli viewed morality as only another tool for manipulation. He wrote: "a leader doesn't have to possess all the virtuous qualities but it's absolutely imperative that he seems to possess them." The crowd is won over "by appearances", and as "the world is all crowd", appearances matter. He expressed admiration for “a certain prince of present times, whom it is not well to name, never preaches anything but peace and faith, and is very hostile to both.” 

Over a century after Machiavelli’s defining work on the necessity of force and deception in politics, Englishman Thomas Hobbes followed up with an even more pessimistic look at humanity. In his most famous work, Leviathan, he wrote "in the first place, I put forth a general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceases only in death.” He argued that individuals living in a state of nature were constantly at war, did not know right from wrong, and lived lives that were “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”. Hobbes advocated rule by an absolute sovereign, or dictator.  Otherwise “during the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition called war; and such a war, as if of every man, against every man.”

The Machiavellian or lying structure predominates today. It underlies the false reality projected by our mainstream media, educational facilities and other institutions. People have a tendency to vote for whoever promises the most for their own personal circumstances, regardless of broken promises in the past. Leaders that are immoral and cater to the selfish side of humanity usually end up on top. For most people, it is easier to fool them than convince them they have been fooled. As difficult as it is to accept, as an aggregate, the people do get the government they deserve. It’s no one’s fault of course. Previous human evolution got us here and the selfish gene lurking deep within us needs to be better directed. The question is how to break out of the cycle of mutual distrust to create a participative, empowering future for all citizens.  

Proofs of a Conspiracy

“If indeed sometimes I do happen to tell the truth, I hide it among so many lies that it is hard to find.” - Niccolo Machiavelli

The super elites themselves have described their Machiavellian bent in published books that can be accessed through the public library system. Insider economist John Keynes came clean in his 1931 book Essays in Persuasion when he wrote “for at least another hundred years we must pretend to ourselves and to everyone that fair is foul and foul is fair; for foul is useful and fair is not. Avarice and usury and precaution must be our gods for a little longer still.  For only they can lead us out of the tunnel of economic necessity into daylight”. In other words, it is necessary to do evil, in order to do good. The ends justify the means. Keynes was the major influence in the development of the post WWII money system.

Jesuit and Georgetown University professor Carroll Quigley, described by past U.S. President Bill Clinton as a mentor, wrote a book entitled Tragedy and Hope, a History of the World in Our Time. In this massive tome he laid bare the reality behind Keynesian economics. He wrote: “The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences.” Quigley also related that he was an insider with this group, had studied its inner workings for years and approved of their overall aims.

Arnold J. Toynbee served as a director of the highly influential Royal Institute of International Affairs. He admitted his adherence to Machiavellian principles when he wrote: “we are at present working, discreetly but with all our might, to wrest this mysterious political force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local national states of our world. And all the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands. It is just because we are really attacking the principle of local sovereignty that we keep on protesting our loyalty to it so loudly because to impugn the sovereignty of the local nation states of the world is still a heresy for which a statesman or publicist can perhaps not quite be burned at the stake but certainly be ostracized or discredited.”

In his book Memoirs, UN stalwart and financier David Rockefeller did not mince words when he penned: “for more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

This is but a tiny sampling of the evidence of the super elite push to weaken national sovereignty in favour of global governance and do so by secretive means. A key point here is that the conspiracy to create a world government is not a monolithic block as is sometimes presented. Like every other significant social endeavor, there are competing factions, outliers and shifting alliances. As Keynes, Quigley, Toynbee, Rockefeller and others make clear, even the injunction to secrecy is not something all feel bound to. A caveat is that when these leaders made their honest statements they felt confident their grip on the mass media and educational systems would ensure our political reality would not become widespread knowledge. Rightly, it was assumed that few people would read the original works in low circulation journals or plow through Quigley’s book of more than 1300 pages. The Internet is a game changer here. The relevant quotes were pulled from their obscurity and given wide circulation in a concise format, along with references to the original works. Belated, futile attempts to stifle information on the Internet is not so much to forestall fake news as to try to put this information genie back in the bottle. 

Change of Change

“Systems were made for people, and not people for systems, and the interest of a person, which is self-development, is above all systems, whether theological, political or economic." - C. H. Douglas

It has been said change is the only constant. However, a distinction can be made between gradual change and discontinuous change. Sometimes discontinuous change is referred to as an age change. There is talk of the agricultural age, the industrial age, the information age, or even an upcoming augmented age. 

These events are world changing, but there is yet a higher level of discontinuous change. Although all of the previous age changes advanced civilization, force and deception were still integral to the progress. Futurist Alvin Toffler is one of several who point out the first truly civilized society has yet to be born. 

While technology remains the catalyst for age changes, nuclear weapons and ecological limits are new considerations. Humanity's capacity for repeating a history of violent change is reaching its limit. Toffler wrote that the birth of the industrial age involved "one long blood-drenched drama of wars, revolts, famines, forced migrations, coups d'état, and calamities". In assessing the information age, Toffler wrote that "today the stakes are much higher, the time shorter, the acceleration faster, and the dangers even greater". 

Toffler warns that "much depends on the flexibility and intelligence of the elites, sub-elites and super-elites.  If these groups prove to be as shortsighted, unimaginative, and frightened as most ruling groups in the past, they will rigidly resist the information age and thereby escalate the risks of violence and their own destruction." Toffler's work was mainstream enough that he has dined at the White House and a congressional house speaker wrote a forward to his book.  Because he was working within the lying structure, some of the specific concepts behind his concerns could only be hinted at. There are no such constraints here.

The establishment mantra is that the information age is here. In terms of technology this is true. In terms of our mass media and other institutions, the misinformation age would be a better fit. So where to start? We are at a fork in the road. The first truly human civilization can be designed from the individual up or it can be designed from the state down. The latter choice would be the unimaginative and shortsighted option. Hobbes and Machiavelli can no longer be the guides of our political systems. Proper education for a genuinely new age is key. 

Our societies are caught between the jungle and true civilization. The worst of our leaders are opportunists, looking for material advantage and with little to no thought given to the common good. They may be peripherally aware that not all is as it appears as regards to budgets and deficits, but there is little thought given to this. They are not motivated by the primary goal of the international financial fraud, which is a world government with a view to ending warfare and introducing environmental sustainability. 

However, the best of our current leaders also constantly lie or tell lies of omission. Like Machiavelli and his protégés Keynes, they think truth and real democracy would lead to anarchy or mob rule. In their eyes, they lie to us for our own good. The ends justify the means. At some point, these leaders have created a self-fulfilling prophecy. By keeping the public in the dark and subverting our educational and mainstream mass media systems, they have ensured that the average person does not have the tools to participate fully in their future. 

In his book Beyond Greed and Scarcity financial expert Bernard Lietaer highlighted an additional problem. Our monetary system enforces scarcity, even where there is none, thereby promoting a scarcity mindset and all that entails. In the simplest terms, money is created as debt, at compound interest, and the money to pay the interest is not created fast enough for everyone to pay their bills. It  is like a game of musical chairs, where the one left standing when the music stops loses their home and often more. The details of this will be covered later, but suffice it to say that an artificially enforced scarcity has significant real world implications in promoting jungle dynamics.

Meanwhile, the resultant oligarchy, benevolent or not, is unsustainable. The flows of information today cannot be adequately addressed by excessively top down structures. By the time information has passed up and down a decision tree, the situation on the ground has often changed. A truly aware person closest to the action is needed for most intelligent decisions today. An additional problem is that the moral glue that helps align much of the lower level decision making to the common good is weakening. People are also losing faith in our leadership as new communication technologies bypass the controlled media. Finally, a dictator or oligarchy based on lies will not have the broad base of popular support of a truly representative government. Even if a leader resists the corruption that comes with unaccountable power, their very decency makes a coup inevitable by those with less scruples. In the final analysis, biblical warnings about an apocalyptic ending to the dictatorial path is based on logic. Machiavelli’s beast in the man must go by the wayside before it slouches towards Bethlehem. Most of the citizens have not been sufficiently educated to avoid being misled by the opportunists, even as our society needs broad-based real political involvement. This is the catch 22 of today’s politics.

Machiavelli’s most well known statement is that "it's much safer to be feared than loved". The reasoning is that fear is a more powerful emotion than loyalty or friendship. However, fear also breeds hatred. It is instructive that the ruler who served as a model for Machiavelli’s book fell to ruin rather spectacularly. Machiavelli must have sensed the downside to his advice as he also wrote:  “the best fortress is to be found in the love of the people, for although you may have fortresses they will not save you if you are hated by the people”.

There are some great ideas out there to gradually transition to a genuinely new society. The overarching idea is to build up from the individual, not down from the state. The higher power, whatever we may call it, communicates most effectively directly with the individual, not through social organizations which add progressive layers of fallible human interference. This is the probable reason why people everywhere, of all time, regard personal freedom as the ultimate goal.

The Just Third Way is perhaps the pre-eminent starting point of such a design. It is not a stretch to argue that civilized means must be used for the transition to a truly civilized age and this design has it in spades. The website at globajusticemovement.org works at marrying the core concepts of the Just Third Way with other progressive movements that focus on creating a world community designed around ecological sustainability. At the lower levels of existence such as food, shelter, clothing, transportation and communications, the most ecologically sustainable design would be technocratic in nature; extending the concept behind the fluoride free public water systems in many countries. At the higher, human levels of our existence, our sense of belonging and self-actualization, freedom should be as unfettered as possible. The only boundaries on one’s rights should be the boundaries on another person’s rights. In cybernetic terms, by separating the lower and higher needs, it is possible to bridge the false dichotomy between the freedom of the individual and the freedom of the whole.

Genes and Memes

“With every day, and from both sides of my intelligence, the moral and the intellectual, I thus drew steadily nearer to the truth, by whose partial discovery I have been doomed to such a dreadful shipwreck: Man is not truly one, but truly two.”

― Robert Louis Stevenson, The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

The classic book Jekyll and Hyde was published shortly after Origin of the Species wherein author Charles Darwin laid out the case for our evolution from the jungle. Art imitates life. When Dr. Jekyll drinks a potion that overrides his morality, he takes on an apelike appearance as he transforms into the evil Mr. Hyde. His experiment goes horribly wrong. Jekyll had planned to isolate and expunge his hidden dark side. Instead he is gradually taken over by his sinister alter ego and the unaccountable power it wields. Ultimately he is destroyed, committing suicide to escape the hangman’s noose for a murder done under the influence of his opiate. 

Journalist Nick Spencer provides a more hopeful outlook on the conflict between our  evolving morality and bestial past. In a newspaper series on Machiavelli he wrote:  “the tussle between the person and the creature, the subject and the object, the angel and the ape, the human and the animal, as various generations have described it, is as old as there are written records – for the simple reason that neither side holds the winning cards, and the two natures wrestle, like Jacob with his angel, within each of us”. The view here is that humanity does hold the winning cards, but it is not always apparent in a game being played out over millennia. A caveat is that there is no guarantee the cards will be played correctly, as we have the double edged gift of free will.   

Machiavelli himself, as could be expected, took a pragmatic view of the duality of man. He advised: “there are two kinds of combat: one with laws, the other with force. The first is proper to man, the second to beasts; but because the first is often not enough, one must have recourse to the second. Therefore it is necessary for a prince to know well how to use the beast and the man”. History shows that all too often the beast takes over from man, much like Hyde took over Jekyll’s personality. Laws are overturned and tyrannical force predominates, as unaccountable power corrupts. 

In The Origins of Virtue, reviewer Nick Warmington wrote that author Matt Ridley “wants to have it both ways, that we’re both nasty and nice. We’re nasty at one level (the unconscious genetically driven self); but in the real world, we’re nice, genuinely pleasant.” However, Ridley includes a giant caveat. He believes the reason we are nice is not at all genuine. We are nice only so that others are nice back to us. Even when an individual does not benefit from a selfless act, such scientists believe that genes are driving the behaviour for the benefit of the clan, tribe, nation or even species. This is in keeping with the selfish gene theory which holds all altruistic acts are simply another survival tactic for human genes and not a result of any innate morality.  

Richard Dawkins, the author of The Selfish Gene has been rightly criticized for a “fallacy of composition.” As blogger Jag Bhalla, relates: “Dawkins inappropriately extends properties of parts to wholes. An absurd example is: each atom in a teacup is invisible, therefore the teacup is invisible. Dawkins projects his preferred “selfish” zero-sum property of genes onto everything built by genes, and falsely concludes everything that has “evolved...should be selfish.” Preeminent evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould joined in this criticism when he wrote: “a fully developed theory of evolution requires such a hierarchical view in which natural selection operates in different ways at a series of different levels, from the gene, the cell and the organism to the sub-species and the species”. Gould stops at the level of the species here, but the progression continues on up. 

Dawkins backtracked somewhat in a following work, but his 1976 Selfish Gene book has influenced a generation of scientists and philosophers. Like Ridley, they have a tendency to regard human morality as simply another survival mechanism. It is no different from the many symbiotic relationships found in nature.

Dawkins offered a way out of the jungle in the conclusion to The Selfish Gene when he wrote “to build a society in which individuals cooperate generously and unselfishly… you can expect little help from biological nature. Let us try to teach generosity and altruism, because we are born selfish. Let us understand what our own selfish genes are up to, because we may then have a chance to upset their design, something which no other species has ever aspired to. We can even discuss ways of cultivating and nurturing pure, disinterested altruism, something that has no place in nature, something that has never existed before in the whole history of the world.… We, alone on earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators.”

Education is a good starting point, but there is infinitely more at play than what Dawkins suggests.  Even the scientists who point out not all altruistic acts can be easily explained by the selfish gene theory of evolution usually stop short at examining forces at play beyond the human animal. The idea that there may be some higher intelligence influencing human morality is rarely discussed. When it is, there is often vehement opposition, as in another of Dawkins’ books entitled The God Delusion

Scientist and philosopher Albert Einstein took a more mature attitude when he wrote that the idea of God was the "most difficult in the world"—a question that could not be answered "simply with yes or no." He conceded that, "the problem involved is too vast for our limited minds." As could be expected, Einstein was adamantly against the anthropomorphic idea of a God that took human form and favoured one religion over another. This sensible stance was often taken out of context to paint him as an atheist rather than agnostic. 

To this writer, the modern scientific tendency to ignore or even attack the idea of a higher intelligence is a strange one. There is no argument that our reality exists in a system of nested hierarchies. Within the genes are molecules, which are composed of atoms, which are made of quarks and down past what can be observed. Going up, in the other direction, humans comprise communities, which are nested in nations, which in turn make up global society, all of which affect our behavior. 

Beyond this it is a given that the physical systems continue. The earth lives within our solar system, enclosed in our galaxy, nested in a universe of many galaxies, and so on beyond what we can observe. Information flows through all levels, from the largest to the smallest. Humans, along with the rest of the planet, are being constantly bombarded by and exchanging atoms with extraterrestrial rays from near and far. Yet many scientists continue to ridicule the idea that this interchange of atoms, and likely other forms of energy and matter, can contain any information that can have an effect on human behavior. Yet at the lowest, simplest level of the heavens, it has been documented there is correlation between the phases of the moon and human behaviour.

Biologist Lynn Margulis is one of many scientists arguing for a more inclusive definition of consciousness and intelligence. She writes: “Not just animals are conscious but every organized being is conscious. In the simplest sense, consciousness is awareness of the outside world”. It is relatively easy to study and understand systems that operate at a lower level of intelligence than us. In studying the ultimate hierarchy, Einstein is correct "the problem involved is too vast for our limited minds.” However, we can look up that path, no doubt guided somewhat by that which flows down to meet us, aware that “natural selection operates in different ways at a series of different levels.”

Intelligent design is a nascent discipline working on how cognition and awareness extends to higher, more complex systems. There are strong arguments made that it is highly improbable the speed and complexity of evolution operates from simply blind variation and retentive selection; that, inexplicably, the environmental effects stop at that which we can observe. 

It is improbable to the point of impossible for all intents and purposes that it is simply a coincidence that cognition and awareness stops at the highest level we can observe it at. Such close mindedness has occurred through the ages. The earth was flat, when it could only be observed from the ground,our galaxy was the entire universe, when early telescopes could only observe that far, atoms were held to be the smallest element, before quarks could be observed and so on. The scientific concepts of most probable and pattern recognition would have eliminated these previous errors and should dispel this limitation tendency once and for all.

Organized religions can drag things back to the bestial by claiming to be an exclusive gateway and holding all religious writings to be error free, even though they were transcribed by fallible humans. However, the charge that religions cause wars would be more accurately stated as a lack of true religion causes wars. Early human tribes aped chimpanzee bands in routinely engaging in genocidal combat over territory, long before any organized religion existed. The bloodiest wars in history had Christian religion against Christian religion. In short, the alpha ape selfish gene can take on religious trappings. 

Any individual within an organized religion that primarily promotes the essence of the golden rule common to major religions cannot but help be a step in the right direction. The current attack on organized religions is misguided. It is wrong to attack an individual’s belief system when they are not infringing on your rights, are striving for morality personally and often doing good works for the community. Newer religions are often vilified as they can attract the enmity of both anti-religionists and establishment religions, but the same criteria apply. An interesting take on the duality of people is held by the World Transformation Movement. They aver that all our problems result from the conflict between our instincts and our intellect, which developed along with our consciousness. The biblical Tree of Knowledge, where Adam and Eve eat the apple, is held to be an analogy of our evolving consciousness and ego. Instinct vs intellect is an oversimplification of the exceedingly complex interplay of our past and present motivators, where sometimes our intellect can actually align with our instincts. 

 

One of the more powerful and interesting motivators to come out of the development of the ego is the fear of death. It is held we are the only such animal to have knowledge of this.  As spiritual author Eckhart Tolle relates: “Fear seems to have many causes. Fear of loss, fear of failure, fear of being hurt, and so on, but ultimately all fear is the ego's fear of death, of annihilation. To the ego, death is always just around the corner. In this mind-identified state, fear of death affects every aspect of your life.”


The Just Third Way takes a multi faith approach, which includes people of good faith who do not belong or take active part in any organized religion, along with those that do. There Core Values are as follows:

 

There is an ultimate Source of all creation and of all universal and absolute values such as Truth, Beauty, Love and Justice, which represent the highest ends of human actions. Many people call this Source, God.

  •  Nothing should stand between God and the human person.
  • There is a hierarchy of human work: The highest form of work is perfecting the social order to elevate each person in his or her relationship to God. The lowest but most urgent form of work is for sheer personal survival.
  • In interacting with nature to promote one's own perfection, every person must respect the rest of creation. Each human being, a steward of nature, remains responsible for conserving natural forms of existence, each of which is interdependent and shares the same divine origin with humanity.
  • Under the ultimate sovereignty of God, all sovereignty in the social order begins with the human person—not institutions including the family, the State, organized religion, the business corporation, the labor union, or academia.
  • The essential means to achieve the sovereignty of the person include such inalienable human rights as the right to life, liberty, and access to productive property and free markets, equality of opportunity, and the secret ballot. These rights—including the rights of property—are not ultimate ends in themselves, but they are intermediate ends or fundamental means to enable each person to pursue Truth, Beauty, Love and Justice.
  • People create tools, shaped from the resources and energies of nature, to support the economic and social sovereignty of the person. Through private property ownership, each person can become master of the technology needed to realize his or her fullest human potential and dignity.
  • People also create and maintain social institutions as highly specialized "invisible tools" designed to serve highly specialized social functions within a just social order. Institutions, as organized expressions of society's values and goals, largely determine the quality of each person's individual and social life. As historical creations of humanity carrying within themselves the wounds of history, institutions are continually in need of healing and perfecting.
  • The highest responsibility of each person is to pursue absolute values and to promote economic and social justice in his or her personal life and all associations with others.