My third diary
In algebra, which literally means 'restoration,' there is an act which maintains all properties of form though it may be substantively changed.
When observing a substantive thing, the substantive-ness is similar to other things we've experienced or know. In the case of a teacher, the substance is a person. The person can be symbolized to be doing things by any symbol. People symbolize it with words. Words are really numbers. Any number can be said to be a word. So for every number there is a word. Say we call every word in the dictionary and every word yet to be a number. The number-ness of the word is a measure. So when I say, "Believe or suffer." I'm communicating an imperative or a call to action. The measurements are understood because they relate to a master matrix of numbers whose origin is understood to be existence. But then, should I not speak truthfully and speak of non-existent things, what can I learn by doing so? That things are formal, and in my logical manipulation of non-existent things in tandem to existent things, I find a pattern. A formal property call validity. Wherein form follows for all variables, non-existent included. How else could we learn?
Now, unlike math, where you don't waste time discussing the addition of 5 on a side of an equation while balancing the 5-ness of the first side, by subtracting negative 5 from the other. This form of balancing isn't balancing. We've learned through formal logic.
When people tell you to believe that 2+2=5, on pain of death for failure to do so, it is a form of corruption so deep that to resist is all one can hope to do. How we can resist the corrupt balance is something I'll discuss another day, but will touch on here.
Officials, like mayor's and senator's are telling us they are one thing while they are another. And we as a whole can't figure out how to tell them that they aren't and that 2+2 does not equal 5. But instead it equals 4.
We abide by the constitution of the united states as the law of the land. In the constitution, a document we hallow with our trust and in our devotion to it, we ascribe duties to people to become representatives for those principles we deem necessary to the functioning of a happy and just, civilized society. Corruption of the forms of our sacred symbols in their representation in the here and now, where we are told one thing and see another requires a restoration to balance out the equations.
All that is required is to tell someone that 2+2 does not equal 5, but 4.
That this isn't the way of politics, and to somehow correct it we imbue those principles to be carried out verbatim by the representative of the principle with due process of law should violations be found infringed upon by the person of office.
The law of man, then, is like the laws of physics or the properties and axioms of math and laws of logic.
When an actor usurps the role he is cast in and acts as himself and not the role they are tasked with, his or her own principles replace those of the role's principles and people become confused. They ignore it or become angry, or laugh at the futility of it all that symbolic acts no longer signify and act on the people who watch the scene unfold. Would you vote for a liar or thief or cruel and ignorant person to hold the most sacred office we have on earth as leader of our free peoples? Any who violate, not the symbolic role, but the lawful one of our constitutions and revised statutes, will be punished to the degree that we believe or are led to believe in their guilt. This is easy enough to do. Make everyone look the other way.
This is why a person who does not wish to rule is more trustworthy than a person who does. They do not have a stake in the process of governance and are reluctant to do any of it, much less more of it that could corrupt them in their new found power as it would many who wish to rule.
Follow below.
Campbell's law stipulates that a test, like a litmus test of pH content or character, which tests something socially important - like the filling of roles whose principles must be upheld without thought of gain - will be used to disguise the nature of the corruption through the test, should there be any corruption or test.
A test, like a statement to the public or an election of a candidate where we expect a principle to be talking, much like preacher's of Christianity are meant to preach their religion, and not a person adding to a sacred text on a whim for personal gain. They speak in lieu of the principles the public knows them to exhibit and I feel as though at times they tell us things for personal power and wealth, and perhaps, darker shades of deceit. We have a responsibility to each other to demand recompense for errors done by them and the office they defiled with self aggrandizement. A responsibility that has been hindered by the officials power itself. They erode the facility and facilitation of our own political and citizen-al rights and processes through the dismantling and privatizing of the education of our children.
And should the public's acceptance of their statements and the results of election tests, regardless of the content of the statement and any possible corruption of the principles involved in the election, be used as its own reverse litmus test to conceal and bind the populace in future to the corrupt cycle shown. Where we live as blind men led by corrupt men pulling wool over our eyes, we have hope in our children and people outside of our corrupt system.
A principle we charge people to uphold as officials, while not charging them their due legal recourse for abuse and dereliction of social rite, will only lead to more corruption of the principles to the degree that it is important to the corrupter. When a man or woman grows fond of power, and steals and kills citizens through personal war, and isn't culpable to the corruption they enact on their office and the principles of that office, there can be no recourse and thus they are given the power of the office we invest with the principles and position of stature it holds. This leads to 'career' politicians who believe themselves to be the law, while witholding the recourse available to their victims. recourse is saying 2+2=4
Here we step outside of the bounds of a math equation. We are many variables now, with no role, and assume no role for ourselves.
We must balance out our own equation and discover the role we are meant for. What do we do? Do we take up the principles of citizens of a constitutionally bound society? If we do, how do we balance out the equations when the variables aren't what they seem and do not function properly?
We teach our children and each person who will listen the nature of principalities and rulers.
Again I quote the bible, not as a bible thumper, but for the statement's merit.
EPH 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.
We do not stand to the man in the judge's robe, we stand to the judge's robe.