Long before Aristotle designated democracy the corrupt form of a Republic, the least of the three good forms of government, the Five Books of Moses dramatized the power-seeking and corrosive essence of democracy, and its danger to ‘ordinary people’ in the episode of Korach’s challenge to the authority of Moshe and Aaron (Deuteronomy 16 with a further lesson in 17). Since the entire nation was “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exodus 19:6), and “the entire assembly is holy,” Korach demanded, “why do you exalt yourselves over the congregation of the Eternal One?” (Deut. 161:3) [5]. This challenge reflected a lust for power to which Moshe responded first with humility and grief and then firmness and trust in G-d Who soon demonstrated the error of the rebel.  

 [Begin essay]  A Latina lawyer recently highlighted for me modernism’s pervasive numbing of mind. Grown rich by advocating for illegal immigrants from across our porous southern border, she lauded her work in “educating” illegal immigrants to “take advantage of their constitutional right to go to [public] school.” Could a succinct explanation that there is no such right in the Constitution; that public schools are not free, or that an illegal immigrant is a criminal gain footing on the slippery slope of such an advocate’s mind? Would it help to explain that taxes for these schools are taken from people, with or without children in these schools, often dismayed at the lack of educational and humane content in these schools? That this is a form of tyranny, kidnapping and corruption of youth?

Should one explain how medical services are swamped by insurance, lawyers, and government bureaucrats, partly by mandating “free” care to these people? Might this make a foothold by which a thought could begin to climb; explaining how wages are being driven down by a flood of cheap labor till almost all of us are serfs ruled by a class of Foundation and Corporate cadres and their scribbling and advocating servants; that illegal immigrants are creating a new middle ages of pandemics, ignorance, official bigotry, violence and tyranny? Might this peel off any layers of pc platitudes that preempt thought and poison the heart?

More likely, by the time one reached the second or third point the senses of the pod person would lock and the accusatory scream fingering one as human, a thinker and a mortal menace to “the Forces of Light” and their “group at-onement” would be emitted, cutting you like a razor and bringing varied cohorts of thought police to fix your work, wealth, and identity.  

This nightmare, reigning for forty years at least, even before the Leninist term “political correctness” became current in America is what we have grown up or grown old with. This suppression of individual thought, of the abilities to think, to bond, to relate, and, above all, to remember and be discriminating is part of the decay of the Constitutional Republic into a Democracy, the investiture of orchestrated group sentiment into official truth and reduction of humanity to a herd.

With this devolution the Executive, an ancient kind of Constitutional Monarch bound strictly by the laws of the Constitution he is required to enforce has had a small cabinet swell into a Pharaonic bureaucracy that Kafka would have found chillingly familiar.

From the cult of personality (dissent at your peril) to group preferences and “affirmative action” (State bias to destroy manliness, the family, continuity, coherence) the absurd notion that “all people are equal” has replaced the saving truth of “equality before the law” with preference neither to the rich nor the poor (Exodus 23:1-13; Leviticus 19:15). Torah stresses that justice and holiness require “correct scales, weights and measures”; fiat currency, fractional reserves and permanent seizure of poor debtors’ property are forbidden in Judaism (Leviticus 19:35-7, cf. Genesis 23:16). The modern west has utterly corrupted all these principles along with the concept of integrity on which they are based. Integrity is the essential and only root of peace [1].

With the corruption of justice to sameness, of the integral individual to the generic ‘person’ came the unisex mania incubated by Romanticism (see my previous essays) and vividly given form in the “Mao suit” – generic persons for a global human “family” whose broken, amnesiac, dwindling members will be culled by “warlocks,” “the new group of world servers” of the Hierarchy, as Alice Bailey wrote; or, more prosaically, by the World State’s proliferating SWAT teams and multinational (generic) Rapid Deployment Forces. “In the new world order” there must be a “new economic order in which all contribute to the whole…serving all men alike.” It sounds like Communism which Bailey and many western “thought leaders” have liked. Among the “fusions and certain syntheses” to be made “by a diversity of governmental methods” there will be a “Federated States of Europe, a new order in Asia, a Federal Union of the Democratic Nations [the UN] and a steady spread of the Soviet Socialist Republics” [2]. It has come to pass: the “new economic order” is taking us down in a web of overlapping “Federal Unions” mixing the elements of tyranny, oligarchy and democracy, corruptions of their true forms all modeled in the Hebrew Scriptures.

Our slide into nightmare is fully exposed in Bailey’s texts: democratic leveling, rule and “fact-creation” by an oligarchy; communism and government re-distribution in the names of “equity” and “compassion”; and her focus on the Jews as “the major racial problem” to be “solved” by “fusion with other peoples” and the abolition of Scriptural religions as Karl Marx demanded [3]. The Scriptural model, including the idea of discreet nations, justice, sober evidentiary standards, compassion and a Constitutional Republic is to be buried with the Jews and their scarcely re-established state [4].

Long before Aristotle designated democracy the corrupt form of a Republic, the least of the three good forms of government, the Five Books of Moses dramatized the power-seeking and corrosive essence of democracy, and its danger to ‘ordinary people’ in the episode of Korach’s challenge to the authority of Moshe and Aaron (Deuteronomy 16 with a further lesson in 17). Since the entire nation was “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation” (Exodus 19:6), and “the entire assembly is holy,” Korach demanded, “why do you exalt yourselves over the congregation of the Eternal One?” (Deut. 161:3) [5]. This challenge reflected a lust for power to which Moshe responded first with humility and grief and then firmness and trust in G-d Who soon demonstrated the error of the rebel.

The generations of damage and suffering that ensue when everyone follows the dictates of their heart and decides for themselves what is wrong or right (Hobbes’ “moral relativism”[6]) are mentioned and dramatized in the Book of Judges, the painfully extended time it took for Israel to establish the integral kingdom and priestly service as the Creator commanded.

The nature of a Republic, its difference from democracy, and the inclusion and readiness to learn from everyone are first set forth when Moshe’s father-in-law, Jethro joined the nation as it approached Mt. Sinai. Moshe had been receiving everyone and their questions by himself [7]. But even the wisest people are not super-human: he was growing exhausted, as he had when praying that Israel gain victory over its eternal enemy Amalek (Exodus 17:8-13) [8]. So Jethro counseled that Moshe and Israel adapt what we call representative government. What are the criteria by which men are elected to settle the questions and disagreements of people? “You be a representative of G-d…and discern from among the entire people men of accomplishment, God-fearing people, men of truth, people who disdain money and appoint them leaders over thousands, hundreds, fifties and tens…You shall judge the major matters and every minor matter they shall judge” (Exodus 18:18-22). This is an aristocracy of character and merit, usually but not always drawing from the elders.

If only our politicians and other leaders fit this pattern or we maintained this pattern of de-centralized judgment and instruction by men.

Here is the basis of a Republic, integral in its work, wealth and property supporting charity, military service and national festivals of remembrance centering on the priests who work with the people to sanctify these daily actions and keep them oriented toward the Creator; As Americans once said, “One nation under God.” And the land-based Republic, each family with its inalienable plot of land (Leviticus 25) is led by a King cautioned to have a modest household (minimal executive) and to write the words of Torah, study them and keep them by him every day (Deut. 17:14-19). This is a model but not a requirement for other nations. The model is non-imperial.

No wonder the New Feudal Hierarchs defame, distort and bury any possibility that this model might be restored, this root re-grown and flourishing anew.

Note that the model of ordered liberty literally grounded in property, in land organized around remembrance of national history, charity, and gratitude to the Creator (Deut. 26) includes Monarchy limited and ruled by the Constitution (Books of Moshe) that denote the nature of the Republic and its aristocracy of merit and character.

One thousand years after these teachings and this model was formed, Aristotle, clearly influenced by them wrote that Monarchy was the best form of polity and its corruption, Tyranny was the worst. Demonstrated countless times through human history (Alcibiades epitomized it [9]) is the fact that Tyranny and Democracy go together;  their intermediary is the oligarchy that justifies and imposes Tyranny’s dictates.

We must understand the Hellenistic view of a Tyrant. Not mainly a brutal dictator, he was a charismatic, power-hungry individual who appealed over the head of the elders, property holders and laws directly to the people and the mob, promising victories, welfare, and glory. Like the leaders of the “democracies” of Renaissance northern Italy (whom our Founders studied in order to avoid), the Tyrant sought to secure his power by lavish displays and professions of love for “the people,” arousing their appetites. They then were urged to vote their preference rather like the mobs in the Coliseum, indicating their passions reductively with thumbs up or down, yes or no, Demlican or Repricrat, Tweedle-dim or tweedle-dummer. The results were chronic civil strife, deceit, politics and assassinations.

Politics is a Greek word and concept, not a Hebrew one. Its growing preeminence has accompanied the resurgence and growth of the pagan Greek branch of the West and its suicidal attacks on its Jewish root and sloughing off of its history and people or “buds.” But “days are coming when Jacob will take root; Israel will bud and blossom and fill the face of the earth like fruit” (Deut. 32: 7-14; 33:28; Isaiah 27:6, 60:21-2).

Will it be Romney or Rodham? ‘Outsider’ Thompson or made-in-a-lab Obama, plastic, menacing, scripted and insincere who fails to secure the borders and hose out the stables of the education industry? Will the West ever relinquish its Camp David-Oslo-Road Map war process rooted in Rome, Luther, Marx, Bailey and Wells and the State imperialisms of our day now coalescing into blocks?

It’s a sign of the end that Israel, the fount and model of representative government with moral, economic, and military power vested in the people is democratic in the worst way. The government administers (it does not own) 90% of the land under a farrago of Turkish, Jordanian and British Mandatory Law, — and in defiance not only of the Creator’s deed but of actual property deeds purchased by Jews for centuries. Serving the NATO powers, the client regime will not let Jews build a shed in the heartland of the nation and imposes a crushing load of socialist regulation on buildings unless they’re built by Arabs: “affirmative action” rules there, too.

Americans are cursed by twin parties squabbling mostly over trivia so as to veil and not impede the shattering of the nation. In Israel it is even worse: people do not have their own local representatives, they must vote for a party list. The party list is selected and rank-ordered by the party boss who usually is controlled by one or more foreign interests. To secure a high and thus ‘safe’ spot on the party list, an aspiring office holder must echo the party boss’s every word. After the election, if they get a better bid or safer seat from another corporate-owned party, even one with a radically different policy, they switch. The people perish; this party-hack oligarchic democracy leads to tyranny: a puppet with a 5% approval rating serving foreign powers while the people are set up for expulsion from their property, arrest for criticizing the government’s idols and ready to be swamped by hordes of genocidally hostile immigrants.

It will take a convulsion for accountability and the Torah model of governance, private property and equal justice before the law to return. This all is predicted with riveting precision in discussions of the orally transmitted Torah. In the end of days there will be no deference: the young will not respect the old, a man’s worse enemy will be his household [wife], the peoples of the borders will be driven from their homes and the Galilee laid waste” [10]. As to change requiring convulsions, America has been in the midst of its own gathering storm for decades.

Remembrance is honor, integrity and continuity, the essence of Judaism and of America too. These qualities are precisely what the New Age, a long time coming, seeks to uproot. We live in the era of giddy forgetting, of instant gratification, judges who invent law to suit their Feudal, group-think likes and dislikes, and the rhetoric of diversity that masks ferocious intolerance (political correctness). Education has become the sandbox of fools; the Torah gives way to Newsweek and the spin zone. They say there is no truth: they indoctrinate our children to accept that there are only opinions and the opinions of the most powerful pigs are the ones that matter, so figure it out or else…

Among the many reasons that David was great was that he accepted responsibility and held himself accountable more strictly than the letter of the law required (Psalm 51; 2 Samuel 12:1-25; 13:23-19:10). Do we have any such leaders? Surely we do, but not in our public life. Our institutions, deformed by the power-mad suppress the good and “today we praise wanton sinners” (Malachi 3:14-15). Men of truth are rarely in view of most of the people. But the tower of the mighty and their World State will collapse; as Rabbi Nachman’s parable “the Flood” indicates the kingdom will be preserved by “a humble and God-fearing people” who will keep the faith when the storm surges over the land and sweeps away the covenant of lies, there and here [11].

Perhaps then there will be serious analysis of democracy, a return to the Scriptural model of an integral nation balancing its Constitutional Monarch with a decentralized Republic of merit and character enabling freedom to be proclaimed throughout the land, genuine freedom, based on every family’s inalienable plot of land from which they give portions of charity, not taxes, directly to their fellows at levels far below the imperial exactions we suffer today. Study can liberate: private property is central to national thanksgiving, personal gratitude, return and repentance. It can be done if the root is restored. 

1. The Hebrew word shaleim (“integrity” in the sense that “wholeness” is a kind of physical and moral perfection, of eternity via memory) of the root of the word shalom. The latter literally grows out of shaleim (a three-letter root) by addition of a letter (Genesis 33:18). This is the condition that Jacob achieves that makes him ready to receive the honorific name, Israel (35:10-14). Judaism is a national as well as ethical religion. Jews cannot be truly shaleim, “in the likeness of Jacob” (Deuteronomy 33:25-9, Moshe’s last words) until and unless it inhabits its entire land (Genesis 15:18; Exodus 23:31-33; Deut. 11:24). Note, the “Sea of Reeds” where Israel left Egypt are the bitter lakes and connecting tidal estuary near the present Suez Canal. Israel did not cross the Yam Adom (“Red Sea”) but the Yam Suf (“Reed Sea”). Shaleim, intact, whole, entire, one is part of the contraction that makes the name, Jerusalem.
2. With the “warlocks,” this metaphor evokes the “Eloi” in HG Wells’ Time Machine. Aquarian theosophist Alice Bailey, hierophant of “a new world order” expounded repeatedly on the inevitably approaching “synthesis” and “fusion” of humanity in an age of peace and brotherhood. This she wrote will be hastened by “the new group of world servers” that would include psychologists to “coordinate the personality” of those unwilling or incapable of the “group thinking” she held necessary for global fusion to occur. The cadres serve an extra-terrestrial hierarchy of know-it-alls who in real-life were folks like Wells, Julian Huxley, the heads of the major foundations and global institutions: new age feudal hierarchy. Bailey, “The Coming World Order,” April 1940 in Externalization of the Hierarchy (Lucis, 1957; 2001), 174-229. In “Seed Groups of the New Age” (July 1937) Bailey wrote of “the law of group progress toward the New Aquarian Age” fulfilled in “the integration of the human family” whose “newer truths can be grasped only as the result of group endeavor” and “group at-onement” that will make “the Aquarian Age the age of synthesis and light.” Thus evolves the idea of communion: cf. Euripides, The Bacchae also parodied in the “Solidarity Day Services” of Brave New World and, more grimly, in “the daily Hate” of Orwell’s 1984.  “Remember” Bailey wrote ominously in view of euthanasia and engineered impoverishment, famine and disease, “death is a cure” (ibid. 26-43). In other words, life is a disease. That’s our New Age. In regard to its feminism, the Torah states, “you shall not allow a sorceress to live,” i.e. have a livelihood, much less rule education, courts and the workplace (Exodus 22:17). Also see Hilchot Melachim, The Ways of Kings 1:5 in which Maimonides stipulates that “no woman should hold a place of high office in Israel,” a standard the West might well adopt (and modern Judaism, too). 
3. ibid. 194-5; 74-77, passim. Karl Marx’s On the Jewish Question (1843-4) asks, “How is religious opposition made impossible?” and answers, “by abolishing religion.” Luther ended his career with a tract “On the Jews and their lies” (1543), insisting, like Hadrian, that their rabbis be forbidden to teach henceforth on pain of loss of life and limb.” And he wrote “let all their synagogues be burned down” and “safe conduct on the highways abolished for them.” He too, like the Roman Church he earlier had baited “to treat him like a Jew” did ground work for Marx, Bailey and Hitler. There was a bit of arrogance and wounded pride in Luther’s genocidal text in that, like the early Mohammed he had expected the Jews to accept his new improved version of Scripture rather than remaining true to their own and their history. Their fidelity, honor and endurance he termed a “failure to learn” of “those miserable and accursed people.”
4. Luther’s position ultimately became that of the Church against whom he defined himself. “If you must talk to a Jew, remind him that his land is in ruins with his Temple and his sovereignty since Titus and Vespasian destroyed them.” This “proof,” foreseen in the Books of Moshe (Deut.28) and prophets is the main goal of the war process in our day: it reveals the Roman, secular and clerical fear of a restored Jewish Jerusalem and Israel shleimah (intact, whole).
5. In 19:6 the word “Kohanim” has the connotation of “ministers” for the entire nation of Israel at Sinai was dedicated to spreading knowledge of the Creator, His promise and merciful providence for mankind, Isaiah 2:2-4, inter alia: The Torah, Volume I (Mesorah 2001), 181. The inclusion of all the Children of Israel, past, present and future, from high to low, from tribal head and elder to proselyte and drawer of water, man and women, old and young in this inheritance and teaching mission is often stressed, e.g. Deut. 29:9-14 and 31:10-13; also Isaiah 60:21-2, a chapter which foresees what the British were obligated to do, — but did the opposite.  
6. Hobbes wrote that “whatever men desire they call ‘good’ and whatever they hate they term ‘evil.’”
7. These questions and explication which began in Exodus 12:2 are the Oral Torah, the ‘classes’ of the Jewish people in dialog with their elders, and righteous sages that was redacted and compiled by Rabbi Judah the Prince (Yehuda ha Nasi c. 110-90 CE) when persecution and murder by the Romans made oral classes nearly impossible and written records essential. The basis of the Oral Torah thus is called Mishna, “records” or “repetition.”
8. But note the physical correlative (Deut. 34:7) of a mortal life of humility (Numbers 12:3), love, service and honesty.
9. See Thucydides, The Peloponnesian War chapters 19-20, 25-6 especially. In the Symposium Plato gives Alcibiades a brief turn when he enters the feast of philosophy on love and tries to seduce Socrates.
10. Sanhedrin 93-99a, Talmud Bavli (Mesorah 1995; 2004); cf. Leviticus 19:32 on honor to elderly and sages which has been disappearing from our public life and promoted lifestyles, sparked by worship of “progress” which thus, as we have noted, is fundamentally regressive.
11. Isaiah 29:17-24: “Behold, in just a little while the Lebanon will become farmland…the meek will increase their joy and the poor among the people rejoice in the Holy One of Israel…Jacob will not be ashamed when he sees his children, My handiwork in their midst. They will sanctify the Holy One of Jacob and revere the God of Israel.” For “the covenant with death,” the “peace process” as it is called in our days will be swept away. Isaiah 28:14-22. Torah Volume II, op. cit. 1001-03
 

This entry was posted on Tuesday, November 13th, 2007 at 1:23 pm and is filed under Articles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.