Left Out in the Rain: John Castel for Father’s Day

Source: Left Out in the Rain.

   I am trying to re-blog this beautiful piece again for Fathers Day. My Father is still alive, and I just walked two miles to call him from the phone at the country store. He now assures me I could not get into Canada because the police have my numbers, and it seems now that he is the one who told them what the Librarian’s assistant at Northville Public Library told him, with assurance, that I was “Schizophrenic,” because I reported to her a death threat that I received on the internet, and told her my best guess as to why I had received it. All Trump supporters know, because the trustworthy Vlad Putin has said, anyone talking Trump-Russian collusion is “Crazy’ and “Dangerous.” Where have I heard those words before? The library, my father, my uncle and my sister, who is charged with perjury, are all quite liable, though there is no way to hold anyone accountable, for slander and perjury, if one is poor. “Am I getting help?” my father asks, and I ask are you getting help? All that nice help available, “professional,” Expert,” like the help they gave Rosalie Kennedy, Lobotomies for their convenience, and you’re not gettin’ any? They did me more harm than just about anything that has ever happened to me in my life.” Ya, what happened when you all sent me to the “psychologist” in High school, for yelling at a firetruck? The Vice principle, Barbara Campbell, she was going fix me early, there in ninth grade, because they have knowledge, and are “professions,” paid to know and do such things to people.”Next time you want to help me like that, just don’t.” “Maybe next year by Father’s Day I’ll have a phone.”

  What impenetrable ignorance! What are the assumptions? There are no such thing as death threats? Trump is surely a righteous fellow? Our psychology is based on scientific knowledge? where shall we start? But speech assumes that truth and justice are these issue, while these have decided that it is rather power that will be the issue. These people literally do not know what they are saying, but are willing to act with the gravest consequences for another without the slightest self-examination. They did not need Socrates. They already knew. They already have certain knowledge, so it is only a question of power-Tyranny. I am forbid, of course, speech to explain or unravel any of the false assumptions at the root of my family members joining to have me committed on perjurous charges, demonstrably intentional lies. They had to say I was “dangerous,” in order to force me to get “help,” so they did. I am the least “dangerous ” person anyone knows and this might occur to anyone with the slightest reflection. They have disregarded perjury, and their delusions are the only delusions doing any harm, and I the only one harmed. You see why I wanted to move to Canada? Thanks, dad, for making that too impossible. This is tyranny, and these the effects of tyranny when it takes hold in a nation. Go on, plug your ears like a four year old. When I take over your life and liberty and harm you on the basis of my delusions of knowledge which I refuse to examine, you have me get some “help.” Till then, if you can’t help me, leave me the f alone, as our fundamental law- which you have never cared to read let alone study and consider-requires you to do.

   Someone told my father something like, Oh, that is a sign of “mental illness,” that they deny they “have” it and need “help.” Lets see, this means that those who are not ill deny it, and those who are ill deny it, and then there are those who admit it, like “i have bipolar disorder…” as though they or some doctor even knew what that meant. That means that literally everyone is mentally ill and needs to be drugged!! I was told this by a worker at Promedica. She had given a speech saying that literally everyone needs psychiatric drugs. She later denied saying it, but I heard her ague this, just before I walked out. Perhaps a truth serum is in order.

   These slanders, which apparently began with a Librarian and whoever told the librarian to say that, my Uncle and whatever Trumpsters helped him, my sister who is always up for bilious shadow fighting, whom they used, and perhaps my mother, for whom I care, and who becomes angry if I try to explain the simplest things. They have endangered me now three times especially, when I was considered a “danger” by police and might have been shot by the smallest error, such as holding a coffee cup. No one would be charged, and no one will be charged if they use the police to murder me- a petty fancy way to cay out a death threat, now fashionable in the Philippines- my fault for knowing it and caring, “abnormal,” since no one else knows or cares. Justice is abnormal, as is the examined life. No one can say what it is I have done wrong: I have spoke, and they did not like what I said. I have said not a single thing that is not true, nor a single thing I do not have a PERFECT right to say. Thanks, family.

   Our generations are broken, in part by this slander and the stigma which makes others assume that if someone said such a thing it must be true. And they do not care, literally, if I am shot or receive a chemical lobotomy for political opinions.

   Thanks Senator Stabenow, because I presented her plenty of reason to raise a question regarding a certain executive agency. And I have it on report of an official, one who knows: his son works now for the CIA: “They do that,” he said. Now I believe they do that. They do whatever they want, especially to hide their own crimes, because there is no oversight, and anyone who tries to whistle blow or hold them to account, even for using women or love in spying on a student who refused to join the CIA, So check and see if they did that to me, and issued a death threat because I raised the question. What? We have certain knowledge that all who say such things are, what did Putin say, “Crazy,””Dangerous.” Check and see if they did that to you, then.

My crime is to study politics in the USA, the freest nation that ever was, and perhaps to know and speak. For this, they have destroyed any semblance of family life for me, and there is no recourse: It is fine with everyone, like Flint drinking water.

Leo Strauss on Solitude

…the philosopher cannot possibly desire to rule. His only demand on the political men is that they leave him alone…(p.207)

   That’s why I yell at my cats- even the “gentleman,” Mr. Black, my “best animal,” “Leave me alone!” If I were a true and full philosopher, I would likely never yell (and they would never listen (Republic, opening), though they do not anyway). And that’s why Justice Black (or Frankfurter?) said, “the right to be left alone is the right most prized by civilized man,” and why the U.S. Declaration, setting rights above duties, is so excellent.* It allows for the Holy Spirit: it is the house without a roof, open to the sky. All men (universal sense, which of course includes women, not of course, qua women, but qua men) have the faculty developed in the philosopher: The philosopher embodies and shows the excellence of man, hence, “all men are created equal-” equally endowed with rights, as Lincoln explains in his speech on Dred Scott. So here, Strauss continues,

   …The philosopher cannot lead an absolutely solitary life because legitimate “subjective certainty” and the “subjective certainty” of the lunatic are indistinguishable. Genuine certainty must be “inter-subjective.” The classics were fully aware of the essential weakness of the mind of the individual. Hence, their teaching about friendship: the philosopher is a philosopher in need of friends.

                                                                                      On Tyranny, p. 208

Tyrants, of course, cannot have friends.

  It is irony itself that the tyrant is surrounded by flatterers and bigger and smaller fish. Some he depends upon to mirror his prestige, while others he depends upon for safety. Meanwhile, the philosopher must hide away in the woods like Merlin to keep mankind from tearing themselves to shreds if they encounter him, who is by nature a gadfly.

   The philosopher too is one of the many, a citizen like any other, with the peculiar advantage that he is one of the few who can speak. There are very few substantial letters to congresspersons, amplifying the voice of those among the people that are able to speak of things that mater. Most, of course, cannot.

   Athens killed Socrates the Philosopher, and Plato and Xenophon wrote Apologies of Socrates, arguing of course that this should not have occurred. Xenophon wrote that far from being punished for not believing in the gods of the city and for corrupting the youth, Socrates was deserving of honor. Socrates, required to tell the truth because he is in court, said he deserved free meals in the Prytanium like an Olympic victor.

   Honor, which the philosopher does not seek for its own sake, in the sense of recognition, is needed for his own protection. It is also good for men to look to and esteem things truly honorable (Leo Paul S. de Alvarez).

   Had Athens honored rather than judicially murdered Socrates the philosopher, Greece might have become an autocthonous nation, more than a match for Persia, and avoided the Imperialism of Alexander that destroyed Greek liberty .

   But you see that since the madman and the philosopher are indistinguishable to the folks in the neighborhood, many things follow. The Constitution supersedes the “Michigan Mental Health Code,” which is unconstitutional when it seizes a man for mere speech because others are deluded and self-interested or imagine him a danger, and act upon this delusion rather than allow him to explain. And the case is important enough to pursue to the ends of the earth. They live like slaves because they fear death, and like the Miller in Grimm’s goat story, will do things so base as to destroy the value of their having lived at all. It is no grave dishonor to be considered mad, nor to lose all one’s friends as Odysseus did while having done or said not a single thing wrong. They could not restrain themselves from the cattle of Helios, or, their ignoble self interest proves them incapable of philosophy. But then Odysseus sees, and gets to see Nausikka.

   This leaves open the possibility that there was no outside influence in what caused my family- people I have known for fifty years- to hurt me so badly I will likely never be reconciled. “…But a sin against the Holy Spirit…” And what do you think the context indicates He is talking about?

Note* So long as one does not violate the rights of another, “society” is required by our fundamental law to at least leave him alone.

Re-vote Revived! Supreme Court Asked Again to Void 2016 Election Due to Russian Interference

This is copied from the legal strategy section of the Our Case category in the menu of Re-Vote 2017:

“Educate and inform the whole mass of the people… They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty.”

            ~ Thomas Jefferson

The theories upon which we base our Petition for Writ of Mandamus are:

  • Fraud was perpetrated against the American People and theFederal Government,
    such that the election was void ab initio.
  • Peoples’ right to vote was diluted or nullified and violated their fundamental and basic rights under the Constitution.
  • Rights to due process were violated.
  • Article IV, Section 4 of the Constitution was violated when we were invaded by the actions of the Russians.
  • Cyber invasions constitute one means by which the United States Army and the United States Navy recruit.
  • The occupant of the Oval Office, or his agents, acted in collusion with the Russians.
  • The Legislative and Executive branches were compromised and only the judicial branch is an effective source of remedy.

You can read our Petition for Writ of Mandamus, now assigned docket #16-1464 at the Supreme Court here:



We have posted a separate copy of our Petition for Writ of Mandamus with notes written by our core team.  We’re calling it the Citizen’s Guide to our Petition for Writ of Mandamus because we have tried to make it easy to understand the legalese.  You can take a look here:


This is copied from the Media page of the Re-Vote website, so the links and videos do not work, but go there-MM

a Writ of Mandamus



Supreme Court Advances Lawsuit to Nullify Trump Administration


by Maya M.
Democratic Moms

The Trump administration has gotten its first heartbreak from the Resistance. The nightmare is ending, and the political gladiators have stepped out to make sure that they fight to the finish.

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has defiled Trump as it advanced a case that might kick the entire Republicans out of the White House. Trump would be battling for his life as SCOTUS gets ready on March 17 for the early stages of hearing this dared case called Blumenthal vs. U.S.

If this case is successful, Trump and his ‘boys’ would be leaving the presidency. There is no doubt that cases at the Supreme Court are complex and require steps that must be conquered before a decision is taken.

It is vital that the puzzle is carefully understood bit by bit. In the Constitution, the basis for this case is referred to as the “Guarantee Clause.” the government would be tasked by this clause in ensuring that America is safe from terrorism.

Attorneys are going to argue fiercely that the 2016 election was invaded by the Russians. Thus, there should be a nullification of the entire election as it has violated the country’s Constitution. You should be aware that the hearing of the case on March 17th is not going to be a complete case. It is the Special Master who was appointed by the American court that would show off the evidence from the both sides

The justices would then decide if the hearing case was able to meet the standard that would lead to a full-blown case. If four justices out of the eight can agree that the case met the requirement, the case is good to move forward.

We are swimming in the murky waters of the American politics because the people have never gotten the opportunity to challenge an entire election that is stringently based on the Guarantee Clause, the people who brought the case might have to find another place for legal precedent.

If the legal precedent is to be achieved, the citizens cited cases that came from both Ukraine and Austria in which revotes were needed after a decision has been reached. The irony to this presentation is that Ukraine may be vital in overturning the Russian government.

Donna Soodalter-Toman, Nancy Goodman, and Diane Blumstein were the citizens who brought the matter to the courts. The lower courts first saw the case and stated that it was a “novel constitutional question.” But, they ended the matter by saying that it was better left in the hands of another government arm, like FBI, to decide if there was a significant role that Russians played in the election.

The Obama administration in a response released information in which it was seen that 17 executive agencies all accepted that there was Russia interference in electing Trump. Since the lower court decided on this matter, more evidence has been revealed that Trump got involved with the Russians. The resignation of Michael Flynn is one of the examples.

The first thing we have to do is to support the brave women who brought the case to the Supreme Court.

Occupy Democrats Interview




Episode 1 of OD Political Radio featured an interview with members of Revote 2017, their lawyer, and the petitioners asking the Supreme Court to nullify the 2016 election results. The original OD story is from February:

Occupy Democrats

Rock Commentaries: “Anastasia Screamed in Vain”


Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna
Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna Crisco edit letters removed.jpg

Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna, c. 1914

   The Stones “Sympathy for the Devil” is profound for its knowledge of the places in history that are especially influenced by the diabolical, and, as it seems to me, not in the least Satanic, but the opposite.

   After the murder of Anastasia, he “Watched with glee while your kings and queens fought for ten decades for the gods they made.” The Centennial of the Communist revolution is indeed approaching. Here is a section from Wikipedia on the murder of the family of Czar Nicholas that begins a historical motion leading to Vladimir Putin:

Captivity and death

Grand Duchesses Maria and Anastasia making faces for the camera in Tsarskoye Selo, around 1917.

   After the Bolshevik revolution in October 1917, Russia quickly disintegrated into civil war. Negotiations for the release of the Romanovs between their Bolshevik (commonly referred to as ‘Reds’) captors and their extended family, many of whom were prominent members of the royal houses of Europe, stalled.[50] As the Whites (anti-Bolshevik forces, although not necessarily supportive of the Tsar) advanced toward Yekaterinburg, the Reds were in a precarious situation. The Reds knew Yekaterinburg would fall to the better manned and equipped White Army. When the Whites reached Yekaterinburg, the imperial family had simply disappeared. The most widely accepted account was that the family had been murdered. This was due to an investigation by White Army investigator Nicholas Sokolov, who came to the conclusion based on items that had belonged to the family being found thrown down a mine shaft at Ganina Yama.[51]

The “Yurovsky Note”, an account of the event filed by Yurovsky to his Bolshevik superiors following the killings, was found in 1989 and detailed in Edvard Radzinsky‘s 1992 book, The Last Tsar. According to the note, on the night of the deaths the family was awakened and told to dress. They were told they were being moved to a new location to ensure their safety in anticipation of the violence that might ensue when the White Army reached Yekaterinburg. Once dressed, the family and the small circle of servants who had remained with them were herded into a small room in the house’s sub-basement and told to wait. Alexandra and Alexei sat in chairs provided by guards at the Empress’s request. After several minutes, the guards entered the room, led by Yurovsky, who quickly informed the Tsar and his family that they were to be executed. The Tsar had time to say only “What?” and turn to his family before he was killed by several bullets to the chest (not, as is commonly stated, to the head; his skull, recovered in 1991, bears no bullet wounds).[52] The Tsarina and her daughter Olga tried to make the sign of the cross, but were killed in the initial volley of bullets fired by the executioners. The rest of the Imperial retinue were shot in short order, with the exception of Anna Demidova, Alexandra’s maid. Demidova survived the initial onslaught, but was quickly murdered against the back wall of the basement, stabbed to death while trying to defend herself with a small pillow she had carried into the sub-basement that was filled with precious gems and jewels.[53]

Grand Duchesses Tatiana and Anastasia and the dog Ortino in captivity at Tsarskoe Selo in the spring of 1917

   The “Yurovsky Note” further reported that once the thick smoke that had filled the room from so many weapons being fired in such close proximity cleared, it was discovered that the executioners’ bullets had ricocheted off the corsets of two or three of the Grand Duchesses. The executioners later came to find out that this was because the family’s crown jewels and diamonds had been sewn inside the linings of the corsets to hide them from their captors. The corsets thus served as a form of “armor” against the bullets. Anastasia and Maria were said to have crouched up against a wall, covering their heads in terror, until they were shot down by bullets, recalled Yurovsky. However, another guard, Peter Ermakov, told his wife that Anastasia had been finished off with bayonets. As the bodies were carried out, one or more of the girls cried out, and were clubbed on the back of the head, wrote Yurovsky.[51]

Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia (RussianАнастаси́я Никола́евна Рома́новаtr. Anastasíya Nikoláyeva Románova; 18 June [O.S. 5 June] 1901 – 17 July 1918) was the youngest daughter of Tsar Nicholas II, the last sovereign of Imperial Russia, and his wife, Tsarina Alexandra Feodorovna.

Anastasia was the younger sister of Grand Duchesses OlgaTatiana, and Maria, and was the elder sister of Alexei Nikolaevich, Tsarevich of Russia. She was murdered with her family in an extrajudicial killing by members of the Cheka, the Bolshevik secret police, at Yekaterinburg on 17 July 1918.

Persistent rumors of her possible escape circulated after her death, fueled by the fact that the location of her burial was unknown during the decades of Communist rule. The mass grave near Yekaterinburg which held the remains of the Tsar, his wife, and three of their daughters was revealed in 1991, and the bodies of Alexei Nikolaevich and the remaining daughter—either Anastasia or her older sister Maria—were discovered in 2007. Her possible survival has been conclusively disproved. Forensic analysis and DNA testing confirmed that the remains are those of the imperial family, showing that all four grand duchesses were killed in 1918.[1][2] Several women falsely claimed to have been Anastasia; the best known impostor is Anna Anderson. Anderson’s body was cremated upon her death in 1984, but DNA testing in 1994 on available pieces of Anderson’s tissue and hair showed no relation to the DNA of the Romanov family.[3]

Free Speech? Use Mirror

   Now that the Trumpsters are being accused of putting an end to the Fist Amendment protection of free speech by control of the media, they are beginning to scream free speech for Fascism. The attempt is to nullify every true accusation by a reverse accusation, then the stupid, Oxy-stupored Americans just cannot tell where the truth lies, and really do not care so long as one pays them. Promise “Gender equality in the new fascism,” parade a bunch of female Trump-Putin supporters, and there will be no more opposition. America may have become simply too stupid to retain liberty.

   We insist that government defend genuine free speech immediately by looking into allegations of the control of the media and prosecuting those, for example, who have attacked me. We need a Congressional investigation of Twitter, and we need to regain control of the executive branch, which directs inquiry. When someone reports a death threat, government may not simply say they are crazy and ignore it, or attack them if they persist. It is the one delivering a death threat that has committed assault, and the one receiving the treat that is assaulted. We cannot allow the Trumpsters to accuse the one receiving a death threat of making a death threat. Truth is truth, and our nation is at stake if we allow this fraud to continue. If you are seriously confused, or paid to be, use the mirror.

Fools, whores, slaves and murderers.

The fools are genuinely duped, as are many Christians and partisan Republicans.

The whores are paid to pervert truth, and do not see what is at stake.

The slaves are instruments of action, serving from fear.

Men who do not believe that murder is wrong are controlling the executive branch and directing the rising fascism.

Revote Constitutional Decision

   The idea that the Supreme Court cannot void the corrupted election of 2016 is absurd. The circumstance is unprecedented, and so of course the decision will lack precedent. We hold that a foreign government, namely Russia, was invited to interfere with the voters themselves, though fake news and other means targeted by the use of data collected by the new spy-marketing system, though the internet. The idea that the court has no power to secure elections from violence, intimidation, corruption or fraud is as startling as the idea that congress has no such power. Presented with evidence that a foreign power was invited to interfere decisively in the 2016 election and did so, we ask the court to void the election and order a re-vote with precautions against such interference, as required by Article IV of the U.S. Constitution.

Leo Strauss on Classical and Modern Tyranny

   Let us begin to get at the distinction between ancient and contemporary tyranny.

Leo Strauss, who saw the days of Hitler, writes (On Tyranny, Introduction, pp. 21-23):

Tyranny is a danger coeval with political life. The analysis of tyranny is therefore as old as political life itself…

..when we were bought face to face with tyranny- with a kind of tyranny that surpassed the boldest imagination of the most powerful thinkers of the past- our political science failed to recognize it.

…many of our contemporaries were relieved when they discovered in the pages in which Plato and other classical thinkers seemed to have interpreted for us the horrors of the twentieth century…

Not much observation and reflection is needed to realize that there is an essential difference between the tyranny analyzed by the classics and that of our age. In contradistinction to classical tyranny, present day tyranny has at its disposal “technology” as well as “ideologies; more generally expressed, it presupposes the existence of a particular interpretation, or kind of science….science was not meant to be applied to the conquest of nature or to be popularized and diffused…science,”

…one cannot understand modern tyranny…before one has understood the elementary and in as sense natural form of tyranny which is pre-modern tyranny…

   It is no accident that present-day political science has failed to gasp tyranny as it really is. Our political science is haunted by the belief that “value judgments” are inadmissible in scientific considerations, and to call a regime tyrannical amounts to pronouncing a “value judgment.” The political scientist who accepts this view of science will speak of the “mass state,” of dictatorship, of totalitarianism, of “authoritarianism, and so on… One cannot overcome this limitation without reflecting on the origin of present day political science. Present day political science traces its origin to Machiavelli…Machiavelli’s Prince (as distinguished from his Discourses on Livy) is characterized by the deliberate indifference to the distinction between King and tyrant; The Prince presupposes the tacit rejection of that traditional distinction.

   If the good is most essential, one cannot have scientific knowledge, especially of political things, without the good.

   Prior to Socrates, among the pre-Socratics, three forms of government were distinguished, democracy, aristocracy and monarchy, as in Herodotus. (Demo-cracy is literally the strength or kratos of the people, the demos; aristo-cracy when the best are stronger, and mon-archy the primacy of one.) Then, after natural philosophy became a known explanation of causes, people noticed that the tyrants of days present were different from the ancient kings, the best men different from the oligarchs, and democracy has barely been tried. In order to get the many to aim at the common good, Aristotle provides the “middle class” regime, giving the many and the few a constitution by which they might arrive at the common good by self interest in the assembly, despairing of the ability of the many to aim at the common good, rather than fleece the rich. Aristotle arrives at six forms, three legitimate and three illegitimate, depending upon whether the regime aims at the common good or rather the advantage of the ruling element. It is Socrates and Socratic philosophy that makes explicit the distinction between Kings and tyrants. Even for Sophocles, Oedipus “Rex” is also called “tyrannous.” Aristotle spells out the distinction: The rule of one man or monarchy that aims at the common good is royal, while the one aiming in rule at his own interests is a tyrant.

   In Xenophon’s Hiero, Simonides shows a tyrant, Hiero, how he might exercise his rule so as to become happy, avoiding the defects and occupational hazards of the tyrant’s life- where security and peace cannot be achieved. Gangsters too think they are not free to leave their life of crime, unlike a free man. Simonides gives Hiero a glimpse of the happiness of kingship.

   I am amazed that no movie writer has tried to film the adventures of Dion and Plato in Syracuse. And no drama college has tried to enact the Trial and Death of Socrates. [Maybe I’ll do it, after I write my comedy of the Toledo war- a historical comedy that writes itself.* See Note 1 below.]

   Science and ideology are what makes modern tyranny different from classical tyranny. As we are seeing, the internet has made Orwellian tyranny possible, and the people hardly notice, or pretend from fear not to notice. But the crucial distinction of “twentieth century totalitarianism” is ideology. The two are fascism on the “right,” and communism on the left, responsible for the deaths of some one hundred million of their own citizens when no war was occurring, not to mention the countless deaths caused in wars seeking to impose and prevent the modern horror. What is today being called “nationalism,” in contrast with “globalism,” is fascism, based on the hatred according to race, rather than economic class. The first regime based explicitly on race was the American South, and the KKK emerged to salute its defeated flag.

   Tyrannical characters of the classic sort- in the classic meaning of the word tyranny as an order of soul- are enlisted in support of these ideological tyrannies, but these may have barely a thought, let alone an idea, in their heads. That the forms of regime are based on orders of soul is a principle explained in Plato’s Republic, especially in Books III and VIII. The modern ideologies behind the tyrannies based upon race and class, and now religion, are intellectual perversions. These deny that murder is wrong, striking at the rational essence of man, but their politics is a projection of a diabolical delusion: a perversion of the imagination- a faculty intended for the perception of the best soul and the best regime. The garden variety tyrant, those seeking their own wealth and power at the expense of the city, cannot even imagine that the intellectual perversions exist, and indeed these do not know what they are in for (though it is, we might say, in their “unconscious” mind). The tyrant murders due to fear for his own security. Plato describes this crossing of a boundary or limit between the human and the bestial in the image of the transformation of the werewolf. But, we hold, in order to understand the modern ideological tyrannies, one needs to consider certain things found in Jung and Christianity. These tyrannies would not be possible, arising out of German philosophy, were it not for the Medieval world and the void in the modern imagination, left at the destruction of the medieval world. Modern tyranny, and possibly Machiavellian tyranny, may be essentially anti-Biblical, and prove to be essentially anti-Christian- not that it cannot use the appearance in opinion of Christianity. That is, what these are can only be understood in light of what they reject.

   Another difference between ancient and modern tyranny is that ancient tyranny was held over a city or polis, until those following Alexander and then the Roman emperors. The nation had barely developed out of the ancient polis when Plato and Aristotle were writing.  Justice pertains to human communities, and these are first families, then tribes, then villages, then cities, townships, states and nations. There are also groups of nations, and of course a form of justice that pertains to our fellow humans as such. But modern politics is different from ancient politics in that the modern sovereignties are nations. The Greek word is ethnoi. The U. S. is different as a young nation representing all other ethnoi, but we function like France or Germany or any other grouping according to nationality. Every nationality on earth has American citizens with representation in the U.S. Congress. But modern tyranny is over nations rather than cities, and often involves the imagination of empire, and even world empire. Fascism is ideological tyranny based upon tribe or race, while communism is ideological tyranny based upon class. 

   That we have failed, on occasion to distinguish between modern tyranny and kingship of the sort described in Plato’s Republic- where the regime is over a single rare city, and communism even there is confined to the guardian class- is symptom of the same deficiency that leaves us prey to modern tyranny. For some time now it has been said that the alternatives are democracy and totalitarianism, and Plato is not a democrat. Bloom notes that democracy is the only regime outside the best that tolerates philosophy.

   In contrast with Bloom, we say that it is not utopianism as such, but a particular inversion of the Christian utopia, that is modern totalitarianism. The only thing prior to our century like it, the killing of an identifiable group in the interests of achieving a perverse utopia- is the Western Christian Inquisition. Modernity arises as a rejection of this medieval Christianity, which we say is based upon the error of mistaking the messiah for a legislator, and Christianity for a nomos or law, and it is the same even if this particular one were not the messiah. Jesus is not a legislator, but the savior, prepared for by the man-made legislations as those of Moses and Mohammed. But salvation is not similarly secured by a belief, and is not a thing man-made, but the birth in the soul of the child that is the image of God, and also the highest faculty. Hence, as Justin Martyr teaches, Socrates is quite obviously “saved,” and by the very same logos. Hence, those judged in the last judgement (Revelation 20) are judged according to what they have done. If the soul is immortal, we are stuck with ourselves and what we have become. What we can do is sacrifice in penance and turn toward God, in prayer. But the modern perverse utopias are a projection onto the political of an inversion of this penance, and so it appears that some worthwhile end can be achieved by violating the commandment forbidding murder. Hence, it is not a lack of prudence in achieving justice, but a perverted imagination of the just condition, which characterizes the Twentieth Century utopias. This cannot be understood without understanding Christianity and what has occurred, but its basis is accessible in the Socratic understanding of the intellect and imagination. One thing most needed, then, is a restoration to its proper function of the faculty of the imagination, and one sees the root of the project of Shakespeare. Plato’s Republic too replaces the Homeric poetry of ancient Greece with the study in which the regime of the city is the image through which it is possible to see the soul.


  1. See, Michigan has this whippersnapper gov’nor, kid like 21, thinks ‘es friggin’ Napoleon, see, but he turns out to be the noblest guy. And it has an Ohio guy named Two Stickney, and actual shooting battle, Ohio prisoners seducing the Michigan Judge’s daughter, everything you need….I’d have Augustus Woodward and Stevens T. Mason discussing education under the “Educational Oak,” and show the founding of our state, and the University of Michigan. And Andrew Jackson, for all hoots, gets to be the hero, firing Mason just before he sent our territory of Michigania against the fine if prudentially challenged State of Ohio in the first ground game between these two rivals. Ken Buns should help the theater guys at Chelsea, in the Purple Rose Theater, again since the comedy writes itself.


NPR Reports on Scam in Oxy-Heroin Recovery Industry: David Armstrong

   Here’s another one we, here at the CLC- saw and called months ago. While Congress blindly throws money at the Oxy-Heroin epidemic, those losing money are already into another industry. They have a lot of money to make from treatment centers that do not quite work. Trump, by the way, advocates deregulating the Oxy dealer companies, and the Russian elected Republicans are going along with it. Again, Oxy-heroine deaths are strangely higher in the swing states, according to a New Jersey Sociologist. Go figure.

   We blogged earlier about treatment centers, when I realized that myself, my mother, sister and niece could, and did, come up with a better plan than what is being implemented for treatment centers. As usual, when something seems that obvious, there is a reason it would never be put into practice. See the guest blog by Myia Blackwood in the Archives, by using “Search.”

   I am astounded by how the rehab centers are sure to be very expensive, use lots of prescription drugs and government medicine, and not quite work, delivering victims back into the Oxy-heroin system. Just don’t smoke! Cigarettes are sure to be forbidden in places more like prisons, because they are “helping” people- because they know what you need! And do not even consider how organic Marijuana might be the one most useful “drug” in recovery- it is not toxic and addictive enough, especially compared to prescription antidepressants. And they would want regulation that assure that chemicals are bought and used in grows that pay payola, and will not consider the health effects of these chemicals until years later, if our nation lasts long enough for the press to notice it has become an issue.

   America, we will not solve problems with this kind of politics. We are being destroyed by our own vices, and those who notice have their speech proscribed, media controlled. This blog is not accessible through search terms. We are just too slow, and the internet sets the corrupt 4 or 5 moves ahead of efforts to address problems.