Authored by William Robert Barber
The presumptive sympathetic is that the world’s institutions, governments, behavioral, and general motivation to act is founded on the basis of reason; inclusively, it is accepted that what is reasonable is also rational and sensible. This predetermined understanding is an a priori assumption fixed into the equation of any cognitive analysis prior to (any person, business, or institution) developing a meaningful guidance’s or plan. This ‘presumptive sympathetic’ is automatically interwoven as an accepted constant. But as with the set and drift of ocean currents, counter-presumptive influences alter the predetermined vector often casting adrift the sum that would otherwise be a logical, deductive, and factually conclusive.
I declare that the world of men and institutions are not reasonable, rational, or sensible; in fact, the contrary is more of a truism then the presumptive.
There are many, many, explanations. The natural inclination is to ask, “But why?” Why it is that reasonable, rational, and sensible do not describe nor are a part of the actions of mankind? It starts within the embryo of our creation: We humans must kill other living things in order to survive and our brain is designed to instinctively prevent our own destruction; hence violent conflict has become a human characteristic, as well as, a defining narrative of humanity. We humans are social animals and utilize such social skills to assist in our intrinsic passion to endure and survive. We are cognitively and emotionally susceptible to acting on irrational judgments that one may clinically describe as behaviorally dysfunctional.
Admittedly, since inception we humans have advanced the ideals of basic kindness, love of and for others, we humans are charitable, giving of self, and capable of creating beauty, tolerance, and appreciating the virtues of empathy. On the other hand, it took humanoids one million years to attach a sharpen rock to a stick and less than a century to develop weapons to destroy all living things on the planet. This sort of technological progress, coupled with the history of violent conflict, explicates my contention that the reasonable and rational have little to do with the world, its people, or its institutions.
Therefore, I offer the plausible deduction that, reasonable and rational, or what has heretofore been considered the presumptive basis of a founding assumption, on a stand-alone basis, is at best inadequate (as to an aggregate of facts equating to a solution) at worse a severe misalignment of reality.
“But,” exclaims the contrarian reader, “that’s why we have laws to govern society.”
“Yes,” the realist responds, exactly so.” Then the realist goes on to explain the differing between what the law decrees and what the government decides to enforce. Noting that the discretion expressed by those powerful enough to ignore the law is broad, that such discretion of enforcement feeds into the evidence that such conduct differs substantively to the meaningfulness of this nation’s constitution, the elective’s oath of office, and is in direct deference to the belief that America is a nation of laws not of men.
The realist continues: “Circumvention of the constitution is now passé, enforcement of statutory laws are so discretionary that the practice is close to (at will) abandonment. Politicians lie; spokespersons of the elected evade, political party loyalist, pundits, and representative openly distort the truth; and the media have forsaken their obligatory of, ‘just the facts.’ There is nothing reasonable, rational, or sensible about any of the preceding.
The Obama presidency is a Statist zeitgeist; a Saul Alinsky moment. A time of crony capitalism, a perfect instance of government malfeasance regarding the expenditures of surplus, a costly green energy boondoggle, a ideologically bent department of justice, an utterly stupid approach to an energy non-policy, a state department that ignored the request for security personal to protect our ambassador in Libya, and a White House, for the sake of winning an election will lie and distort the palpable in the hopes that no one will notice.”
One can clearly visualize my contention that there is nothing reasonable or rational in our world or the man running for reelection…