Rousseau on the Protestant Reformation

There have been a few good translations of Jean-Jacques Rousseau's last publications. They were published 1752-1764 and are Letters to Beaumont and Letters Written from the Mountain. Rousseau had some succinct sketches of the reformation history. Interestingly the reformers were then regarded as humanists. It is not too surprising that he knew Calvinism and the history having been born in Geneva.

A 2001 book (there is also a 2013 work in print) has a good, plain English translation. One may of course view the original 1764 text on line at the Princeton library among other sources. 

Examples of Rousseau's thought from the book page 154-157 (following) illustrate the continuing relevance of Rousseau's summary of the ideas of Protestant reformers, and their concept of independence and self-reliance for interpreting the scriptures rather than an ecclesiastical or government authority. Compulsory state monopoly on spiritual or even political reasoning can be a problem in authoritarian and theocratic governments including socialism and communism.

Jean-Jacques ROUSSEAU author, Letter to Beaumont, Letters Written from the Mountain, and Related Writings, C. Kelly and E.G. Grace editors. 2001

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/reviews/letter-to-beaumont-letters-written-from-the-mountain-and-related-writings-jean-jacques-rousseau/1101165266?ean=9781611682854
  
"When the Reformers separated from the Roman Church they accused it of error; and in order to correct that error at its source, they gave to Scripture a different meaning than the one the Church gave it. They were asked by what authority they thus deviated from the accepted doctrine? They said that it was by their own authority, by that of their reason. They said that since the meaning of Bible was intelligible and clear to all men in what concerned salvation, each was a competent judge of doctrine and could interpret the Bible, which was its rule, in accordance with his individual mind; that all would agree this way about the essential things, and that those upon which they could not agree were not at all essential.

Thus the individual mind is established as the sole interpreter of Scripture; thus the authority of the Church is rejected; thus each is put under his own jurisdiction for doctrine. Such are the two fundamental points of the Reform: to acknowledge the Bible as rule of one’s belief, and not to admit any other interpreter of the meaning of the Bible than oneself. Combined, these two points form the principle on which the Reformed Christians separated from the Roman Church, and they could not do not any less without falling into contradiction; for what interpretive authority could they have reserved for themselves, after having rejected that of the body of the Church?

But, it will be said, how could the Protestants have been able to unite based on such a principle? Wanting each to have his manner of thinking, how did they constitute a body against the Catholic Church? They had to do it: they united in this, that all acknowledged each of them as competent judge for himself. They tolerated and they ought to tolerate all interpretation except one, namely that which removes liberty of interpretation. Now that single interpretation which they rejected was that of the Catholics. Thus they had to proscribe in concert Rome alone, which equally proscribed all of them. The very diversity of their manners of thinking about all the rest was the common bond that united them. It was so many small States leagued against a great Power, and the general confederation of which removed nothing from the independence of each.

      The Protestant Religion is tolerant by principle; it is tolerant essentially; it is as much so as it is possible to be, since the only dogma it does not tolerate is that of intolerance. That is the insurmountable barrier that separates us from the Catholics and unites the other communions among themselves. Each one indeed views the others as being in error. But none views or ought to view that error as an obstacle to salvation."

Locke and Calvin- What Intellectual Relation?

I will give it a try.

The idea that Locke might have been much influenced by Calvin is interesting. I tend to regard the British philosophical evolution of empiricism and utilitarianism following as forming informed by Continental intellectual developments yet substantially separate. In my opinion 18th century British philosophers preponderantly developed from a Magna Carta (1215) tree-diagram outgrowth and increasing democratic rationalization for liberalism (meaning in this case liberty from absolute power or rule by Monarchs and royalty). Though many Brits of the day were protestants and informed by movements of reformed theology of which Calvin was one of the foremost, the British philosophical trend was toward empirical observation and consideration of that which is, while Calvin's deontological interpretation of scripture was occupationally of a different character.

https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hccc-worldhistory/chapter/louis-xiv-and-the-huguenots/

Christian theologians and philosophers of the reformed church did exist in a day where the separation of Church and state in Europe was amorphous at best. Royals in Britain seemed to tolerate empirical researches in philosophy and science without considering the information threatening to them politically for good reason. Continental neo-theocracy was more complex, as were the economic systems in Europe with royals only very reluctantly relinquishing any sort of right to rule. It is a great irony that Giordano Bruno attended Calvin's Academy in Geneva only later to be burned at the order of the Pope in Italy. Papal relations were more bound up with secular neo-theocratic power held by the royal houses. Britain's King James in 1603 had put down Papal religious monopoly in Britain. While Calvin and continental reformers of the church had their own issues with the Catholic Church, philosophically the development was different- and philosophers need be careful and with different considerations regarding economics than those of Britain- a nation with a far-flung materialistic empire.

Germany's great philosophical renaissance of the 18th century with Kant and Hegel (and into the 19th) with others followed German independence from the Catholic Hapsburg power to monopolize and only tolerate parsimoniously, independent philosophical researches.

Collapsology and Neo-Smartologists

With Democracy ostensibly blessed with free political choice the future is malleable and non-deterministic. There are fundamentalist collapsologists of all faiths and faithlessnesses I would guess, including pre-trib Christians. As a neo-Calvinist, Gentryist post-tribber, post-Darwinian and quantum metatheoretical transcendence optimist American my opinion is that the future can be shaped toward the optimal with intelligence rightly applied. That may appear to be lacking in politicians generally, yet one can’t have everything.

collapsology

It should be possible to stop population growth on Earth and restore the ecosphere to health, transition the economy to an ecologically long-term, sustainable footing and halt and reverse the 6th planetary mass extinction caused by human destruction of habitat. The first world is already entered into the post-industrial evolution though upgrading materials science and production as well as, unfortunately, outsourcing some dirty industries to countries like China.

It is always possible to select dystopian economic industrial and residential ensembles politically. Escapism such as unlimited space expansion hypothetically avoids the clear and present challenges on Earth. The solar system should have no more than maybe five billion souls living off-Earth anywhere in reasonably healthy places with Earth-like gravity norms. The resources of the solar system should not be relocated in mass or consumed as fast as bacterial-like growth rates can allow.

There are not religious or political reasons why the people of Earth cannot recover the ecosphere and manage it well in a non-bacterial way as God probably intended. Well, if there is a reason it is just plain, pervasive social and political stupidity.

* I disclaim being a neo-smartologist that regard humanity, except for oneself, as generally stupid. Is there enough oxygen in the atmosphere still?

Diafron and Cosmology - reading from 'Pieces of Eight'

                   I read a passage from my science fiction work.

AOC and The Dirty Dozen

I heard AOC say recently on a news sound bite (less than a paraphrase) that the 12 year number wasn’t to be taken literally. It was comparable to a Biblical comment like ‘the sheep in my flock here my voice’- not to be taken literally (that is- the saved Christians aren’t really sheep in the way that a cruel heat wave is not really a hater).

The 12 years was used to symbolize the urgency of correcting Earth ecosphere or atmospheric issues in particular that need be fixed directly or things will get much worse. They say that there is more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere than at anytime in the past 3.5 million years (415 p.p.m.), and the number is steadily rising.

Washington Gov. Inslee Seems Like Democrat's Adult Supervision Candidate

Washington State Governor Jay Inslee boosted his campaign for the Democratic nomination for President of the United States with the announcement of an eight or nine trillion dollar program to move the United States toward a non-carbon emitting infrastructure. With his qualifications and a reasonable plan (maybe the most practical so far) to create a low-carbon transportation infrastructure footprint the candidate seems like the adult supervision in a room full of pretenders.

https://thinkprogress.org/inslee-2020-campaign-climate-plan-labor-workers-jobs/

It may well be that additional programs could appear that get more bang for the buck regarding efficiency of tax dollars vs quality results of movement to zero-carbon transportation and ecological economic transition that restores ecosphere. Washington State has sales and income taxes so high that living there is fairly undesirable. It would be better to pass zoning and regulatory laws that compel low carbon ecological economics and ecospheric restoration and not increase the Federal budget. Democrats apparently haven't any such rational ideas like that in their heads.

Outlaw Forced Innoculations

Science has clearly proven the value of vaccines against illness, viruses etc. Even so it is important to prevent the government from being able to force vaccination on any citizen. The reason is plain and simple; governments cannot be trusted with one's life.

https://www.sciencealert.com/scientists-redesign-e-coli-s-genome-to-create-the-most-synthetic-life-form-yet

Vaccines can be used to kill as well as heal. In the age of designer D.N.A. and viral recombinant engineering the ability for the 1% or government co-conspirators to vaccinate people with mal-ware lethal viruses or viruses that modify behavior for the benefit of the richest is always an Existential or perhaps Utilitarian, Zoroastrian, Taoist, Hedonist, Zarathustran, Consequentialist or Empirical threat.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/no-religious-exemptions-from-vaccines-11557875456

When government can force all of the public that are poor or middle class to receive a vaccine for the strange news disease then the temptation to accomplish population reduction will challenge select government and wealthiest insider lunatics to act. The danger to the pubic is too great to ignore.

America Isn't In Danger of Being or Collapsing as an Empire

The United States is supposed to be a Republic rather than a nation with an imperial government such as own empires. One might find that communist governments own empires sometimes- China annexed Tibet and the former Soviet Union wrought power grabs wheresoever it could. In that case the Communist Party simply annexed the new lands and made them part of the nation. The enhanced nation had different classes of state units and representation.

The United States could have had an empire if it had kept the Philippines after winning it in a war from Spain. Instead that colony was gotten rid of- granted independence after just 36 years. ref https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tydings%E2%80%93McDuffie_Act

What would end in the United States would be a Republican form of government. That could happen. Eliminating the electoral college would allow dopified densely populated urban proles under the daily hate supervision of party and media corporate marionettes to yes-vote every politically correct item. It would be called democracy, although in fact it would be some kind of corporatism-socialist nominalism under an elite cadre of plutocrat directors.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-16/steel-rabbit-by-koons-sells-for-record-91-million-at-auction

The most interesting fin de siè·cle trend I have noted is the movement toward outsourcing jobs offshore while neglecting national financial competence in management (23 trillion of public debt) and letting infrastructure rot. There are additional challenges; failure to reinforce public college education for all with free tuition in order to remain competitive internationally is rivaled by needs to secure boundaries against illegal entry, resurrect ecospheric health and so forth.  Those are serious challenges yet not greater than successful nations have overcome in the past.

The general social abandonment of traditional moral values is a serious danger for that will weaken public competence regarding virtue in political management sand social relations. The threats to the United States arise from elites with global agendas, over-the-border illegal aliens by the millions, and the corrupted Democrat Party without substantively high-quality leaders.

President Obama's Race Legacy

President Obama's two terms seemed to stimulate black urban riots as a means to advance black political causes. It is challenging to justify claims that he did much for blacks besides creating a sense of entitlement to king tribal leadership.

While people have made Rosa Parks Memorial jokes about the tragic Las Vegas police video release of a black woman pushing an old white man to his death from a bus, it does give people reason to wonder what sort of changes the Democrat Party had in expropriating or redistributing retirement benefits such as Medicare from the elderly to the everyone, perhaps letting the elderly keep their diluted benefits for a while. I would guess the end game idea is to stress the social safety net to breaking and cancellation. The 1% might like that.

Democrats have problems with the 2020 election in finding qualified people with experience meaningful to the job. That's why former V.P. and Senator Joe Biden is leading; even Democrats don't want to play Russian roulette again with the well being of the nation.

A President of the United States need not be a senior government worker or bureaucrat as President Trump showed in being elected. Yet if a politicians has been in the Senate a dozen years or so he or she had to have learned something on the job about how and what a President should know. The Democrats have a slew of candidates that don't have experience in military affairs, business economics, environmental economic or International Relations. Neither should a candidate be a close relative of a prior President since a Republic or even a Democracy isn't sort of imperial.

President Obama was pretty under-qualified to be President. A very lackluster term or two in the Illinois legislature and less than a full term as a U.S. Senator. He was just fast-tracked by the Harvard people as a front yard black politicians who would do their bidding.

I doubt that a single Democrat in the Senate would have led a tax cuts for the ultra-rich fight the way President Obama did. Harvard might have liked it but the people were largely screwed. When the stock market crash of 1929-30 hit the nation the next President (F.D.R.) fixed the problem and eventually raised taxes on the rich to 90%. Keeping the tax rate high worked for the better part of half a century.

Under-qualified candidates can start wars that get millions of people killed or injured as did President Obama. President Trump has yet to start such a war, or series of wars. Instead he has focused on business when not distracted by interminable Democrat-led investigations on a hypothetical connection between himself and the Russian government. Another under-qualified Democrat in the White House could let another series of second and third world wars start and supply weapons and training for them. Sure the global warming issue is meaningful, yet panic about that make it a good political issue and is one of the few legitimate items on an agenda any mention.

Democrats need to be a little more traditional (actually a lot). They should talk about reducing public debt, securing national borders, keeping full employment while transitioning business to ecospherically synergistic and sustainable methods. They should respect families and individual rights and return marriage toward a heterosexual establishment and create a separate and new [package for homosexuals. Democrats should respect the sensibilities of others and not inevitably work to force their corrupt will upon other citizens.

The Solar Trouble With Iran

Iran has a couple of serious issues that make it a problem for free nations. I have a list somewhere of free nations lacking facial recognition systems. One may be the city-state of San Francisco that recently banned such from private use or maybe government too. It's a good place to hide out it you are an international fugitive although you might need to be homosexual.

Iran is a great location for solar power collection and UV rays for skin cancer fashions. Iran should be an Asian leader in solar power installations and electric car production. Missiles aren’t a good investment. Iranian leaders should be thinking carbon-free transportation infrastructure now.

Unfortunately it also has Muslim religion. Let me explain about Muslim religion for you godless atheists out there.

Muslim is a dumbed down amalgam of Judaeo-Christianity with the sole requirement of loyalty  to the intifadah leader,politically speaking . It has a unified mosque-state theocratic form of government that makes jihad on everyone else twice a year during Ramadan and Yom Kippur.

Muslim countries have no homosexuals. That is a good side of the political-faith in All Law. The bad side is that Muslim is a heresy that gets no followers saved; they believe in a godless hedonist secularist after-life with 99 virgins for carnal happiness and no problems of original sin following. Muhammad's strong points were not in theology.

So getting Iran to quit hating Israel and get rid of nuclear bombs and missiles to become a good western nation of computer code writers and financial related services people will be difficult. Contemporary western theories requires that all heretic, terrorist nations like Iran convert to godless homosexual corporate states that love The View and pork barrel spending.

Maybe Democrats have a plan to send Presidential candidate Pete Buttijudge to make some kind of peace accord with Iran negotiating homosexual conditions satisfying to Democrats.

In case of war along the Iran-Irac border it is certain that the U.S. military will utilize kinder, compassionate tactics that forego building bridges with opfor bodies.

Good luck to all.

U.S. Gov Should Buy Soybeans

The U.S. Government should buy millions of tons of soybeans this year for food stamp recipients. A contractor could make the soy into chewable food bars and the government would buy them. They might actually work well in school lunch programs too.

There is no better all-around food than soy except maybe peanuts so while the trade war is on and China is letting its people eat degraded meat potted products instead of healthy soy the U.S. government should try doing something practical.

The Trump administration is robbing Peter to pay Paul on the 1.6 billion for the moon budget. They shouldn't take anything from Pell grants for the U.S.A. needs educated people, and far too many poor students just can't afford college without the Pell Grants.

The moon is important of course. Maybe they will need to cut a deal with Bezos or Musk and use their moon lander.  A billion on a moon research base might be a better investment.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/voices/2019/05/14/trump-china-trade-negotiations-tariffs-soybeans-column/1141716001/

US Investors in China Deserve a Trade War

U.S. investors in China deserve a trade war. It is a kind of reality check. They need to know they are building up the main adversary of the United States in the secular world besides the Democrat Party.

For decades American business has been offshoring production to China and neglecting the United States. Politicians have cut tax on the most rich to let the Warren Buffets and Steve Jobs have more to invest in China. The idea is that they will create some work for Americans now and then while Democrats talk about a low growth economy for environmental reason whenever the Chinese rate of economic growth is between 7 and 15% annually.

The infrastructure of the United States is old and worn down. It is not at any rate forward looking for new and better things. China in many respects is forward looking with leads in electric vehicle sales and hydrogen car infrastructure.

China has been given far to great of an advantage over the United States in business. Wall Street is all-Chinese these days leaping into business partnerships and that isn't good for the United States. Fundamentally the plan in D.C. is to have a strong military to protect Wall Street 1%er profits and properties in China. 

President Trump must find negotiating with China rather irresistible. A trade war can rectify many wrongs built by the irrational exuberance of investors in China that don't consider externalities such as pollution or national security meaningful. Neither do they regard the nation's infrastructure, public debt or average wage and standard of living as greatly of concern.

It is unfortunate that President Trump is not an ecologist of some sort for the field for creating a carbon-free transportation infrastructure is ripe for exploiting in a positive sense of development. If he were to reconstruct the nation's infrastructure with a carbon-free transportation network that might actual garner enough respect that some would take his claim to making America great again seriously.

In the meanwhile the Wall Street China crew can enjoy learning the difference between investing in America and investing in China.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/13/1point2-trillion-in-stock-market-value-lost-so-far-from-trade-war-sell-off-with-more-expected.html

A Border Control Fresh Water and Hydrogen Canal Project Would Be Useful

It might be a good idea to combine three national material goals in one system of a border control canal along the sunshiny Mexican-American desert. One might cover the canals that are filled with salt water pumped up from the Pacific Ocean to Deming New Mexico. Water would flow downhill east and west from the continental divide, with numerous locks on the way.

 The covers would be honeycombed plastic-like solar voltaics electricity producers along the length of the canal. The electricity generated would be used for electrolysis to produce hydrogen and oxygen. Some of the water would evaporate under the sloped air-tight covers and slide off as fresh water into a collection canal.

The project would obstruct illegal immigration to the U.S.A., produce hydrogen, oxygen and fresh water for farming along the canal zone. The hydrogen would be condensed and delivered by pipelines to fueling stations for hydrogen vehicles along Interstates and Texas border highways.

https://www.naturalgasworld.com/natural-gas-and-the-hydrogen-economy-lng-condensed-69968

Rep Talib's Gaff Sounded Like She Gets Comfort from the Holocaust

Representative Talib's remark about Jews and the holocaust gives the appearance that she gets comfort from 6 million Jews being killed by Nazis in W.W. 2 death camps. It is comforting to her because the Jews took Palestine for-themselves after the Palestinians waged a war on the Jews because Palestinians were unwilling to share.

The insensitive remark could be taken in another way of course. Yet the Representative should not have made a remark that was a paradigmatic double entendre.

Sure Speaker Pelosi can defend the remark. I doubt that Senator Feinstein would. The Democrat party does have some cheesy characters.

https://www.businessinsider.com/pelosi-defends-rashida-tlaib-trump-holocaust-anti-semitism-2019-5

Yes Robert E. Lee Was a Traitor, Yet Who Cares Now?

A traitor wages war directly other through or means on his own country. It is a material defect in good faith required of citizens. So Robert E. Lee was in a real sense a traitor. Yet one must ask; who cares after 154 years?

The Confederacy was a collection of supremacist rebels that wanted to force their will upon the citizens of the United States. Mr. Lee was happy enough to command the military forces that sought to divide the nation if not impose slavery upon the states.

I won a game in on-line blitz chess today from a guy with a rebel flag for an icon. Then it changed to Turkish after the loss. Some people still use the symbol to throw gasoline on political fires.

Robert E. Lee’s father was a convicted land swindler. It may be that Mr. Lee had something of his father’s rakish nature about him. He seemed to pursue upward social mobility for himself at all costs, and if marrying George Washington’s adopted son’s daughter and moving into the Washington properties wasn’t enough to satisfy him, and being named to lead West Point to supervise young men with all of the pomp and formality required left him feeling somewhat impoverished in stature, the opportunity to lead a new nation like his grand-father in law George Washington must have seemed like the real thing to him at least. 

The sense of glory and destiny must have been overwhelming for Robert E. Lee. His leadership wasn’t very good. He even disobeyed his Confederate President Jeff Davis in taking his army to campaign across the Potomac expecting support from welcoming northerners that never materialized.

Facebook Should Breakup into Red and Blue Books

Facebook has gone too far in promoting unAmerican interests around the world facilitating as they have Russian advertising and invading privacy of those making Facebook their lives.

https://www.vox.com/2019/5/12/18616663/kamala-harris-cory-booker-elizabeth-warren-address-break-up-facebook

Plainly an American corporation that relies upon chat and video stuff without paying users for content should be suspect of commie pinko or extreme royal expropriative tendencies. That is why it should be broken up at least into Red Book and Blue Book with the rest being foreign Russian stuff book material.

It that doesn't work a new chpater named N.R.A. book could be formed with all kinds of cool military and hunting stuff including Tom Clancy games and righteous hunting of domestic commie subversives.

For an alternative subculture a Left-Wing Leninism page could be made for socialist utopians with unlimited access to any sort of cuddly we are lovable stuff with much hate and abuse of right wing moderate figures like Donald Trump. 

Just ideas about promoting free speech.

Credo Ecclesium; a Question of Credibility

The reformed church in removing the chaff of erroneous doctrine may have made the error of regarding its Biblical exegesis as complete or final? What if the Holy Spirit leads one to interpret Genesis as indicating an evolutionary mode implemented within the creation?  The Word may have its meaning revealed or understood when the time is correct.

Because the reformers had no concept of evolution, the interpretation along evolutionary grounds would have been improbable. For those of us that learned science at the same time as the Bible, it may be obvious.

I think the phrase of Calvin's credo in ecclesium vs credo ecclesium may be useful in understanding part of the contemporary problem of faith. People don't believe the church version of creation. It does rely on an old interpretation of scripture. Without coercion at all nor conflict of interest one may interpret Genesis within evolution parameters contingent upon the omnipotence of God for whom all things are completely malleable.

The Extra-Calvinisticum Makes Sense on Platonic Grounds

There was a difference of opinion between Lutherans and Calvinist reformers in Christology regarding The Son as the Logos, Word or Verb of God and Jesus the fully incarnate man. Kenotic theory ran of the opinion that The Son emptied himself entirely into the fleshly incarnate being of Jesus. Calvin believed there was a difference.

The difference is that The Son and Logos, Verb or Word did not entirely transfer himself into the fleshy incarnation of Jesus Christ. If he had then Jesus wouldn't have been able to experience the human experience fully as he did. The juxtaposition of nature in the eternal and heavenly with the worldly and temporal creates implicit difficulties in understanding.

With Plato's theory of forms it is easy to find a solution to the enigma. Jesus as man was like a Universal form making itself into a particular, with the difference being that the particular was the Universal in nature and being, yet limited in the capacities of the Universal as the particular. While the particular fleshy form of Jesus could live as  a man, suffer and be crucified, the fleshy form could not have the vision and perspective of the Universal form.
Jesus as the Word of God, as The Son, would keep the experience of being a man upon return to the Universal form. For Jesus though the Universal form is the being containing all possible sets or forms including Himself as a particular. Upon visiting the disciples after crucifixion and resurrection the Lord Jesus had an ambiguous form neither entirely fleshy nor entirely Universal. A mode of being neither physical and subject to the physical laws of cosmology nor in a form of heavenly non-temporal being that is a metaphysical question for humans.

The Son as the progenitor of all forms was of God, and was with God co-eternally. The Son is God yet a distinct personality-for-others. When the Son became the particular Jesus Christ the form of The Son ineluctably remained while the particular expressed its existence.

The President With the Greatest First Two Years

President Trump claimed to have the greatest first two years in office of any U.S. President. George Washington was the greatest U.S. President, although much what made him the best occurred before he took office. His unwillingness to let let the Presidential Office be more royal followed his leading the Revolutionary Army to victory. President Trump has yet to entirely secure the southern border, though he tries.

 President Trump has withstood more criticism and oppression by opponents than any former U.S.President except perhaps Abraham Lincoln. He has been a tough guy and has strengthened America against legions of those trying to weaken it. Thomas Jefferson however bought the Louisiana territory in 1803 after becoming President in 1801. That purchase made him debateably the greatest U.S. President in the first two years.

No one would mention Andrew Johnson’s purchase of Alaska yet that was not a small accomplishment either. President Trump is a business and sales guy and uses hyperbole and promotion to gain advantages politically for himself and the nation. His opponents call that lying, as if the godless, atheist, left had scruples about lying themselves.

One might consider President Reagan’s turnaround of the economy from the Carter malaise to one of vigor. If one doesn’t like Christians or Russia President Clinton’s first two years accomplished reforming the Cold War for the future in getting Yeltsin to give up Ukraine and Crimea, and burning Christians at Waco Texas, and might be their ticket. President Obama stimulated wars across North Africa and the Middle east after winning a Nobel Peace Prize and gave huge tax cuts to the rich as well as zero interest loans by the trillions to big banks so they could electronically mint trillions. Of course that pales in comparison to his later work in levering homosexual marriage on the nation through state legislatures and the Supreme Court with his judicial appointments; some might like that sort of thing.

President Eisenhower might have done the most in his first two years of anyone. The world was a three ring circus then with chaos and war ubiquitous, and modernity forced technological and scientific changes at home and abroad in economics and society. Eisenhower used the 101st Airborne to integrate schools in Little Rock Arkansas eventually. He was as much of a federalist law enforcer as Abraham Lincoln- who in his first two years had the tough luck of a challenging war and was compelled to fight against national disintegration.

President Kennedy accomplished a lot in three years before his assassination, The Apollo program might be his greatest legacy. He had failures like the Bay of Pigs too, yet I recall his challenge to all Americans to make a 50-mile hike. His expression ‘Ask not what you country can do for you but what you can do for your country’ was as inspirational as ‘when the tide comes in, all of the ships in the harbor rise.’ Kennedy was an inspirational leader.

President Trump has had a solid first two years in office. I would like someone good at ecological economics as President who is nonetheless nationalist, yet those don’t exist. The President is trying a long term rectification of China-U.S. trade that needed work to correct after the decade of U.S. business relocating there while the nation was flooded with illegal aliens etc. So the President is not exactly my idea of the best servant of the people one might find.

He did however appoint two moderately conservative judges and will continue that into a second term hopefully. If his claim to be the greatest ever in his first two years in office falls short of complete accuracy, it is at least consistent with his effort to promote everything American including himself.

Moderation in Human Space Development and Eco-Conservation

When billionaire Jeff Bezos declared the desire to expand human lifestyles into the solar system with a trillion people inhabiting every available niche and construction possible he expressed two human characteristics simultaneously. One was the honorable desire to advance technologically and explore. The second was careless, intemperate disregard of collateral damage to the ecosphere that supports life.

On Earth the ecosphere of the planet is under relentless, sustained attack and degradation from overuse. The concern of Wall Street is for profits with disregard for externalities such as the world outside profit margins. That is why moderation and temperance need return to business through regulation and reform of capitalism such that democracy could be rectified. And the citizens need look to the Democrat party for temperance and reason?

The Democrat Party today is godless and non-rational. Its leadership is incapable of coordinating and balancing its own policies. Its extremes run from Jeff Bezos the billionaire with wild extremist expansion to A.O.C.’s socialist Green New Deal to dole the people with social security and Medicare for everyone while jets are grounded and global warming remedies are forced on the nation while the rest of the world issues compensating carbon dioxide flatus in wonder.

The time frame for correcting the world’s ecosphere decline is presently ticking away. A U.N. report says a million species are threatened with extinction. Wall Street doesn’t understand the web of life and how one species supports another and actually creates a livable ecosphere. For the business people the birds and bees are nice childhood stories to inform youth on how to advance to sex, automobiles, rectilinear homes, shag carpets, social organizations and adulthood watching football. Correcting human ecospheric destruction affects that are inherent in the Human Economic Structure is beyond the ken (nel) of human social reality.

Human Economic Structure engineering is required to correct the most ancient models for human development of exploiting the environment to benefit humanity. Humanity was given the task by God of mastering the ecosphere and its wildlife rather than simple consuming it as bacteria. The H.E.S. need account for rebuilding the ecosphere and its wild denizens as well as using it for human convenience. It is as if humanity not only need enjoy the natural lawn, they need also mow, fertilize and water it.

The Earth presently has a human population of more than seven and a half billion people, and that number is sufficient to have put human survival- or at least ecospheric survival- on a negative growth trajectory. If one were to chart the ecospheric health on a graph, the ecospheric health would be inversely reflecting human population increase. That need be corrected. Human growth should stabilize yet even so the ecospheric decline need be reversed.

The Von Bezos plan for lunatic human expansion in the solar system is the traditional bacterial model of growth overcoming its growth medium. It is a reckless expansion model putting human existence into dangerous and unnecessary volatile and vulnerable condition on the edge of destruction. Moderation is what is required for human development; enlightened moderation with an advanced Human Economic System comprehensive of human economic impact on a given ecosphere.

Consuming the Earth to exhaustion before consuming the solar system to exhaustion is a bacterial business plan rather than human. Humans are about intellect differentiating them from beasts, not larger parts. A human bacterial model of exhausting Earth then exhausting the solar system before seeking new star systems to exhaust is daft and dangerous. Evolution works through natural selection. There are more losers than winners in natural selection. Formerly there were dozens of human like primates and now just one remains. The prospects of just one species representative surviving numerous environmental challenges are very poor. It is better to avoid brinksmanship with just one species rep existing.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/05/10/jeff-bezoss-new-plans-space-have-stirred-up-old-fights-science-fiction/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.94889faa5c18

Human population in the solar system should never exceed 15 billion people more or less. Sticking 20 million on Mars, terraforming Venus, placing a billion in the outer solar system is probably enough. There is no urgent need to exhaust all of the resources of the solar system. Constructing human habitats in space might be convenient to place excess Earth population and a few billion more. And those people would need to visit Earth periodically- at least one year out of five, to maintain human physiological health in Earth-specific gravity and field conditions.

Humanity has grown within a particular gravitational field strength and shape-for gravity fields may perhaps alter in shape. Often people don’t realize how dependent human form is upon the particular gravitational field of the Earth. Without it the natural growth processes of a body are themselves akin to cancer. The relationships of the body’s parts to itself are formed with gravitational governance that when removed changes the entire structural logic- even the anus as the downward terminus of the digestive tract has no gravitational forms moving food waste downward. Excrement would be upwardly mobile-perhaps toward billionaire brains.

A future scenario for human development should have patience. Evolution is done in a day-or a year. A thousand years isn’t much for evolution’s pace. Human development and adaptation to the solar system should utilize several thousand years for reasonable continuity of human thought and sentience while intellectual and physical development continues.

Earth ecospheric systems probably should carry no more than one billion souls at a time with the remainder scattered about the solar system with no more than 15 billion living about it altogether. Women no longer wish to be baby factories once they are prosperous any way. Quality over quantity is important for human development and sustainability. Spiritual growth need occur though bacterial traits remain as in the Von Bezos paradigm.

In the book of Genesis God provided information concerning human origins. Simplistic readings were sufficient in previous generations. Today however with the rise of evolutionary biology and other sciences it is useful to understand the book with deeper insight. It is fundamentally incorporative of evolution directed by God within an unknown paradigm. Since God is omnipotent he has greater control of mass and energy than would a future quantum super-computer able to treat mass and energy as items as malleable as a holographic field created by the quantum super-computer.

Human future development needs to bring the Earth to ecospheric recovery while moderately developing human habitats around the solar system that one day would be able to support total solar system population of 15 billion with just one billion enjoying the Earth at any given time.