posted on Jul, 19 2004 @ 06:33 PM
It would be good for us to sort through the good and the bad. It would be good to look objectively at our leadership and judge them.
There are in fact various groups that have done this, but most of them are simply promoting their own interests.
It is easy for the rich and the insulated to forsake the people. If your entire social circle consists of businessmen and lawyers, then you are going
to promote and develop the ideas and methods of these people.
It is not in the best interests of a NATIONAL leader to make his business entirely of the sorts that happen in boardrooms and corporate offices. The
business of a national leader is not, at any time, "business". My representatives are not businessmen. Lawyers are not good choices for moral
guides, most of the time. Those whose dealings are with money, exchanges, obscure laws and administration are not necessarily noble.
Such persons are mundane at the best, corrupt and vile at the worst, and none of them will ever acquire nobility and true leadership by wealth or
What is needed is a place to hang a crown and the jewels of civilization. We don't need a monarchy, at least not a government by a kingship. We
need worthy persons to bear the jewels and tools of our particular society IN LIEU of a king, which was the tradition WE BEGAN the presidency with
Because these things were invisble, and conceptual, even spiritual, it is easy to forget about them, and just have men bearing titles and honorary
conditions, without any of the real attire of nobilty, which is the spirit and soul of greatness.
What men qualify for this distinction? Confucious often asked the very same question. He spent many of his discussions looking for the perfect "son
We too, being civilized men, are looking for the same ones among us to lead. it is in our nature to do this, fo all nations need leadership, and all
honest men know that heaven provides such men to us from time to time.
I guess the first thing we need to do is establish a wise criterion by which to assess the current leadership, so that we manly citizens might
determine in our own minds what kind of sorts we have promoted, and what kinds of things we expect from their hire, and so forth.
Then we may consider our favorites, who have shown themselves to be resistant to the soft corruption that has descened upon the entire legislature in
the form of corporate and international monies and pressures. Our men have a sense of civil engineering, their minds are a nest of virtuous
intentions, their thoughts move to a grand scale of arcetecture, by which to build up a nation, or a dream, or a goal.
Such are the kind of men we desire. We need conductors, engineers, designers. We need pilots, captians, and explorers. We have enough coal-diggers,
of deckhands we have plenty, we have no want of salesmen.
I doubt that in a nation of 300 million souls we have been unable to find any persons sufficiently sound and wise to promote to positions of civil
leadership and communal trust. In fact, I rather firmly believe there is a whole segment of our society, many tens of thousands of men at least,
capable of considering the laws, consequences, and the general business of running the nation.
Given the quality of intelligence and the ease of communiation, the actual job of the presidency is not very difficult. We do not need any more
fixing of the system, it is fine. It is the qualities of the persons we have elected to move the wheels and direct the course. We need to have men
who are good at wise thought, wise planning, and benevolent intention. We need a good king.
We need a good king, and all his good court, and all his good captains. We cannot live long without these things, we will not endure as a peaceful