The Splendor A Farewell to Cynicism   Friends Nepotism, the politics of friends only, is an enemy on itself saying: 'the splendor to us alone', putting others in the dark. Thus let's say against that: 'Better take leave of those friends using you politically to their advantage or to the advantage one-sided one may have in common, because they are of no surrender really, they're not vowed at all. Those friends constitute factually your bad character. They call themselves friends, but they are, with their preference for that one-sidedness the politicians of the lust, the unorganized as far as others are concerned, of the exclusive in stead of the inclusive, and of envy, of an odd eye, of opposition lusting for power and wishing to do to others what is done to them. Thus they don't care for whom you belong to or what you stand for with your soul, they just want your permissiveness as if you were the graceful God, your consent in selling their souls. Do not surrender to the hypocrites, with nice words but vague plans, that later so wanted stab you in the back; ultimately they just want the job & the bread on the table next to the doubtful honor and friendship depending on that they just as easy are willing to give up for it. They will with adversity mock you even for your permissiveness and personal weaknesses, and will spite you for your acting alike them. You have shown no character namely with your politics! Thus: be not so permissive with them nor with yourselves even relating to the original sins and... for a better character...forget for once about the money, ultimately it is better not to live in envy from personal attachments and desires and then atone for your bad conscience with a cowardly message of 'do it yourself, see for yourself'. Isn't it the purpose of democracy to bring together people for a balanced concept of community service, and have the money subservient to that? Therefore is it surely good advise to be cautious making friends in the political sphere, it could be in conflict with the purpose of a righteous democracy that is not based on (group)egoism and that is willing to take responsibility. Even for the rest of your social life, your family members, your private company that is true..., wouldn't they all be glad to have risen to the status of more or less democratic and diplomatic friends?' Political consciousness, the materialistic consciousness of 20st century party-politics, is all around; it is our modern time hypnosis of invalid selfreference overlooking the big picture. Especially the socially corrupted falsehood of egoism presenting the illusion that consensus wouldn't be egoism but something of God... Weren't the fascists including their politics of fear, not in agreement the same way? Your love is, politically seen, in fact there for nothing but the cause of social justice, isn't it; you might even debunk yourself in betrayal to that cause.   The Cause Is it the cause to insult others, to say that they are stupid, to prove them wrong? To prove yourself superior? The cause, we know, is to be serious, to mean it, to be sincere, to be to the principle, honest, truthful, loyal, to share and to care and such. What else would society be but the homes, offices, houses of God and downtown-businesses where we practice these fundamentals in the care for one another? Are they, those values, there for a mass that egotistical is lying, betraying, selfish and violent? We don't want that society at all! Not a society full of liars, traitors, egoists and suppressors denying each others and your life or paint the other black, demonize others, for the sake of the political argument! So we have to mean it with the truth, with loyalty, with selflessness and compassion with all living beings if we want righteous politics. And thus are we odd enough in the first place no friends anymore, we are much better now: we are devoted to the cause, dedicated. That cause tells us who we are. No longer strangers, no longer cynical with the deceit all the time with the lies of the false identity. Being of make-belief, unvowed, not confessed, with no discipline, are we then honest? Isn't it naive to even try without? What is truth not really meant: isn't that a lie! Why pretend? Isn't that the bad of ego because of which nobody believes or trusts anymore? Don't step forward if you're not that far yet! Do not pretend to be able to! You're not able if you don't want! That's the truth! Again, I, this speaker am not just your friend anymore thus...I tell it you now vowed and straight away...as a politician, a public speaker reckoning with, am I and maybe you also, there to put an end to the politician, that talking head-as-if, that is a liar, the politician that is a cheat, that greedy career monster and a violent war-mongerer. Liars need enemies, the truthful need adherents, collaborators, followers that are devoted. To them, the truthful, are people not the enemy, the competition, the threat, nay the soul-betrayed false ego is the enemy. We are always two: soul and ego, witness and the witnessed. Belief in yourself so must be belief in the soul that is our common self of truth, the false is to put ones own material interest before that of others; to believe in the physical ego and the temporary advantage only without its directive that does justice to all. Ego is just your brand of car, the color of your skin or your sex; your blue eyes! To the soul it is triviality, insignificance. The physical self is always but a part of the complete nature; never more - that is the so very necessary safeguard against brutality against the dictature of a class, of a caste-system of me better than you with everyone needed; it guarantees the modesty. The idea of being just material is the stupidity one has to overcome. What is a car without a driver: dead! What is a computer without a program: junk! What is a body without a soul: a zombie! a living corpse! There is hardware, there is software, there is body, there is soul. That's the primal duality were have to face. So the politician needs a plan like the car a driver, a plan of the soul thus properly meant that is equal to all, that takes differences as they are by nature and not the way they are taken out of their social context to a concept of power. And where is the handbook of politics? Ever spoken a politician with a handbook? No they, the materially motivated ego-politicians, have a book of incoherent laws concocted over the centuries and bookcases full of speculative philosophy about the person of authority - themselves rather - that they use as the holiness with which they are determined to break, saying be yourself to sin is normal, meanwhile concealing their selfish intent of anarchism calling that your own responsibility. What for God's sake is a society that doesn't want to care for its members, that doesn't want to be a welfare state? What else is there to do? Even the greatest sinner needs others and needs to be of some meaningful service for his self-respect if he's not a right-out criminal. 'Forget the authority and the order that does justice to everyone', do those politicians failing in consciousness in fact say, those politicians that do not know what all is required to have a good outcome. They conceal their incompetence with delusions of power, the accusing of others; isn't power the illusion of the lack thereof? What is power when all are happy? They cannot cope with the true responsibility, the self-confrontation, of leading the people, the people nicely disciplined, the people wise, the people of service, the people that help....with or without remuneration. They subscribe to no discipline was said, they are straying worse than you and I are since they lead with all that we are enmeshed in, and get paid for quarreling, they, the ego-politicians have no experience, no wisdom, as they are gone tomorrow and weren't there yesterday; they don't serve you, you must serve them they think; they do not help you; they give you money instead and then say 'sorry it is not of the value anymore you thought!' Sell them your soul, belief in egoism, or they throw you in the gutter!That's what those irresponsible madmen of materialism so pretentious in religion and philosophy plot. They, cold as ice in fact, smiling and all, pretending goodness, but meanwhile violating human rights by denying free access to the healthcare system e.g., do they as much they can, deny their responsibility for the society. 'We care only for the economy', they say, 'do not ask what the government can do for you', we are your dictators. No we are God, ask what you can do for us!' Those who said that, say that and maintain that, for the sake of the economy of a small elite, are nothing put people possessed by desire, false nobles not recognizing the obligation at all! Materialists, capitalists, communists! fundamentalists! Dictators!!!! ; they have no program really but a scheme to deceive for a career of their own; they have no vision of justice but a double tongue of make-belief. They have by themselves, if necessary, legalized criminal intentions to lie their way to the big money! They are businessman disguised as public servants. That is their program! They bend the law to protect themselves, not to care for you! You may thank them not to have destroyed all social or liberal legislation that happens to be there because of the human weakness and lust of the democracy they in fact despise, so they factually propose... You, the common people are the factual enemy they fear, and right so, one should fear the people. But practically can they in their unconscious fears only present you with an enemy living abroad as threatening strangers doing exactly the same as you all together do with nuclear energy, weapons of mass destruction and political scheming for the best position in the market. They will never tell you about the enemy of lust and anger raised and maintained thus in everyone! Would these people control themselves better than the others? Would God be a mirror for saint and demon maybe? Would God tolerate a double standard? Who would dare to presume that! So no nepotism, no false equality. Were you my friends to begin with? No and I am not your private buddy either! Nor will I be in the general interest. Without a sense of purpose, a cause, a handbook, a guideline, an example, a leader or a coherent law in respect of and value-free above all agegroups and vocations, protected against short-term legal robbers, we are hopelessly lost in conflicts of authority, in neuroses of control and in psychopathologies of illusion and crime!   Dictature and its Counterpart Let me tell you something about dictature, it is the perversion of each vocation on its own in society, it is the corruption of each class fighting for its self-respect, it is the result of losing balance in the arena of political competition. It is the ripe fruit of political struggles for power. Finally you made it with the elections..., and loaded in the heart is there then the doctrine of ones own favorite class, temporarily imposed over all other approaches, because now you've found the final trick to take office. Isn't that how the fascist came to power, isn't that how the communist has won, isn't that how the fundamentalist is so proud of being the president, isn't that how the manager of oil and peanuts, movies and star-images or broadcasting steals the show as a capitalist dictator full of illusion about his goodness? The perversion is the symptom of the false ego before mentioned. Having sold the soul in exchange for power - yes the devil promised - is the self-interest of nepotism the power of rule and is the repression, so typical for the dictature, as good as assured. Always has the dictator the madness in his head of ruling the whole world being sure of the enemy he is himself; all those communists, those capitalists, those fundamentalists and those fascists. It doesn't matter what evil fears what enmity. To the Sweet Lord may each demon slay each other demon. Kind seeks kind, the way the host is is the guest met. You, the common people though, want your houses, your jobs, your income, your children, your freedom etc. Nobody sees himself as the evil one, the dictator, the enemy, no one ever asked for the dictature, for the repression, for the war, for the competition, for the fear, for the animosity, for the paranoia, for the corruption, the loneliness, the estrangement...but still that product of ignorance, of the unenlightened heart, of the competition, of the desire to control against the rule of the other ruins the social integrity. Apparently from this perspective is a good society and good governance a matter of balance not directly assured by the democracies we have known as yet. Apparently must we try to get out of this constant hell of human imbalance and downfall into dictature and her false temporary securities... eh,.. not possible? That is the complacency of or with the dictature, and.... do the other dictatures not prove the feasibility of an alternative? Why not join hands and say 'let each class rule its own dictate within certain limits laid down in the constitution'? Why always this cramp of ego and not the one vision of the diversity of human services and disciplines? Why are we such fools of illusion and fake victories over others whose interest we do not recognize as as our own? What use are the millions in the bank when large masses of customers lack in funds because we fall short in appreciation of nonprofit workers, of volunteers, housewives, children, the elderly, the philosophers and the ones detached? Make for laborcamps and then pay them? Probably not! What is a single communist party with a compulsion for material labor only in repression of all self-critical culture? Political prisoners that will fall at your feet saying selfcorrection is a sin? Probably not! What is a military worldorder against all citizens that supposedly are evil rebels? Would they confess that to arm and resist is bad? Probably not! What if all fathers at home are priests denoting all children and women as the sinners and the weak to treat as a second class? Will they grow beards and say that sin wouldn't exist anymore? Probably not! Never will a single class dictate, a single political party, a single syndicate of commerce or a uniformed military order or a single religion rule the world! Not even the haughty all-powerful almighty religion of the politicians themselves will rule the world ever being so ridiculous with no one believed not even by a quarter of the people and all 'priests', clad in black and gray, preaching at one another. Aren't they fools to get paid to disagree? Would they ever join their forces and cover all groups of interest? Would they ever resist the temptation to take advantage with a small democratic majority and an unsuspected dictate forcing everything? No of course, evidently the concept of democracy needs a reboot, a new start a new angle, a new vision. That upgrade would have to assure us a better balanced, better understood, more stable, more inviting, less exclusive, more intelligent, more elevated, more enlightened and more harmonious society.   A Better Democracy? So let us consider what this better democracy might entail. In the beginning of this discourse we saw that the false ego constitutes the problem of inequality. Missing the common ground of the soul does the dominance of the physical motive lead to nepotist perversions, power struggles, personal imbalance, narrow minded unenlightened psychologies and a consequent collective anger and downfall in dictatures waging wars not only impoverishing the world, but threaten to destroy the world completely! Surely will the new concept of democracy have to honor the individual- as well as the group-ego, matter as well as soul, poverty as well as welfare, believers as well as disbelievers. In fact is it completely incomprehensible that the outcome of democracy would be the exclusion of the poor by the rich or the reverse of it, or, as also with the other dichotomies, of believers shut out by disbelievers or individuals shut out by interestgroups mightier. From the liberal/democratic opposition we learn of a flaw of democracy: giving the power to the people we lose with a negative vote of the people against the liberal perspective, the freedom of enterprise and capitalmanagement, so runs the fear quite correct. Liberal democracy then in power again is a lie to the socially motivated who for the sake of reinforcing social adaptation want to distribute the money apart from productive labor. We are here in need of a third position rising above the dichotomies of the liberal and social 'democratic' motive to solve the problem, at least theoretically. How about science? Would it be possible to develop a scientific concept of democracy that is in respect with the full splendor of the divine diversity of mankind not tempted into dictature and repression, not tempted into dual oppositions and forms of estrangement that want to reserve that splendor for themselves? Could that splendor still be splendor not shared? Is the splendor not the good of us history gave us; don't we owe it to our predecessors? And what would be needed for such a scientific concept of democracy? Holy people, all being academic, all being noble, all with their own enterprise, all being friends? No of course not. We can change the society, but not the people. We, if we are scientists who simply settled it together, can invite them, the ones otherwise, but not make them. One must keep the door open and then clearly state what the advantages and disadvantages of participation are. Sure we can regulate channels of democratic rebirth to a religion of politics that allows each to preach on behalf of his interest, free from illusion. The renaissance of a scientific democracy demands clear concepts and values, norms and standards in representation, in dealing with numbers and allowances, in the different duties and in specific rewards. The terms validity and reliability we know from the sciences of numbers and physics must be included. So must there be the proper implementation of the at the beginning mentioned needed permissiveness: at a certain level of the culture of rule must everything be clear while at a lower level there is more and more 'freedom and chaos'. The intelligent know that high-life freedom is equal to being bound to the doctrine of non-illusion: that culture gives the liberation of being protected as a servant of the cause. For the position of the leader the range of deviance is but small, since we, the people, must be lead by precept and example, not by dictate and the falsehood of ego. At the top one is alone in devotion at the bottom one may be glad to be together in friendship. That is how things scientifically are if we check the literatures of the different sciences. The novels say so, the holy books preach it, the socialist says so, the antropologists say so, the laws support it, the products we buy reflect it, the freedom commands it... The new democracy must be dictate-conscious: to each position there is a dictate, a definition, a privilege, a duty. The equality is in the mobility, in the guarantee of equal chances. The identities set by transcendence, vocation and agegroup, mode and style are never equal, but the soul always is. The game is variegated but each must be allowed to choose his own position. Therefore must privilege and duty in this outweigh one another: money means responsibility and not freedom. Freedom means poverty and not the obligation to be productive. Intellect means publishing, but not an obligation of being innovative as not everyone can be a genius. Labor means union and ministry, to be united in material interests, a settled income, but not the denial of a commanding manager. Politics means debate between the groups of interest but not so much a membership of a political party based on whims instead of science and completeness. The military implies mechanical power to impose and fight, but cannot ship with a defiance of the elementary (personal) discipline of peacekeeping, meanwhile artificially entertaining international oppositions.  The complete of this clear vision all depends on realism, rationalism and personalism as the three basic forms of philosophy that schizoid as they are to themselves have to even one another out in the scientific concept of democracy. The momentary mondial opposition of left-wing humanism and right-wing pragmatism (see article) leading to the plethora of the political landscape mondially fragmented in thousands of political parties for whatever interest, is by these three pushed in the background to the liberal of free association. The humanist must become a personalist if he wants to take the lead as a person and the pragmatist must become a realist if he free from illusion wants to evade the temporary that proves his an illusion. From the neurotic rationalistic as a defensemechanism to the rational use of reason for the purpose of methodic completeness; that is the purpose. A new worldorder will have to be much stricter in its system of heartening the different interests as is done by the 20th century whimsical political parties with their doubtful scientific value. The latter are more a form of neurosis about the question of authority instead of being an answer to that problem in the form of a more sane and logical systematic representation in state-department wise set groups of interest in a scientific democracy such as laid out here. So we have a vision of a scientific revolution that is not declared and fought, but explained and defended by all who are in favor of a sober non-illusioned approach free from the deluding power belonging to the being identified with an material body that each of us has to carry his whole life.   Conclusion: the Non-illusion of the Threefold Philosophy. Non-illusion is difficult to achieve for as well the individual as for the greater society. It constitutes the highest achievement in the religious and scientific doctrines. In fact is nobody completely free from the deluding power of the material world that simply sucks. From within one knows the selfrealization of the more inner drive in sublimation of the lower drives of sex, aggression personal attachment, fear of freedom, bad association, physical control strategies etc. etc. From the outside we know the social control of egomanagement and imagebuilding keeping up appearances in social control and societal commitments of labor and leisure, public and private. With these two drives out of balance we fall in illusion as illusion is simply the discord between the realizations of the inner and the outer world with its consequent downfall in corruption and dictature above mentioned. Thus we must safeguard the scientific democracy with the logic and reason of the rationalism, realism and personalism we need to balance our inner and outer drives. The idea is, said in one line, that with a realistic vision the impersonal rationalistic vision of numbers and measurements [ratios] automatically leads to a proper respect for the person with all its personalistic philosophies of psychology and theology. Or simpler said: the wanted reality is that of a good system [of valid numbers and measurements] that leads to a good person and a good person [valid as-it-is, truthful] that leads to a good system. Thus are the philosophies from within and without confirmed by system and person both ways, on the condition of having the human values respected as found in the charter of human rights that defies a possible dictature. Thus do we, valid in two ways, have a guarantee of a good time in matching the inner person with the outer one and thus a less illusioned and psychologically more healthy, individual person and associated society that is unified as well as differentiated world wide. In the end is it the good time free from illusion that counts, not the short-term good time of a classical democratic dictate out of balance or a flawed democracy in an all-too liberal social or nonsocial denial of responsibilities. The good scientific time, the good system, free from illusion, the basic reference, the anchor of this science is then the time to the tempo of the living being we know as the dynamic universe in its entirety, the original subject of study for all sciences including theology. Once we see by validity and reliability taken together the dual nature again of the higherlife linear and cyclic concept of the natural time of the sun the moon and the stars as opposed to the 'modern' pragmatic materialistic standard of the lowerlife cultural clocktiming defying that nature, may we in a scientific valuefree democracy thus conceived, speak of the completeness and choice necessary for the right concept of freedom and bondage taken as one. We then work with a constructive approach that effective puts an end to cynicism and restores the faith in the public servant.   References: - The Filognostic Manifesto part One and Two - Democratic Elections.... - Sun, moon and the New World Order - A New Dualism - Time Sciences - Links to Tijd-sites - See also further: 'A small Philosophy of Association'   The Webmaster of The Order of Time