by Joel S. Hirschhorn,

All over the Internet are sincere efforts to reform and improve America's political-government system. The downside is fragmentation of the subpopulation that has escaped brainwashing, cultural distraction, and self-delusion. Strategy solidarity is missing, but is possible.

Millions of discontent, dissident and truly patriotic Americans see our federal government as corrupt and untrustworthy, disrespectful of our Constitution, under the grip of moneyed interests, subservient to corporate and globalization elites, unresponsive to the needs of ordinary people, and very much on the wrong track. But they are not united.

This subpopulation no longer believes that electing different Democrats or Republicans will turn around the nation. Many have stopped voting. Some believe violent revolution is necessary. Some think that only national economic disaster will produce necessary change. Most find hope in a particular reform strategy that has attracted their attention and respect. However, so many reform efforts reduce prospects for success.

I am talking about political-government reforms, not party reforms. Many successful websites often described as "progressive" seek changes in the Democratic Party. On the political right others hope to reform the Republican Party. Party reform is not the same as reversing the many declines in American democratic institutions. Devotees of popular sites like, and, for example, still believe that electing different Democrats is the solution, while true dissidents have given up on that. Being passionately anti-Bush/Cheney does not change their loyalty to the two-party system.

For the dissident subpopulation, fragmentation impedes building a critical mass that can precipitate a tipping point for revolutionary change that solves systemic national problems. Fragmentation results in large measure because of the ease of creating new groups with their own websites. Dissidents align with some web group (and sometimes several), hoping and perhaps praying for success, even if they admit the probability is low.

Comment: Joel S. Hirschhorn starts off in this article identifying the futility of division amongst those in opposition to the status quo system in the U.S. He then talks about how to reform the system via a constitutional convention.

Well, the problem is with coercion and the hypocrisy inherent within building upon coerciveness.

What Jesus had in mind is much better. It is the best plan ever put forth. It is not within the worldly system. It is rather within. Each person, each soul, will write the New Commandment upon his or her heart. It will be sealed into the mind, the very matter of the brain. Selfishness will be overcome by unselfishness. Then the healing will occur.

We don't need armies or navies or Marines or an air force or missiles or bombs. We don't need weapons or ammunition. All those things can go and will go.

We need the unifying spirit of unselfish love in action. We don't need selfish, predatory, sexual lust. We don't need greed. We need peace, giving and sharing, the commons of the inheritance of all (the Earth and everything else if we will be righteous), and sexual purity, which means 1) abstinence or 2) monogamy and fidelity for purposes of human procreation.

Rather than a constitutional convention where neocons and socialists will fight and bribes will be offered in temptation, turn rather to the real solution that is behaving in accordance with the New Commandment. Come together in the Holy Spirit of truth that says share and feed the proverbial lambs and sheep of God.

We are to bring forth the Kingdom of Heaven on Earth, the fruits of righteousness, the atoning deeds worthy of repentance. Help to bring forth the Real Christian Commons. Please donate to this most worthy of causes (Jesus's cause).

Tithe or better if you are able, if the Holy Spirit gives you to do it, moves your heart to have the real faith to do it.

Let us together bring forth. Donate liberally now to the Real Liberal Christian Church Common Treasury to bring forth the Christian Commons.

This will non-coercively displace evil. It will demonstrate the correctness of the real message of Jesus.

Capitalism, where the few own the means of production and take the lion's share of the gain from the labor of others, is not Christian. It is an unholy thing. It is far from living out the golden rule. It is totally unenlightened (in the dark; of the dark side).

We must live on so-called private property and in accordance with the New Commandment while we spread the word and the way so that more and more people will live likewise until the whole world is living that way.

To obtain that property, we need people to help financially. We need people to join the cause. Consult your conscience. Ask God what to do: What is the truth? Act. Give.

Via Atlantic Free Press - Hard Truths for Hard Times

Originally from Atlantic Free Press - Hard Truths for Hard Times on July 12, 2007, 9:25am


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 – present, website developer and writer. 2015 – present, insurance broker.

    Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration.

    Volunteerism: 2007 – present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.

    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.