Got the Revolution!
‘Brave New World’ by George Orwell. I realize what I’ve written here is in line with that product, only mine is to be called ‘Brave, New, Rational World‘ by David and others.
The purpose of challenging the outcomes of the three previous state audits in Arizona, from the 2020 presidential election, was to invalidate the valid path, which had been agreed upon by both political parties prior to the election.
The vote count is valid. The motive for auditing the outcome is not! This audit was not intended to operate in good faith. It was not compelled by any evidence of fraud or misconduct. The valid audit process in Arizona has shown repeatedly there was no fraud. The audit that is currently ongoing, overseen by Cyber Ninjas, was not created to find invalid or corrupt votes, on the contrary, its purpose is to highjack the power that belongs to the people, and in so doing, corrupting the very democracy they claim to be protecting.
The goal is to capture the means by which election outcomes are determined. How ironic that they execute this action by attempting to overturn legitimate votes. One strategy they are using is the spreading of lies and unfounded rumors to seed doubt and unrest amongst the electorate, undermining the validity of the voting process itself. This places our whole system of voting in jeopardy—undermining the faith that Americans have in their system of government.
That’s why oversight and transparency are critical in government accountability. We already have a system for that. It’s called law. Why would we want to allow private interests to meddle in our system of checks and balances? It’s not ethical for dark money to have a hand in any way, at any time, in determining the outcome of any election. That’s what elections are for, the people speak and their government responds accordingly, with accountability. That’s why we have the oath of office, to publicly declare one’s allegiance to the Constitution of the United States of America. A declaration that you understand the awesome power you hold as an elected official—declaring your allegiance to the American people themselves.
What we have here is one interest group with criminal intent, who’s sole purpose is to corrupt and invalidate a legitimate and verified process for counting the people’s votes. The current process of transparency, including accountability to the people, is known and admired the world over. This current attempt to challenge this process of accountability, with no evidence to the contrary, is one of the greatest crimes against a free democracy. Those who have implemented and authorized this shoddy attempt to overthrow a fair and free election must be held to account. Each and every individual who has done their part in this sham must be charged to the full extent of the law.
Those holding public office who are currently participating in this ongoing attempt, owe it to the American people to account for their rhetoric and for their actions—what findings are they basing these claims of election fraud? They must testify under oath and present their evidence . If the courts determine that there is no evidence of wrong doing by the state of Arizona, those who have claimed such, with no evidence to back up such claims, should be removed from public office—banned from ever holding elected office, or any government position, again.
The insemination of irrational and false accusations of election fraud, designed to undermine what has been proven in three previous audits as valid, is an extreme abuse of government power. The premise of fraud is knowingly false and is a criminal violation and attack on public trust. To create a false assumption without foundation comes with criminal intent. It is an act of sedition, a crime against the people.
Their twisted opinion becomes libelous and destructive to the Public Trust in government and its people. One may freely speculate, but one cannot claim it to be true without the foundation of facts.
A dialogue in free speech, when stated to be speculation—taking responsibility for its uncertainty—makes for good debate. But to smear credibility and trust with lies and intentional deception is a violation of the meaning of the words free speech. To intentionally deceive in this instance is a crime—taking a public oath to protect and defend that which is most precious to a free peoples, and then using the power of your office to undermine that very principal.
The current dilemma we are now facing is how to prosecute those who would lie publicly with the intent of misinforming voters. As more information can be verified, we are seeing a pattern in which the Arizona audit is but one arm of a multi-armed coup attempt. Let’s be very clear about this. As time passes, we are able to piece together evidence of this from the top down. The more information that can be verified and available to the public regarding the final weeks of the Trump administration, the more we are learning about similar tactics within our DOJ, our legislative branch, and of course the insurrection on January 6, 2021. The Arizona audit is just one in a series of desperate attempts to hold on to power through undermining democracy itself.
What should be a punishment for the violation of the integrity of free speech? Using public access in communications without being held libel for proven lies and misinformation cannot be tolerated in a free society. There must be accountability. They should be required to present the simultaneous contrast in information and opinion in the living moments of broadcast and parallels in publishing.
The Balance of Personal and Public Interest
As a free society we are tasked with creating a healthy, rational public image, while at the same time having to address conflicting priorities. This can be observed in how we bring the environment, climate, and public health and safety, into balance and control. Providing for those who are affected is part of the collective responsibility.
Covid-19 is a perfect example of what I am speaking to. The collective task of bringing Covid-19 under control requires a shift of priority from personal choice to the well being and overall health of the community, as well as the security and safety of the nation as a whole. In order to bring a contagious virus under control in 2021 seems a daunting task indeed. The priority of the whole over the individual parts—individual rights—serves everyone, including the economic well being of a society.
An individual’s choice does not exist even if there are rare exceptions and varying levels of risks for only a minority of individuals. (Private rights do not include driving on the wrong side of the highway.)
The principle of individual choice, balanced between the rights of the individual and the well being of the public as a whole, is at the core of the image of the “Rational New World for Responsible Citizens”.
This is a difficult concept to work out in its detail. Those who lie and are without conscience or ethics, whos sole intent is to mislead, are motivated by a desire to undermine the very system of government whose foundational doctrine speaks to the power of the whole, not the power of any individual to override the will of the majority.
What are the rules for rational global citizenry? This is the big question of our time. Reckless disturbance of the public trust using false dialogue, irrational projections, and false assumptions, is a symptom of feeling based beliefs—using feelings to validate opinions instead of evidence and facts.
How do we measure and require qualifications of knowledge and character, psychological health of those people holding and running for office? How do we eliminate these social pathologies? What is the next step towards the evolution of a rational citizenship and representative government?
If you are not rational you should not be eligible to vote as a citizen. The operations of a democracy should be only for those who are conscious, well intentioned, with an understanding of the responsibility of being a citizen of a democracy.
Human beings with unkind and cruel temperaments are a disturbed peoples and should be denied access to the ballot, to full citizenship, and the right to own.