I am frequently disturbed to realize how outdated the U.S. Constitution is, and how easily many Americans either infer rights from or take cunning advantage of its gaping holes.
Scripture
Both the outdated rights and the gaping holes in the Constitution allow for incredible latitude in taking advantage of our collective interests as a society. Not in the least because the constitution merely defines rights, omitting the need for mutual obligations to secure the trust in those rights.
The constitution devolves quickly into mediocrity because any scripture evolving by precedent only yields by definition only downstream sub-optimizations of increased complexity, the opposite of the renewed recalibration needed to conform to a better and simpler normalization of truth upstream.
Born today, one would not design the Constitution the way it is today, which should have anyone in Congress up in arms to reinvent the Constitution pronto.
Church And State
The concept of separation of church and state, uniquely and clairvoyantly described in the makeup of the American constitution, was designed to ensure that a belief in theology by a few cannot be allowed to indoctrinate all others. And that no decision that affects all Americans shall be made based on the belief in a religion.
What it really means, and few but I dare to voice unapologetically, is that all commandments of religion must subjugate to the laws of the state. The commandments of any religion cannot be allowed to circumvent, undercut, or supersede the commandments and precedents of the U.S. Constitution, but instead must be castrated to conform with the constitution.
Hence, for people to call a fear of Islam xenophobic is a clear misjudgment of the intended constitutional separation of church and state.
One shall not, for example, as the Koran in conjunction with the Hadith unequivocally state, be allowed to kill infidels who no longer abide by Islam or adhere to another religion. One is also not authorized to grant different rights to men than to women. One cannot stone a woman to death for no longer being a virgin.
Many of the barbaric precepts of Islam violate the U.S. Constitution, and many of us, including some of our leaders, are too weak or too politically correct to admit a xenophobic religion referring to itself as the last-and-final solution has no right to call its adversaries xenophobic. There is no better example of a religion painting the kettle black.
Technology And State
The reason why I introduced that “lighthearted” fox in the henhouse is to highlight the weakness by which we fail to protect the most foundational precepts of our constitution. Technology has also been allowed to deploy whatever constitutional ignorance it can muster.
Today, technology bullies deploy, en-masse, totalitarian monisms of absolutism – to the world – by which the most basic fundamental rights of freedom, self-governance, plurality, freedom of speech, rights to self-expression, etc. are systematically violated, ignored or slapped down. In addition, technology deploys an increasingly fragmented technology stack, wide-open to intrusion by anyone with open-source access. The spiraling infancy of technology has become the unprotected backdoor to nation-state sovereignty.
The same lee-way granted to religion has been awarded to technology, just like a parent unwilling or too tired to reprimand a child who misbehaves. The ignorant parents smile and stimulate their child’s unacceptable behavior just as governments around the world, desperately trying to imitate Silicon Valley, are now actively involved in perpetuating the blind positivity of technology, infusing millions of dollars in programs that grant unchecked dictatorial rights to anyone who can manage to write a few lines of code.
Technology has become a religion, its preachings absorbed by anyone willing to come to its church and put a coin in the hat, without regard to the evolutionary validity of the proposition. Indeed, after some forty years of technology development, we have yet to prove technology strengthens the renewal of humanity.
Just so you know, the consequential data for the U.S. (I have provided on this blog many times) does not support technology improves The State of Humanity, quite the opposite.
The State
The point is, we do not have a Constitution that defines what our goals as a society are, which is an omission as serious as a business without a business plan while telling employees they are free to do whatever they please. Blissfully forgetting freedom without its paradox yields no (trust in) freedom for all.
The U.S. Constitution, derived from the excommunication of European intellectuals a historian recently told me, has attached itself to concepts with no material positive effect on the excellence of The State of Humanity. The State of Humanity which in-turn is dependent on a dynamic equilibrium with The State of Nature.
I will not bore you again with how the embarrassing underbelly of our economic leaderboard position in the world is evidence we have not at all implemented human excellence. Just let it sink in how poverty in the U.S. is now estimated to cost us one-trillion dollars per year.
Technology has yet to solve any real problems for humanity. To no surprise, because the thesis that determines what can be discovered is broken. And thus, any entrepreneur with a valuable proposition to improve the human excellence of long will get kicked to the curb and tagged as a false negative by venture capitalists engaged in a rat-race of short.
Change Is Easy
We cannot allow technology to define or play hooky with our constitution. Or else, the constitution is admittedly worthless. But our constitution must begin to include goals and rules to induce a flourishing and renewable society. Our government can do so by simply aligning the principles of our constitution with evolutionary principles guaranteed to maximize the quality of human renewal.
As I lay out in How To Really Change The World, a change in the thesis and remuneration geared to improving evolutionary excellence will determine what humanity can truly discover about itself. New rules will change how the human game will be played. And everyone will change quickly when improving our evolutionary contribution is the only way of getting paid.
I am glad technocratic bullies are being found out for what they are. It wakes many people up to the notion we must revise the constitution that identifies human gameplay so that we can finally direct the arbitrage and compass of human ingenuity to benefit us all.
