Dean Gotcher

   While the American Revolution removed the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the authority of a King in the general government, creating a Constitutional Republic, limiting the power of government, thanks to the bill of rights (inalienable rights) it left the father's/Father's authority, i.e., the "king" in tact in the home, guaranteeing private convictions, property, and business, engendering a guilty conscience in the next generation of citizens for doing wrong or for disobeying, i.e., for disrespecting authority, knowing they would be individually (personally) held accountable before authority, i.e., God for their actions when they did wrong, disobeyed, sinned. The French Revolution on the other hand, ruling on the side of  the carnal nature of the child, i.e., "human nature," i.e., "the people" not only killed the King, it silenced, censored, removed, or killed any one who supported the father's/Father's authority as well. This includes almost all revolutions since, including the so called "velvet" ones, following after its system of "Liberté, Equalité, Fraternité," i.e., with opinions (which liberate everyone from the father's/Father's authority) being dialogued (which makes everyone equal, negating the father's/Father's "top-down" authority system) to a consensus (which makes everyone one in working to overcome the father's/Father's authority in society), which is the soviet system, i.e., the process of  brainwashing where the father's/Father's authority system is "washed" from the feelings, thoughts, and actions of all who participate). The consensus process is such a powerful procedure (now being put into practice, i.e., praxis in our classrooms and government) that over 570 "representatives" from the French parishes (counties), meeting at the famous tennis court (Serment du Jeu de Paume), cast aside their constituents petitions, making an oath, with only one (1) delegate abstaining, i.e., coming to a consensus to kill the King, i.e., to negate the father's/Father's authority (the very praxis of dialoguing opinions to a consensus does that automatically, purging the room and any decisions that come out of it of the father's/Father's authority). We have now embraced the structure of thought of the French Revolution, i.e., the ideology of Georg Hegel, as well as Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud (as well as Lenin), negating the father's/Father's authority and thereby the guilty conscience for doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, not only in the general government but in the home as well, i.e., negating individualism, under God, making the individual (and therefore the home) subject to the "group," i.e., to the "village," i.e., to the "community," i.e., to society , i.e., socialists, common-ists, globalists instead. By merging socialism and psychology, i.e., merging Marx and Freud, i.e., the individual and the group, creating "group psychotherapy," socialists, i.e., facilitators of 'change' are able to negate the tradition home, negating its ability to limit the power of government, preparing children in the "group grade" classroom to question, challenge, disregard, defy, attack their parent's authority when they get home (instead of respecting, honoring, and supporting it). "There are many stories of the conflict and tension that these new practices are producing between parents and children." (David Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives Book 2: Affective Domain"Bloom's Taxonomies")

"Submission to authority, desire for a strong leader, subservience of the individual to the state, and so forth, have so frequently and, as it seems to us, correctly, been set forth as important aspects of the Nazi creed that a search for correlates of prejudice had naturally to take these attitudes into account." "The power-relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality)

The error in this 'logic' is the assumption that Fascism is based upon the father's/Father's authority when in truth in order to create any form of socialism, whether it be National socialism, i.e., Fascism or Global socialism, i.e., Communism, or anything in between, you must first negate the father's/Father's authority in the individuals or citizens themselves. While the father's authority entails the preaching of commands and rules to be obeyed as given and the teaching of facts and truth to be accepted as it, it also includes discussion (at the father's discretion) in order for children to fully understand what the father wants done, any change on the father's part being based upon sound reasoning, from facts that he can accept and embrace (persuasion), at no loss of his authority. When discussion is removed from the equation, as Hitler did, totalitarianism prevails. Globalist, i.e., facilitators' of 'change,' on the other hand, by replacing discussion (the father's/Father's "top-down" authority) with dialogue (the children's "feelings," i.e., their opinion of the 'moment,' in the "light" of the given situation), negate the father's/Father's authority in the feeling, thoughts, and actions of the participants. The paranoia of globalist's is their fear that the traditional family might turning to National government, i.e., that parent's might abdicate their authority to preach, teach, and discuss, to government in order to stop the globalist's advancement, thus forming Fascism. In truth the children, through socialists programs in education have already been 'liberated' from their parent's' authority, i.e., the father's/Father's authority system, establishing their 'loyalty' to "the group," in this case replacing National socialism with Global socialism, serving "the people" without having a guilty conscience while doing wrong, disobeying, sinning, i.e., while doing unconscionable things—which is the byproduct of all forms of socialism.

   Our culture, like the pharaoh of Egypt who "knew not Joseph" (Exodus 1:8; Acts 7:18), does not know its history, does not understand (can not wrap its head around the concept of limited government, i.e., thinking through their feelings of the 'moment' they can no longer think, i.e., know the truth—making the following paragraphs almost impossible to understand, i.e., incomprehensible at first reading for most people) that our elected officials are to be sent (as children) by their constituents (the father, under God, the source of the father's authority, giving us "unalienable rights") to re-present them (the father), spending their money (the father's money) at the capital (at the store) to buy their (the father's) goods, according to their (the father's) will (according to the father's commands, rules, facts, and truth), maintaining local (the father's) control i.e., sovereignty. If they (the children) spend it (the father's money) on their own self interests and/or on their friends self interest instead (which the consensus process does), they are no longer sent to the capital (to the store). The child (the elected official) can only re-present the father (the constituents who put him into office, i.e.., their position), i.e., re-present the father's position—along with his restraints—which the child accepts as his own (sent to re-present his constitutes position because they, the constituents agreed with his position—which is the same as theirs). The child can only "present" his own feelings (opinion) of the 'moment'—which includes his own "self interests" of the 'moment' and resentment toward the father's restraints—which are subject to the current situation and the seduction, deception, and manipulation of the facilitator of 'change,' i.e., subject to 'change,' what he has in common with all the children of the world who resent their father's restraints—in his thoughts and actions "representing" only the children of the world (his desire for pleasure and resentment toward restraint) over and therefore against the father's authority (true representative government based upon doing right and not wrong according to the father's will). The uniqueness of limited government, is that the 'justification' of government is by the governed, under God, with each individual being personally held accountable before God, the Heavenly Father, and His obedient Son (in all things commanded) for his thoughts and his actions, forming government of restraint, i.e., elected officials with restraints placed upon them not only by the governed, under God, but also by having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, under God as well. Though secular in practice the element of one right answer (the guilty conscience for doing wrong) instead of many (the super-ego which is influenced by the "feelings" of the 'moment') keeps those in government from making compromise the means to the end, which results in government controlling the people, in the name of the people, instead of the people controlling (limiting) the government in the name of freedom of the conscience, i.e., liberty.
    When the elected official (the child) comes to a consensus with other elected officials (other children), he can only present his own feelings (desires and resentments) of the 'moment,' circumventing the constituents voice (the father's will), i.e., negating true representative, majority vote, limited government (the father's authority, i.e., local control, i.e., sovereignty, the father's restraint, i.e., self restraint) in the process. The Constitution with its Bill of Rights was based upon the father's (the constituent's) restraints, not the children's (the elected officials) desires (impulses and urges of the 'moment'). "Self interest" negates the humbling, denying, controlling, disciplining of self, under the father's/Father's authority, 'liberating' elected officials from their constituents (under God's authority) restraints.

   According to those intoxicated, addicted, and possessed with dialectic 'reasoning,' in the consensus process not only is the individual's traditional way of thinking and acting sacrificed at the alter of socialism, his God is sacrificed as well. As the Transformational Marxist (Marxist's who merge Karl Marx, i.e., "the group," i.e., society with Sigmund Freud, i.e., psychology, i.e., the individual, creating "group psychotherapy") Theodor Adorno explained it: "God is conceived more directly after a parental image and thus as a source of support and as a guiding and sometimes punishing authority." "Family relationships are characterized by fearful subservience to the demands of the parents and by an early suppression of impulses not acceptable to them." "Authoritarian submission was conceived of as a very general attitude that would be evoked in relation to a variety of authority figures—parents, older people, leaders, supernatural power, and so forth." "The power-relationship between the parents, the domination of the subject's family by the father or by the mother, and their relative dominance in specific areas of life also seemed of importance for our problem." (Theodor Adorno, The Authoritarian Personality) According to the 'logic' of Transformational Marxists, the "problem" is the father's/Father's authority, i.e., "authoritarianism" which engenders "prejudice," i.e., "right-wrong" thinking and acting, engendering Nationalism (Isolationism), i.e., "Us vs. them," i.e., "lander-ausländer" (ingroup-outgroup), which (when globalists, i.e., Transformational Marxists attempt to negate the father's/Father's authority in order to overcome Nationalism, the fathers turn to government to protect their authority, which then) engenders Fascism, i.e., totalitarianism, inhibiting or blocking Globalism, i.e., worldly peace and socialist harmony. Transformational Marxist, i.e., "group psychotherapist" 'logic' is: if the father's/Father's authority is created by children, abdicating their carnal nature to the father's/Father's commands, rules, facts, and truth (going against their carnal nature in order to do the father's/Father's will—as Karl Marx explained it: "The life which he [the child] has given to the object [to the father] sets itself against him as an alien and hostile force." Karl Marx, MEGA I/3, pp. 83-84), then 'liberating' the children's mind and actions ("theory and practice") from the father's/Father's authority in the classroom (cafés), i.e., "helping" the children, i.e., the next generation of citizens "transcend" their parents customs, traditions, boarders, differences, beliefs, etc., negates, in the mind and actions of the children, the father's/Father's authority in the home, negating, in the mind and actions of the children, the father's/Father's authority in "society," 'liberating' the children and all of "society" from "the fear of God," i.e., from having a guilty conscience for doing wrong, i.e., for disobeying the father/Father—so that all can sin with impunity. i.e., be human, i.e., be "of and for self" and the world only, instead.

   The "group" experience ("group dynamics") is an essential element in the process of 'change,' with the child's desire for approval, i.e., for affirmation by the group 'changing' how he thinks and acts, especially when "the group's" goal is to achieve consensus (a "feeling" of "oneness"). "Few individuals, as Asch has shown, can maintain their objectivity [their belief, i.e., their faith (trust) in authority, be it in their parent's, their teacher's, their boss's, their leader(s), or God's authority] in the face of apparent group unanimity [especially when "the group," excluding (rejecting) him (because of his "ridged," i.e., "prejudiced," i.e., unadaptable to 'change' father's/Father's position), is heading down the road, hand in hand with his carnal desire of the 'moment,' "enjoying" it without him]." (Irvin D. Yalom, Theory and Practice and Group Psychotherapy) "The individual is emancipated in the social group." "Freud commented that only through the solidarity of all the participants could the sense of guilt be assuaged." (Norman O. Brown, Life Against Death: The Psychoanalytical Meaning of History) By simply moving the classroom away from the preaching and teaching (and discussion, at the teachers discretion) of commands, rules, facts, and truth to be accepted as is (indicative of the father's/Father's authority) to where the students are free to dialogue their opinions (how they themselves are "feeling" in the 'moment' in the "light" of the current situation, i.e., what they are thinking about in the 'moment' regarding personal/individual-social issues—the social issues or crises of the times being authoritarian leadership, i.e., nationalism oppressing "the people," associated to children being oppressed by their parents, i.e., the father's/Father's "top-down," "do what I say, or else" authority system, needing 'liberation' from "authoritarianism," i.e., needing democracy in order to be their "self") to a consensus, initiates and sustains the deed. In the scriptures, the Kingdom of God is advanced by the preaching of the gospel, not through dialogue, i.e., children/men and women finding common group with one another based upon their common carnal desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment.'

   Georg Hegel, Karl Marx, and Sigmund Freud set out to use the conflict between the child's nature, i.e., the child's natural desire for the carnal pleasures of the 'moment, i.e., that which is of the world and his (or her) natural resentment toward the father's/Father's restraints (which all children have in common—the basis of "common-ism" AKA Communism), and the father's authority, i.e., directing the child's steps, teaching him to do right and not wrong according to his/His commands, rules, facts, and truth (which, according to Transformational Marxists, i.e., "group psychotherapists," divides the child from his own nature, "repressing" him, "alienating" him not only from his own "self" but from the other children of the world as well [engendering individualism, under God, i.e., associated with nationalism, i.e., "Us vs. them," leading to Fascism], preventing him from finding ('discovering') common ground, i.e., common-ism with the world [globalism, i.e., "We working for us"] in the process—"The dialectical method [globalism] was overthrown—the parts [the children] were prevented [by the father's/Father's authority] from finding their definition within the whole [within their nature and the world]." György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness; What is Orthodox Marxism?) in order to negating the father's/Father's authority, thus allowing the children to become as one, i.e., "of and for self," uniting their "self" as one through the dialoguing of their opinions i.e., their feelings and thoughts, i.e., their desires and dissatisfactions of the 'moment,' 'discovering' common ground, i.e., synthesis (consensus), 'creating' a "new' world order based upon their nature, i.e., the child's nature, i.e., "human nature" only, negating the "old" world order of the father's/Father's "top-down," "do right and not wrong, according to my will, or else" authority system in the process. As Abraham Maslow explained it: "Self-actualizing people have to a large extent transcended the values of their culture. They are not so much merely Americans as they are world citizens, members of the human species first and foremost." (Abraham Maslow, The Further Reaches of Human Nature) "Marxian theory ["the group"] needs Freudian-type instinct theory [the child's carnal nature] to round it out. And of course, vice versa." "The whole discussion becomes species-wide, One World, at least so far as the guiding goal is concerned. To get to that goal is politics & is in time and space & will take a long time & cost much blood." [Since the 'drive' of "the group" is the child's carnal nature, i.e., the child's love of pleasure (including affirmation) and his hate of restraint, the 'purpose' of "the group," as well as the individual, becomes the augmentation of the child's carnal nature, i.e., the "lust" for pleasure and hate of the father's/Father's authority, with the 'purpose' of life being the 'liberation' of "human nature" from the father's/Father's authority—at all cast, i.e., costing "much blood."] "This is a realistic combination of the Marxian version & the humanistic. (Better add to definition of "humanistic" that it also means one species, One World.)" "The new Zeitgeist is value-full (value-directed, value-vectorial), human-need & metaneed centered (or based), moving toward basic-need gratification & metaneed metagratification—that is, toward full-humanness, SA, psychological health, full-functioning human fulfillment, i.e., toward human perfection as the limit & as the direction [making the limits and measure of life the pleasures of the 'moment' instead of doing right and not wrong according to established standards of the "past"]." (Abraham Maslow, The Journals of A.H. Maslow)

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2017