Public-Private Partnership.
Is Marxism.

Dean Gotcher

"Thus saith the LORD; Cursed [be] the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD." Jeremiah 17:5

Private is nobody's business. Public is everybody's business. When that which is private, i.e., nobody's business becomes public, i.e., everybody's, that which is nobodies business becomes everybody's business and that what is public, i.e., everybody's business becomes private, i.e., nobodies business—since you have to protect the public, i.e., those in government (who sold this totalitarian idea to the public) from the private, i.e., from the citizens who realize their God given right of private (private convictions, private property, private business, etc.,) have been taken over by those in government. Transparency from then on simply means those in government can surveillance the public without the publics knowledge for the good of "the people," i.e., for the "good" of those in government, silencing or removing anyone who complains.  Are we really this stupid? (Rhetorical question.)

"In the dialogic relation of recognizing oneself in the other, they experience the common ground of their existence." (Jürgen Habermas, Knowledge & Human Interest, Chapter Three: The Idea of the Theory of Knowledge as Social Theory)

In dialogue there is no father's/Father's authority, i.e., individualism under God, i.e., unalienable rights, there is only the carnal desires, i.e., "self interests," i.e., "lusts" of all parties involved in the dialogue. Public-private partnership is "building relationship upon self interest" which is the hallmark of Marxism, negating the private rights of the individual, under God. Money is stored up pleasure. Make the 'drive' and 'purpose' of life pleasure, i.e., "lust" instead of doing right and not wrong according to established commands, rules, facts, and truth, i.e., doing the father's/Father's will and money can not be in the hands of the father/Father but in the hands of the Marxist "leaders" 'liberating' the children from the father's/Father's authority. By having all people come to gather as one, through dialogue setting aside their differences, i.e., their individualism, under God, they abdicate their rights to those who control the meeting, advocating public-private partnership.

"'Capital' … is, according to Marx, 'not a thing but a social relation between persons mediated through things.' 'These relations,' Marx states, 'are not those between one individual and another, but between worker and capitalist, tenant and landlord, [children and their parents] etc. Eliminate these relations and you abolish the whole of society; …… a scientifically acceptable solution does exist [replacing discussion, which keeps the capitalist in authority, i.e., in power with dialogue, which makes the "worker and capitalist" equal, negating the capitalists authority, i.e., power]… For to accept that solution, even in theory, would be tantamount to observing society from a class standpoint [from the children's perspective] other than that of the bourgeoisie [from the parent's perspective]. And no class can do that-unless it is willing to abdicate its power freely [if parents are to observe the world, including their authority from their children's perspective, they must first abdicate their authority to their children's "feelings"]. ' '... the ideological history of the bourgeoisie was nothing but a desperate resistance to every insight into the true nature of the society it had created [the family] and thus to a real understanding of its class situation [its "creation" of a "top-down," "Do what I say or else" relationship].… the Communist Manifesto makes the point that the bourgeoisie [those initiating and sustaining the father's/Father's authority] produces its own grave-diggers [their children].'" (György Lukács, History & Class Consciousness: What is Orthodox Marxism?)

Moving communication from discussion (facts and truth) to dialogue ("feelings") makes that which is nobody's business ("feelings") everybody's business—known as common-ism, that which is "of and for self" and the world only. It is just that easy.

"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness? And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you, And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty." 2 Corinthians 6:14-18

© Institution for Authority Research, Dean Gotcher 2019, 2020