Why and How I am a Committed Radical (11th in Series): The Executive & the Monarchy, Generally, the Emperor and the Empress
by Frank Wynerth Summers III on Tuesday, April 17, 2012 at 10:18am ·
This Note will be about the the numberless and untitlted preamble as well as Sections One and Two of Article Three in my Model Constitution. For those who want to see the Model Constitution I propose as a whole you can go to the following link:
I am convinced and am trying to communicate to the readers of this note the conviction that if the revolutionary changes described up until this point were carried out in the context of an American Revolution that would create a much stronger and more just country than we have today. Such changes are vastly out of sync with what is discussed and proposed in Washington and in most of the United States of America as political options. Here we come to two areas of large difference. First we do have all sorts of laws that are directed to men and women but almost no offices of any political type that are restricted to one sex or the other. In the text discussed to day we have the Emperor who must be a man and the Empress who must be a woman. Both of them have the largest part of their office and title subssisting outside the politics of the Union. However, both do have political roles in the Union itself as well as in the more complex structure of Union and Empire which this Constitution defines and empowers. That brings us to the second thing we must deal with here, these are Royal Monarchs and they are therefore a radical departure from our current republican conditions. However, I think that I general our Founding Fathers and the responsible leaders among the Revolutionary leaders thought that in time our republic ought to evolve into an Empire but that it should do so in a good and free way (they never equated freedom and democracy). I assert that the next large constitutional transformation of this society ought to be into an empire. I propose that when this Constitution is ratified the reconstitutionalized country should have two official names “The United States of America” and “The Federal American Empire of the United States”.
To fully understand my proposal for a transition from exclusive Republicanism to a Royalist constitution with strong republican elements you will have to read materials in separate notes in this series post on my blog using site searches like “American Royalism” or “Fulfilling Plans of Empire” although I have not tried those searches myself. The mere basics of American royalism can be mentioned here but remeber if you read this alone that all of the elected legislators I propose would increase the number which currently exist. In the great plan of our Union the federalism would still exist and these wouldinclude many democratic state and local posts. This constitution would also add to federal judiciary a number of posts for life which are not royal called Censors and Electors for Life which would exist as described and provided for in this constitution. This changes the question in some mindes to whether with all of these elections this is still a radical royalist system that I am proposing.
The Electors for Life will help a limited group of others to even elect the Emperor himself from a small field of hereditary and mostly hereditary heirs in the Imperial Conclave. Yes, an elected Emperor could be fully royal. The Holy Roman Emperor was elected, the Pope ( who is a Royal Monarch of an odd kind) is elected, the Kings of England before the Norman Conquest were elected, The King of Poland in recent centuries was elected, Numerous Royal Chiefs and High Kings of Scotland and Ireland have been elected. There is also this dirty little secret which doubtless the United Kingdom would feel the need to deny if this were an official US document — QUEEN ELIZABETH’S FATHER AND PRINCE PHILIP’S GRANDFATHER WERE BOTH ELECTED KINGS. Thus if Charles become King of England then he will have a grandfather and a great-grandfather who were elected kings of different countries. However this system would be like the Holy Roman Empire and Poland and the Pope and ancient England in that the elections would be regular and a matter of course not exception.
There would be a change in the title of the ordinary Executive elected every four years from President to First Executive Vice President and some of his powers and duties would be reduced but mostly the Emperor would fill a different role. Emperor would have a fulsome executive power over a central governance outside the Constitutional Jurisdictions and the Federal government per se in the Imperial House, Imperial Tribe and Direct Imperial Government. Even this government would have two broad types of land in its sway. First, the District of Columbia and the Federation of Compact Zones would be in the Direct Imperial Government category along with a substantial one time grant of lands currently owned by the Federal Government and administered by the federalBureau of Land Management bureaucracy. The composition of theis complex DIG Jurisdiction is to be defined elsewhere in this series and is defined in my blog in a variety of posts. It is a jurisdiction which will play an important but very limited role. There is a lot which will be left out of this post about a royalist regime but one thing that must be addressed for such a post as this to be in any way genuine as a serious piece of revolutionary literature which is what I intend it to be. To do this I need to discuss the royalist tradition which is relevant in America and tied to America.
In the empirically unlikely event that the United States converts to a royalist system within a short time the Monarch if they are to be in any very good sense a Monarch and in any very good sense both royal and royalist will have a lot to do in terms of creating and restoring, both renewing and establishing royal and royalist culture. Hawaii can certainly still be restored to a royalist culture it can both influence a new regime and it can be influenced to conform to the New regime. Using the Councils of Nobles which I have mentioned the ideal Ordinary Nobility would be a mix of new titles and some renewed from worthy preserver of such color of right to those titles as French, English, Spanish and other powers have left in good families of committed Americans upon our shores. However, while I am constrained by space and unable to really do a decent job of presenting these ideas I am going to suggest that there is a royal line, tradition and apparatus which has pre-eminent claim to an American Empire for many reasons and that is the Arcadian — Acadian royal line.
This line is almost entirely unknown for a variety of reasons. There is a great deal to take in and almost no chance to weave it in coherently in this post. Yet it is imperative that we try to do so.
the first really key point is that the real roots of the American Revolution occurred in a larger colonial context. I am going to recommend a book that does not declare ( as I do here and now) that the Acadian expulsion (loosely described in Longfellow’s epic poem Evangeline) were a principal cause of and stimulus to the American revolution. But it does show the connections of this event to the revolutionary ferment in a broad contest. In this regard I recommend Leach’s book. http://www.amazon.com/Roots-Conflict-Colonial-Americans-1677-1763/dp/0807842583#noop
Secondly, I want to show that the destruction of Acadie was a large and significant act. That it had everything to do with creating a British profile and character the Americans could distrust and that in their early history the Acadians had both elements the Americans were eager to restore to their experience of the British Constitution and also the chivalric and aristocratic values which I argue that we need to restore today. In which regard there is a recent book by John Mack Faragher: http://www.amazon.com/Great-Noble-Scheme-Expulsion-Acadians/dp/0393051358 to understand the British view of how great and wealthy a land the Acadians had created and how eager they were to have its wealth for themselves. The Acadian experience is deeply tioed to the American experience as a whole.
Two men whom I know (one much better than the other and neither all that well) have also written books that are relevant to this theme and discussion Carl A. Brasseaux has written The Founding of the New Acadia and Acadian to Cajun. Meanwhile Warren Perrin has handled the appeal for the Apology from the Queen of England and Scotland and has discussed this journey and its partial success in the book Acadian Redemption. Le Grand Derangement or the Great Upheaval brought Acadians to all parts of the Thirteen Colonies before they were settled in Louisiana successfully in 1765 by the King Joseph Broussard Dit Beausoleil. During their scattering they did not get on well with the general population and there times were sad and bad mostly. But that does not mean that they did not have a powerful influence in turning the minds of their fellow North American Colonists against the English Government. Even if it had only been the example of their suffering they would be the most likely true proximate cause of the Revolutionary ferment in America. But in fact we know they had vast network of communications and logistics with which they reassembled small groups of survivors from many parts of the world to found the New Acadia in South Louisiana. Res ipsa loquitur — the thing speaks for itself and although they have been cheated of that recognition and sought to conceal it just as they have been cheated and concealing of many other things the American Revolution is profoundly tied to and rooted in the Acadian experience and expulsion. It can also play a role in the new American Revolution if it comes.
In the Acadian Constitution is the resource for a royalist Empire that is truly American the Kings of the Acadians are not directly mentioned as such in any of the many books which describe or recount the lives of Joseph Broussard, Governor Mouton, General Mouton, Severin Leblanc, Dudley Leblanc or others who have held the title. But both the people’s lives and much of the constitution is obliquely or directly availabel from respectable history. The Basileus Arkadion (or Arkadios) is elected from those most eligible in a complex line of succession this would be merged into a Unity Conclave where Acadian electors were the majority but Imperial and Louisiana Royal electors were substantial minorities. The voting still comes late in the selection process. Tests of merit are extensive and these are only only available to those with the heredity required. The Arcadian Bouletherion would have to be fully and openly re-established but it has in its ancient history been hybridized. They would supply the majority of electors but the US Electors for Life and other Peer Electors could also vote. Thus Americans as a whole would always have some voice in their Sovereign’s selection without doing violence to his tradition which would be very difficult to achieve anywhere else from existing options. The Keys to the Line of the Basileus Arkadios have always been known to very few as have the remnant of Acadian government in the Ethnos Arkadios (or Arcadian Tribe translated fully into English). These elements of Comites, Ridelles, Courires, Loups Garous, Gran Famille and Prince Chef de Gran Famille are very seldom mentioned by anyone. They are almost ignored in the public works of the Acadian Renaissance in recent decades. Nonetheless the Acadian royalist system might still be saved to come to America’s aid should it desire a royalist system. There is no European descended culture more North American than the Acadian and Cajun culture. The Acadian system would also have some of the advantages of cost from both systems. In a royalist system the cost is contained if it works properly because a few facilities and people are paid a lot for their role and this is not done away with so that over time one build up great capital with limited expense in royal hands. Ina republican system costs are contained over time if it works well because standards are lower for all the executive accoutrements. In Acadian lines since 1604 no great fortune has ever been in Kingly hands ( nor for hundreds of years before by the terms of European Royalty) and Arcadian and Spartan royals were often austere in the mists of time’s long past. This has not usually been so much deliberates it has been part of the historic reality. Nonetheless, compared to other precedents one could bring to a truly Imperial USA this set of traditions has the most apparent low price tag.
The Titles of the Emperor would include “Emperor, Supreme President and Extraordinary Commander-in-Chief of the United States of America”. Among the perquisites of the Emperor he would have the White House as his Imperial residence. Some duties of the current Presidency would go to him but many would remain in the hands of an official to be titled “First and Executive Vice President, ordinary Commander-in-Chief and High Imperial Political Minister” of the United States of America”. This person would become a Censor on retirement by right, would have a Deputy First Vice President elected on his ticket and doing many of the same things in the same ways as the current Vice President. The First and Executive Vice President would reside in the Naval Observatory and would have a country residence as well provided by his office. The Emperor will also be tied to an elevation of America to royalism by the institution of Forty Peer Electors not usually part of the Elections of the First Executive Vice President for whom the Electors for Life are entitled to vote just as they do for Emperor. The Peer Electors would include the long secret Princely Chiefs of the Acadians — The Prince Boulet, The Prince Theriot, The Prince Broussard, The Prince Mouton and The Prince Leblanc. They would include the King or Queen of Hawaii but they would largely include scions of old families with claims who were selected for this special honor partly because given their claims they had agreed to conform to the Acadian four-part succession system of heredity, trials of merit, election and fealty. They would also include some key leaders of religious , academic and a tribal organization who have played a large role in America in this the republican era and have the qualities to pass things on with a title over generations.
This text from the Model Constitution is the first of many provisions which sexual discrimination is openly and blatantly described. That is despite the fact that most laws apply to both sexes equally and most offices are accessible to both equally. However, there are a good number of exceptions. The Emperor is and must be a male and man (although he could be so young that most moderns would not all him a man — to contend in Trials and Ordeals an Heir must have celebrated his thirteenth birthday and no more is required of age although age has advantages in the selection system so does youth). The Empress must be female and a woman. A Full Empress must be married to the Emperor in the Roman Catholic or Greek Orthodox Church. An Acting Empress must be appointed by the Emperor in the absence of an Empress. An Acting Empress can be the Emperor’s mother, legitimate and full gnealogical sister, or his legitimate daughter. She is required to be a female (as should be obvious) of at least fourteen years old. Aside from the fact that there has never been a female President of this republcan Union there are other advantages to women in the institution of the Empress. However tp justify all of this one must first revisit the question of whether or not discrimination between men and women is a correct course of actionfor a polity or not. I think men and women are very different and therefore must be regarded as such in the law.
First, human females are truly shockingly extraordinary. They are not only very different from men they are different from other female earthlings. Women distinguish our species so enormously that it is simply inevitable magic. The combination of human extreme bipedalism (walking on two feet) and the shape of chidlbearing hips combine with prominent breasts to create a figure which is very extreme sexual dsiplay compared to men’s beards and very little else is so specifically developed as sexual flesh. This is somewhat different from our nearest biological relatives the apes. It is very distinct from the myriad examples of ducks, deer, chickens, lions, turkeys and other well known species where the male expresses the physical “come hither” material in the sexual dialog. In most species there is either no sexual dimorphism meaning there is asexual morphism — meaning males and females look mostly alike OR the male wears the plumage.
Having shown a major difference we are only geeting started. A heathy adult female can have coitus on any day at any period of that day. Most females are penetrable (in species like large animals which penterate) only infrquently and are fertile only on these realtively rare occasions. Healthy adult human females are fertile and infertile every month when they are not pregnant or lactating to supply a dependent nursing heavily. The variations between fertile and infertile periods within the month are not common to the whole species nor linked closely to the weather but vary from woman to woman. Further, there is very little physical difference between fertile and infertile women so that estrus is largely hidden. This is also a very limiting set of sexual characteristics which human famles share with few if any other females on Earth if taken as a whole.
To add another level of complexity to the totality of the factors in the paragraph above the human female fertility cycle matches the length of one of the most obvious cycles on earth that of the moon but is not tied to its periodicity. It generaly runs according to the woman’s own biology but does tie in and sychronize to some degree with women she lives with and is somewhat (but very subtly and eraticaly) related to sexual stimulus from men especialy in very young women.
Additional to all the other differences there is the difference between the baby dlivered by a woman and an adult human. That difference is called the “degree of neotony”. Almost no creature has a greater degree of neotony and when one combines this degree of neotony with the degree of involvement and care a young human will generaly accept and seek from its mother this creates a greaer demand and matched capacity for mothering per individual human than almost any other earthly species.
These are actually only a few of the reasons why women are objectively one of the most fascinating and compelling subjects to which one could apply the human mind. I actually believe that one of the greatest windows for insight into the state of well-being, progress and potential of any society is to look at women as women within that society.
Here is a woman functioning in Acadian or Germano-Acadian home ‘s kitchen and living room where she plays a vital role in social and economic development in the family and community. The painting is in turn painted by another woman, my great-great-grandmother Regina Oubre Hollier. Dhe is drawing from childhood memories for the composition.
There are a great number of things to learn if one wants to understand womanhood and perhaps in the modern age we are losing the last ties to many of them. Among the most influential men of my own lifetime a few of them have been distinguished in large part by something having to do with sex and womanhood. These include Karol Wotija/ Pope John Paul II, Ronald Reagan, Hugh Heffner, Bill Clinton, Prince Charles Arthur George Saxe-Coburg-Gotha- Battenburg-Lyons-Windsor (or whatever one chooses to call the current Prince of Wales) and John F. Kennedy. However, unlike many religious people what strikes me about the modern era is how sexles and lifeless it is not how we are all a bunch of sex maniacs. These men while very different from one another are perhaps more normal in that sex is a pulsing shaping force in their public biography. Most modern biographies are perhaps best described as freakishly wierd. Sex is not a side note to the decisions people make in public office. Sex is very much a part of a sane governance. Sex is also enormously troublesome in our current poltical life. The Edwards trial, the IMF President DSK, the Secret Service Agents scandal in Colombia and the Clinton Impeachment are just a fewinstances whwere the trouble is very visible to everyone watching our system. The Emperor and Empress would change the sexual debates and dialogs in many ways without more heavy-handed hostility toward one group of people or another. There will be conflicts over sexual issues in the new regime but men and women will be acknowledged sexually in a better way than they are now simply by having an EMperor and an Empress.
In a royalist or aristocratic high republican or a number of other regimes the family has a stature which can tie together the privacy of sex, affection and home with the qualities of a public institution.The modern era has largely abandoned this whole vast set of institutions and patterns which tie these huge parts of the world together.
The point of all this is not that women should have no meaning or existence outside of their role as sexual coun terparts to men and mothers to children. However, the point is to show thattheir is almost limitless capacity for development and discussion in that aspect both of women and of the idea of women. To know woman one must first renounce that kind of asexual androgyny which has had a great deal of credence and influence in the world of my lifetime. Men and women are profooundly different and that difference is vital, useful and profoundly energizing in a decent and healthy society.
There are many layers of sexual exchange and perception between men and women. The Bible is one of the sources for wisom and the perception of ages regarding the relations of men and women. In the iconic story of Adam and Eve in the Book of Genesis in the Bible Adam is the first man and his words upon seeing the first woman are memorable. As Genesis 2: 22b-25 states:” When he brought her to the man the man said.”This one, at last, is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh;This one shall be called “woman” for out of “her man” this one has been taken.”That is why a man leaves his mother an father and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body.The man and his wife were naked but they felt no shame.”
The extreme intimacy of the passage is in comparison to the anmials with whom Adam cannot marry or form an intimate partnership. But it remains a very intimate passage. There is almost nothing that has been more under sustained attack for millenia than this excited, intimate and personal recognition by man of his mate in women. Real moral science ia very demading and elegant pursuit and thus is more often abandoned than pursued. However, real moral science must always take a careful measure of relations between the sexes.
I think it deserves to be said in this context that I believe in a moral struggle as a desirable thing. I find that those who are not struggling have usually settled for something bad. One of the powerful shaping forces of humanity as it is remains the strong belief that anything related to the relational structure of humanity must either be very ancient, fixed and setled or else a really blank slate upon which any given generation can write or draw whatever it wants. For me I think that the entire mystery and meaning of humanity is something quite different. Humans have numerous intrinsic qualities that cannot really be changed much in any generation. Yet one may face the future with confidence when aware of these strictures of the past and present. A generation and an individual can compose any vast number of varied tunes using these notes given by nature. By preserving and fully working the great musical tradition one can even enhance the range and delicacy of notes available to future generations of musicians. Sexuality and the role of women is one of the great musical worlds in which the human race can operate. It is an area where we all practice some form of art whether or not we even acknowledge it.
What evolution, the idea of original sin, reincarnation, eugenics and quite a few other theories about the proper living out of humanity have in common is the idea that we pass on something different to the future based on our actions. Humans may not agree on what the mechanism for passing things on is, nor what ought to be passed on, nor how that which is passed on relates to present behavior. But in many different ways and at many different levels of intensity we remind ourselves and are reminded by those we put in charge of our most serious thinking that we are changing the present of future generations by how we live out our own present here and now.
This is a rather serious business and humans are able to make rather substantial changes in the population in relatively short periods of time. One of the most notable struggles of human race is our struggle to define and make ourselves as a species. That our greatest project is ourselves is a perspective which gives great importance to waman’s involvement in the human adventure. One of the characterisitics of the modern era is that we expect the totality of sexual relations to be easily defined. Consider that terms like: harem, concubine, paramour, mistress, courtesan, sister-wife, rival, Abbess, novice, midwife, maid, lady-in-waiting, placement, princess, Queen, Official Mistress and countless others once denoted roles which were available to women in many cases simultaneously and which in huge numbers of places have all disappeared down to the last one. I write here not so much to change the world but more as any defeated soldier may write when he decides that before his life ends he wants to make really clear how badly he views this new order and the triumph of what he fought against. So for me I see layer upon layer of both personal defeat and the coming to an end of much of what makes the human species human. It goes back to my recurring theme thayt life has mostly been a nightmare.
One thing about sex and womanhood being very near the core of the human moral struggle is that the issues related to womanhood and sexuality are subject to the same regional and epochal variations as are other part of the human moral drama. From my point of view I may say that all humans are severely confused and diseased in their understanding of these things. However, I would not say that they or we all suffer from the same delusion or disease. We may all be in error but we are in distinct errors across the species. A loose translation of the Bible called the Catholic Living Bible translates a passage as follows: Luke 11: 45-47a”Sir,” said an expert in religious law who was standing there, ” you insult my profession, too, in what you just said.””Yes,” said Jesus, “the same horrors await you! For you crush men beneath impossible religious demands that you yourselves would never think of trying to keep. Woe to you!””
Sex is an area where evil intentions , evil plans and hate often come dressed up as morality. One of the greatest problems humanity faces is the problem of overcoming the advantages acrued by evil in human affairs once evil is recognized as a real thing. I think that for me sex is an aspect of the human condition which accentuates hoew badly flawed our species is and yet, at the same time, is the point of glory at which we can most resemble the species we were once meant to be.
Sex remains the great risk and gamble on which we still place the most on the table. Where we can never entirely wipe out our divine destiny whether we believe in it or not.I think of Lawrence Summers my distinguished nonrelative ( as far as i know) who has had his name on the money of the United States of America and beeen president of Harvard and I think of the uproar and probable beginings of the move to boot him from the presidency of that famed institution. He merely suggested that the difference in representatation in hard sciences and maths and engineering between men and women migh have something to do with natural predilections varying by sex. He did not say women could not be good engineers, scientists or mathematicians. This is a story where I think the female faculty at Harverd is 100% justified in being very vigilant to the point of near para noia in guarding access to these fields for women candidates. I think Lawrence Summers — aside from having phenomenaly good taste in last names — was fully justified in speculating that there may be proclivities varying by sex which were relevant here. I think in that regard both sides in the dispute acted as relatively wise and intelligent people. Nonethless, I would favor the Swedish Parliament funding a Special “Silly Goose Award” comparable to the Nobel prizes they already give out and making all parties to this public dispute designated recipients. “Sex” it has often been said “makes fools of us all”.
Misogyny is a quality which abounds among the total population of male humans. But degrading all tradtional familial institutions and not allowing men to feel like men is not excusable anyway. Killing love and marriage is not godd for women. Neither is covering over millions of cases of rape with non-notification laws on abortions for teenage girls. America must support the royalist opportunities for women in the world if it is to be a substantially feminist society. It must also acknowledge it exists in the world that is full of real institutional brutality and abuse against women like the female genital mutilation of millions of women throughout the world to destroy their sexuality. So is the killing of countless girls and women without prosecution by their families and lovers every year in the worst situations and without hope of justice huge portions of the world. I am not sure the ladies of Harvard can afford quite the ivory tower they live in. However, in that way they resemble their male counterparts.
I do not believe that the story at the begining of the book of Genesis was written by Moses after visiting the origins of the human species in a time machine. I do not believe the writer had a Ph. D. in biology. I do not believe it is a book coded from another book which was largely a straight first hand bio-history of its time — that is what I believe about the Gospels. I am even willing to say that he early stories are myths which is a word that atheistic relativistic scholars love to use for them. However, I do think that they are true stories written to pass on ancient coded trruths and insights which come from miraculousy ancient parts of the human story. Why is so much in the Bible coded?
That is a question for a long an important note on another occasion. In this note we will examine a bit more of Adam and Eve. There are three phases of the sexual relationship betwwen the two. in very general terms I mean for one could argue for a dozen phases.
The first is the phase in Genesis 2: 22-25b which I have already quoted this is the relationship between Man and Woman which God intended as unique to the human species. This really reflected the Image of an ultimate divine nature. The qualities of that relationship are intimacy, passion, empathy, excitement sex, good bodily self-image and fertitlity. It sounds tiring to those of us with enough mileage but otherwise one who can think can see the logic and goodness of it.
To preserve this humanity needed God’s friendship and to avoid eating the fruit of the knowleddge of Good and Evil. The writer here is using code for cannibalism. Yes, that again. The passage says that iti is a tree in the middle of the garden of course humans are in the middle of their own world always. That on the day one eats it humans will die and again if humans are eaten then the human eaten will die. It brings knowledge of Good and Evil and we actually have a lot of data across many centuries and cultures to show that eating human flesh is a passage which brings cunning, insioght and moral guilt into human minds in a unique way whether the society endorses or forbids cannibalism.
The last set of relations is the abusive marrasige and the loss of God’s friendship which define behavior which is in the survivable margin for humans as we currently are. These last two phases of the story are descibed in Genesis Chapter three. We all are still living in the last phase at best from the story’s own point of view.
It goes far beyond my capacity in time and space in tis note to show instances of cultures where men have driven their lands into desert and ruin to make sure that women were sastarving and dispossessed and fit into one of three (to them) acceptable catgories hyper-breeding terrified slaves, spies or religiously deluded cattle reared as food. rthis of course has always included the need to kill and maim some large number of men who cannot overcome (or heroicaly resist overcoming) their lover for mothers, sisters, and female lovers. Some of the time homosexuals have led this misogynistic elte.
Life is often hell and human society often a sewer which exceeds my capcity to espress and usually it involves building things on one of two principles men hating women or women hating children. Often this is dressed up as religion or ideology but it is really about that. This engine allows the most foul and wothless kinds of people to amss almost all available power and resources. It has happened occasionaly since time imemorial.
The sexualy intense path of paradise requires lots of restriction and guidance in the real world. It always has unless you believe we may have had an unfallen Eden somewhere in the pre-historic past. But it is the path which produces real joy and love, wealth, pressure for progress and other necessities. I presume that almost everyone alive today is someone I would consider fundamantally insane. But I do not take such a dim view of insanity as some do. Homosexuality is a condition of some sons of women which is in my view tolerable when thaose who are homosexual know it is a limiting thing and have the humility to see it as a special status with some rewards like a special survival adaptation or even a near talent and some disease-like qualities requiring a routine of self -care such homosexuals are plenty sane enough to be in the category of people saner than a whole lot of fellow humans. The same is true for homosexuals they publicly acnkowledge it as a kind of loss in bio-sweepstakes in which they make the best out of a less than first place postion. But there are many modern American homosexuals who are lying evil men supported by many feminists encouraging other evil men in a way which opens on to an ininite pool of evil. Yes sexuality can be evil and not just in aggressive direct ways that very strong heterosexuls can do evil.
Women are tied to certain kinds of inferiority too. The way a man is supposed to feel superior is in the act of achieving coital satisfaction. Unthinkably in allowing the killer and crusher in him to feel fed by her sufferings in pregnancy and child birth and then letting the good and protective part of him make it up to her in other ways. Women are supposed to have a capacity for maistakes as a class which is not the same in men. If women stopped getting pregnant and being a little optimistic about it when everything was bleak and horrible there would never be a brighter tomorrow. What is wrong is that there have for hundreds of centuries been people racing to the bottom, giving women less and less of their share for breeding expenses as it were. There is a lot more I could say on this subject. Men have also been maimed and crippled by women in many ways and that is also part of the drama.
Darwin is selected as the father of modern evolutionary science partly because he earned it and partly for the toxic views on sexuality, breeding, polygamy and other sexual subjects. We have been poisoned by political pseudo-science against a real and worthy understanding of sex. I believe that we all face a need for learning more and better views of marriage, culture , midwifery and other subjects. However, only when humanity is able to see that women were maent to inflame men and so were made by God and yet we cannot handle it can we begin to handle it. I truly think that both medical contraception and the church sponsored studies of natural family planning in recent centuries can bring us much closer to what we are meant to be. And yet I would be lying if I said that I believe the Catholic Hierarchy or Gynecolgists have handled the test very well. I think there is a massive sexual crisis on Earth and that is a separate note because it relates mostly to the last 1,500 years where as what I have discussed is about all humans at all times. In the West our current disoprder is usually to be blindly iresponsible and lie about why. In the East it is to use responsibility as an excues for racing to the worst positions because they are sustainable. I think that anyone who believes in a God Gods, Fates, Karma or Providence should be very afraid to account for our species’ sexual legacy. The rest of you, well you sort of amuse me –maybe that is your cosmic purpose.
In this new Constitution a man and a woman who are either married to one another or else have another close family tie preside over the Empire in an ultimate Earthly sense. They provide an exmple that may not be what most Americans in power want but is what the whole society needs. We shall see in the next note and Section Three that the ordinary exercise of political power remains in the hands of persons more analogous to our current republican presidents. These officials will now be called First Executive Vice Presidents. However, the Acadian and Louisiana Titles, the Imperial House and Tribe will all be recognized by the United States Ordinary Executive. In addition the Head of State, whether Emperor of Empress will retain some executive perogatives. The Empress will also have some executive perogatives which are hers as Empress and do not depend on the arrival of times when she is the Full Head of State or near to that because the Emperor is absent or dead.
***** ******* ****** ******
Article Three: The Executive and the Monarchy
This is a complicated and vital section of this document and charter. There will be a Jurisdiction called the Direct Imperial Government where the Emperor will function as a Royal and powerful chief executive, The Imperial House where he will operate as a Royal Despot in a Constitutional House, an Imperial Tribe where he will reign and rule in an extremely complex non-state traditional constitutional mixed government, and a Harem within the House where he will be an absolute authority in one sphere. All of this is only part of his possible collection of functions. However his function in this Empire as Emperor will be as described and defined in this Constitution.
Section One: The Emperor and Supreme President
This is the greatest new change. At the time of the Founding all executive and Command power will be in the Emperor who is also head of State. The Emperor will entrust ordinary exercise of this power to the First Executive Vice President after he and the Second and Deputy Executive Vice President are duly elected and have paid him public homage.
Section Two: The Empress and Temporary Supreme President
The Empress will be full Head of State during an Interregnum if she is full Empress. She will be Supreme Deputy Head of State in Absence or Indisposition of the Emperor. There can be times when she has his full Executive Authority. Normally she will be a mjor executive figure between the Highest minister and the Emperor in the DIG. This is also a transformative position and state in which all language is presumed to require some change in law and constitution compared to the state of law and policy in the Second Union.
***** ***** ***** **** **** ****
If you have the energy to discuss this with friends that would be great. But the basic point here in this the numberless and untitled preamble as well as in Section One “The Emperor and Supreme President” and Section Two “The Empress and Temporary Supreme Presidenti” n Article Three ” The Executive and the Monarchy” is that for our system to work there must be an effective executive and more as well. This portion of the article introduces to us the idea of a royal man and a royal woman holding some executive power as heads of state. We are made aware that the next section will deal with a figure more like the current President of the republican Union.
I have tagged a few FB friends and I will in some or all my notes. Any kind of political radicalism at any time is a risk for those associated with it and so I am keeping the tagging to a minimum and while a great deal of endorsement will be needed to effect these changes there is no indication that someone tagged in a note in this series is actually endorsing the note. As always I am willing to respond to posted comments, chat and private messages.