American Republic

What this republic intends to do to restore and fulfill the Constitution.

The Court received a question as to what the Trubidity Act means for Americans of this Republic in investing in the space industry. The President set an amount and the congress provided a resolution, so how should this be interpreted for Americans to act?

This is a body, a group, that seeks to restore America to her republic, in the nature of representing people, and being a moral, righteous, and constitutional democracy. The current form of America, the establishment and the bureaucracy, do not represent the American people, nor our interests. The American Republic is, first and foremost, an idea. It's an idea because the nation that was a republic has vanished. It's also this particular body you see before you, in this particular form, because this is a group that seeks to enact those principles.

This document declares the foundation and the renewal of the American Republic. It declares the rights of all people and the foundations of government, and the reasons that command obedience and fulfillment. It then puts forth a list of misdeeds the current administration has done. Finally, it declares the renewal and continued Constitutional commitment of our American Republic to that which is righteous, autonomous as a group of American people.

This is the Constitution of the American Republic, which lays out the separation of powers of the body. It creates a congress, a President, and a supreme court, and establishes the rights of all of the individuals within this body.

This proposes the Final Testament to the Bible. It covers the ministry of Christ after his death up until now, and the new covenant made with God's chosen people: the Americans.

I propose that justice must be sought, and it must be attained through any means necessary, darkness or light. Make no mistake! The destiny is the light of the world, which shines greater than the darkness, and the darkness comprehends it not.

I am not talking about those who have achieved oneness with the light. Nor am I speaking of those who are pursuing the light, and doing so through the light, which is a far more effective, better, and fruitful manner of seeing Jesus Christ. I am talking specifically about those who do not believe or wish to believe in Jesus, or those who have tried to but cannot make any progress, perhaps especially make negative progress, by only using the journey of light to get there.

For those people, I speak to specifically. And the way to maneuver in this case is to understand that all roads fully followed lead to God. Therefore, the worst sin is not necessarily choosing the road of darkness, but for choosing the road of neither light nor darkness, but staying middlingly in between.

To you, if on your journey to Jesus you cannot take the path of light, then take the one of darkness instead; it will lead you there anyway if you go all the way down.

I cover the history that led me to this conclusion, including the philosophy of authors like Milton and Dante. My foundation is from that light is triumphant so any full congregation with reality will make it appear. Seek the light.

This book attempts to highlight the significance of life. It points out that there are two distinct forms of life as I see it relevant: life that is untainted, proud, and pure, versus life that has willfully corrupted itself by opposing the Lord (though still untainted and pure because of the divinity of all humans; I only mean tainted in a human sense). It is inspired by Colonel Carey's arguments in favor of Manifest Destiny for America. In it, he argues that America should liberate other nations that oppress their people, with force if necessary, to protect the innocent of them. He acknowledges this could result in tragic collateral damage, but that it is a sacrifice to be made under these conditions. I agree. I anticipate counterarguments, however, that question the validity of the desire to protect the innocent when the argument revolves around sacrificing portions of them, as they may say.

But to be sure, this is not the case. It's not the case because there is a difference between taking life that is corporeally corrupted and evil by choice–that harms others–where innocents only get caught in the crossfire despite the best of efforts for them to not be so, versus willfully harming the innocent. The willful harming of the innocent is the very thing the Colonel and I seek to prevent in the first place! I exemplify this at first by making an analogy with abortion, where being pro-life for the unborn baby does not preclude accepting the realities of just warfare in this circumstance. One is innocent, whose potential inconvenience for unappreciative mothers is not willful and thus cannot be treated so.

I move on to discuss the broader issue at hand, where we understand as Christians and Americans the value of life to be something that is inherent, and so must be protected. It is never the goal to end life. We hold life to be sacred and superordinate. This compels us to protect innocent children, babies, men, and women against those who would harm them. And those who would harm them, too, are not deserving of death. They are deserving of what is necessary to prevent further harm from occurring. The terrible face of war may involve the slaughtering of unjust people who could otherwise be reconstituted calmly, and innocents maimed, but that is neither the intent nor the enterprise. All war revolves around peace. A respect for peace is the very thing that compels the righteous to protect the peaceful.

Having proven that broader issue, confirming the value of life and understanding it is this value that leads us to manifestly take action, I provide why Manifest Destiny is a deductive manifestation of a kind regard for human welfare. Jesus forgave those who knew not what they did, who showed remorse, or who were good in essence. He turned over the temple of those who did not. Sparing precise examples of how and why various countries harm their people, the book lists overall methodologies and philosophies other nations use to subjugate people, even of the most seemingly civilized sort. The people who rule, as well as those who blindly follow, must be stopped, and the book delivers cutting reasons as to how that aligns with American-Christian jurisprudence.

I end it with a call for reflection, and an understanding of why our lives are all so important: mutual divinity in Christ, assertion of eternal goodwill, and a perseverance to preserve and spread it.

Have you ever wondered how to speak wonderfully? You probably already do, knowing how wise you are to have stumbled across this survey of text. I once surveyed an arrangement of text, and it was quite nice, except that it had some text that was quite fine, too. The thing I didn't like about it was that it could be loud sometimes. I just asked it politely to stop, and it did. And that's the essence of speaking. We articulate ourselves, we move ahead, and we deliberate.

So this book goes over precisely how to speak. Speaking is a process that involves two main types of planned and unplanned. Planned speaking is a process aided by careful reflection prior specifically for that moment. You'll be aided in being knowledgeable of the subject. When we're talking about unplanned speech delivery, you'll do as well as you can, which is great, and then might have to fill in holes.

Break a speech up into parts. It's teleological. That means it's always directed at an end, that of answering the continuing questions that evolve over affairs of societal circumstance. We don't speak because we want to say random words, but because there are bigger questions to be answered. If you keep your audience in mind, then, and treat it just like answering these pure sets of questions, it's a walk. Now, there is a history of speech that involves understand why writing is important. We also need to understand that being eloquent indeed requires having the audience closely in mind, gauging their reactions, and so forth, because speech is a two-way affair.

I go on to discuss the detailed processes of forming speech. Writing is something that should be possessed as a skill to carefully aid the formation process, and I cover how to skillfully use it to gain effective speeches. Then the delivery must mirror this process, and I deliver specific techniques on how that is accomplished.

This story covers the endeavors of a lovely gentlemen known by the name Surreal. His story is both surreal and practical, taking place in the day and age of today's America. He's a very discerning man, and notices the things that are happening, and doubly moves to combat them. He plots to end the unsightly occurrences by using the powers of the earth to undermine them. Surreal is a patriot, and disdains those who aren't. It is by the Christian Protestantism we were made, shall live, too.

The story begins in San Francisco, which is a birthplace of the modern forms of technology which are very interesting, yet sometimes fruitful. Surreal endeavors to politically strike against the forms of technology by taking strategic civil action. He goes to City Hall and puts and end to this by showcasing, in patriotic regard, the list of grievances the City of San Francisco has engaged upon its inhabitants. He shows how the lack of unity is directly tied to an infrastructure not geared toward the eternal practical gain of man and woman, their children alike. No, it's geared toward the phony illusion of what's called progress, geared toward a mayoral administration which admires the appearance of change, and geared toward a city in desperate need for reconciliation with the Lord but finds only in its wake manipulative torment upon those unable to see it, having been so, with forlorn element, deceived by that administration.

Yet Surreal is not so deceived and, discerning conscience, speaks boldly at City Hall. This sparks something of a rebellion, where his passionate words spark a movement across the city with himself closely at the helm. He forms a group at this, and moves to better the city of San Francisco with more effective means. This city serves as a beachhead for what comes later in the novel, where he deploys these amassing forces to divest away with technology, but the other fruits that it represents, and baptize America by fire and water as it was, but needs to be in more fiery and glorious water.

America is at a state of harm and division. Polls show there is a significant proportion of the population that views civil war as likely. Armed civil war. There's something deeper going on in our consciousness that is causing this. It's moral relativism, in a nutshell. I seek to determine why this is, and the various factors present in the American psyche. By doing this, I provide a solution.

Moral relativism resulted in identity politics for the benefit of individuals and their small in-groups instead of everybody. It results in disloyalty and chaos. The rising political violence is a manifestation of this. I analyze the psyche of America and through themes and patterns reveal the inner consciousness. I recognize the consciousness of the conservatives and few liberals who oppose the rising tide. I define them in comparison, and how this consciousness leads to what we see. It's defined as a fight from conservatives and those few liberals against the progressive leftist agenda. It's the TV, the social media, and the powers of the Earth used in reverse: not for people but people for the powers of the Earth.

After proving this, I show how the nation can move on by fracturing the leftist consciousness. We fracture them with fire and water. We play their game since they refuse to obey reason. We offer them water only after they realize their foolishness. Then we bring them to the good state of consciousness, which, appealing to God, rights every wrong. It's a poem that displays the differences in the American psyche and how they originate in thought. As I prove The Fruits of States, people are moved by principles, as humans are the ultimate embodiment. So we need to methodically operationalize the right ones.

Reasoning is a dutiful affair which in no small fashion compels to view the world more eloquently, and divest proper rights to those who are worthy. The rights of mankind. Now, in order to reason, one must have a very specific process. This book shows how reason can be done carefully, by taking an objective view of one's surroundings, and analyzing them for any utility. Reasoning is teleological, so you need to have in mind the object of your desire. There are patterns from reasoning that can be seen, but they need to be identified in unconventional ways because situations are distinct from the patterns from which one derives their conclusions. In order to derive the best conclusions, you'll also need some subjective element. It's a final skill which is very difficult to master, but when incorporated can remove some of the mistaken elements that reasoning can involve, it being something involving inherently novel territory where patterns are meaningless from them.

In order to reason, a close analysis of everything is conducted. The reasoner needs to be aware of both the past, present, and future with the future being most firmly fixed in mind. It's not for no reason that emotions can be brought into it, and the first stage is always passionless. There are things that can only be seen by doing away with notions possessed before. Only after it has been materially confirmed by reason of it substance, is the process worthy of commendation.

The subjective element is articulated. It's a tactic to be done only by people who have mastered this most fundamental element. After that, the reasoner can include certain heuristics and techniques they have learned and committed to memory. This should be done under the careful guidance of the greeter and objective intellect. That's why it's done in this two step stage.

This treatise declares the divinity of the spirit of America, which was founded on beautiful Protestant Christian ethics of love and compassion. We have these ideals. We need to extend them to other nations.

It makes a brief appeal to why our sense necessitates we procure it. It backs this up.

Then the treatise discusses that although this is right, we must be cautious. America, today, even though it is the best nation, is undergoing severe difficulties. With the same idea of Manifest Destiny we must liberate those who are subjugated and who demean themselves in this nation. We must do it fiercely and not with the same implied overt force but the same cause of division.

We begin by manifestly enlightening the citizens of our own nation by conquering the leftists, and emboldening the conservatives, libertarians, and reasonable moderates. As established in my work on the American consciousness, in our home country this will be done with a calm and patient fire and water approach, yet strategic.

Once united, and compelled to be glorious, we extend outward, obtain more land for us and the people we liberate, and solve all the other crises. We start with ourselves, then we go to the nearby countries. This is an action of ultimate peace.

An argument for the utility of a civic dividend. I was inspired by the fruitfulness of UBI, the idea that human beings should receive a small sum of currency in order to incentivize risk-taking, small business, and desires motivated by things rather than abject fear. However, this runs the risk of not making economic sense from the principle of it being divested universally, without meaningful origin. The correct answer is to understand that humans indeed are motivated by the purity of work. But people also have property rights that should be respected, both public and private.

The argument details first the philosophical origins for a civic dividend. It argues with a proposed opponent who detests the idea. The dividend is intended to be a property right originating from people's rights in the state of nature. America was founded on property rights heavily taken from English Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke, where all men own the world in common in the state of nature, which is why anyone can take an apple and eat it out in nature, despite that tree belonging, seemingly, to no one. Now, there is no open natural land commonly owned for man to take his own risks and pursue property bravely and independently. Man and woman must instead pursue jobs that require human permission, but nature required no arbiter. This is a deviation from natural property rights that must be restored.

It should be given back to the people and their elected representatives in the states. A civic dividend may consist of people performing such duties as voting, volunteering, or filing some sort of declaration of fruitful desire every year, each action appropriately divesting to them some portion of a dividend taken from them from the original free state of nature that has been excessive. This will also incentivize more participation in the civic process, and also reflects the fact that all citizens in America, by the patriotic and automatic act of holding the government accountable perform work, that should be rewarded. We all, through our continued American existence, take everyday civic actions that strengthen and secure our democracy, even when we don't vote: like by talking with each other and forming clever opinions that allow us to hold politicians accountable and make them obey their people. The overt nature of these acts, like voting and volunteering, are therefore subject to the compensation that they involve, especially since the fruitfulness of America at modern large today is only made possible by the continued civic involvement, and is how the free land of nature has been so vastly appropriated beyond (such an uncompensated) justification.

The fact of the lack of a human arbiter is also retained through the dividend. Such civic duties require no human permission, just as the tree required none to pick its apple, but only the equal and impartial ability to pick. No human employer, however generous, is impartial, because by definition a human being is unnatural and partial, unlike nature. Americans have a right to all aspects of their private property.

Not only have the fruits of such nature been appropriated unrighteously, but the fulfillment of picking them has been as well. We therefore ask, demand actually, that this be given to the people and their elected representatives to make do with how it would be fitting.

My reading of the Gospel, which is very inspired. I'm a Protestant, and I understand who Christ is, and I have faith in him. It's how I believe in God, as well. So, here I do my best to help unveil how I believe Christ to be, and what he wanted us to do. I don't claim to have any special power in doing so, I'm only revealing my own beliefs. Jesus instructed us to be brave, truthful, forgiving, but also to be fierce in doing justice toward that same end. Here, I mainly show how both of those two things can be true.

Across the Gospel, he tells us to be peaceful like doves, to be forgiving, and to be loving. We should be, and extending love to those who hate us is beautiful. Jesus instructs us to be kind to strangers. This Word is the light of humanity. We must never forget to offer up unrestricted kindness to everybody we see, to give our cloak to the one who asks for a vest, and to breathe the life of Jesus and his spirit into everyone.

There's also Scripture which commands us to bring division and enmity against those who are outright evil. We are not supposed to offer peace to these people, and are to oppose them, even forcefully. How can both of these things be true, and why does Jesus tell us both things in Matthew? I clear up common confusion that I see ideating around the idea that he was purely peaceful, which he was mostly, but not always if there were reasons, and cite the Gospel. Then I answer that question of how we must not draw the sword in haste, but also not refuse to use it when in good taste.

Through this faith, the light triumphs over the darkness. The darkness, as John says, does not comprehend it.

I establish the Christian Church. I help establish it. The Christian Church is the body of Jesus's followers across the globe. I use that term to differentiate it from other, small churches. There is no church but every Christian, and that needs to be emphasized.

I fix why the Christian Church must prominently be recognized, despite it being obvious. The Christian set of ethics and ideals is not at the forefront today as it should be, and atheism, like a scheming duck, seeks to quell the divinity of man's good conscience by a series of relative stances, none of which have at the heart any shared mutual acknowledgment for the betterment of Americans or her allies, but instead the selfish pursuit of egregious ignominy serving at best a baseless imitation of a childish idol and at worst a reckless disregard for Christ which must be stopped. America is a Christian nation, and we have a right and duty to be Christian, not only because we were, but because we are, and because the world ought to be. Only through Christ have we compelled the world to be so great for what it is, which is.

So these witches must be reconciled. I cover the history of America and its Protestant roots only to show why we are the Christian Church. That matters because America was founded on Jesus, who loves us who follow him. More so than any other nation, the first among us in America followed Jesus. More so than any other people, have the individuals of America have to have made God, through his omnipotent Son, smile. I will unite the free and brave. Then I cover our mission in more detail, going over how we offer a vision to claim faith in people at large by showcasing to them their inner peace. It won't be forced upon them but gently guided there. Some more gently than others.

I articulate the specific reasons the Christian Church offers what it does, including the forms of communication and action of the books, bills, and petitions. Originality of expression will foster a reflection that will demand, on its own accord, a unity with Christ. So through getting people to know themselves, we will get them to see the light of him. In great muse, I proclaim the mission of the Christian Church in enlightening the world and how we will go from point to point and mission to mission to end the suffering caused by the atheistic movement, and help America and the world realize that Christianity is divine and to be worshipped. The Christian Church will involve itself with people, get them to think intelligently, and after pointing out the absurdity of atheism in action or thought, douse them with the light of Jesus Christ, therefore among all our brothers and sisters seek charity.

This book determines how states arise in the world. It draws from classical Enlightenment thought, applying libertarian thinking to analyze. Traditionally, the state arises from one of nature, where there is no fixed government. It's almost a kind of anarchy. Except that there can never be any true anarchy, because people operate under principles. As long as principles exist, they will act in concert with each other. This occurs to varying levels of degrees and sometimes catastrophically. I ascertain what real principle unites people initially, in anarchy. I show how a common principle always allows states to come into existence.

That principle is one of common faith in each other, and therefore establishes the basis for freedom. Once that is in place, large states can form. This is classically done in the form of a social contract. The idea of what a social contract is, whether it makes sense, and how it is precisely constituted is explored and fixed. Nozick's idea of the invisible hand is articulated in context. Yet it connects it with libertarian principles of just agreement and ultimate connection.

Afterward, the American formation of the state, the most beautiful state to form, is explored as to its origins. Precisely how did the formation of the American state come into being, considering the nature of the principled origin of human groups and the social contract of free enterprise? The book connects it with various thematic elements of early America, including Protestantism, republican democracy, free speech connected with morality and responsibility. This, indeed, bore fruit for America, which represents the fruit that all states undoubtedly seek to achieve.

I finally touch on how the world, through the American and Christian nature of shared justice, achieve eternal fruit. If America, the light, can show the world what it wants so desperately, it can bear a fruit last seen in Eden. That involves reconciliation, a flaming gun, and practically opining about why we seek justice.

America stands divided on too many issues. We fail to consistently understand why. It's not because our object policies are wrong, as instead that's a symptom. It's core. We don't know what it means to be whole together in the first place. We misunderstand fatally the concept of unity totally, where it involves two halves that unite, that are boundless and jolly in character. This concept revolves around man and woman, which aren't biological assets, but ideas, whose transcendent radiation has perplexed people, causing them to forget clear communication and the free exercise of rights in such communion.

Until we resolve this, it's no wonder as a country we have a housing crisis, isn't it? I explore several topics. First, I analyze potential causes for the division, identifying lack of responsibility as a concern, and place the blame on feminism. Unwittingly, I identify truths later. It's not feminism that's the problem; it's that along with the blanket failure of men and women to take accountability for themselves. And to talk with clear conscience in mind for the community of Americans. But I identify that a source of division is gender as a base concept: Americans are concerned about so many gender issues–the feminism delusion, the gay activists, the transgender confusion–because we're asking a question about gender, about what it means to be a man and woman, and the goodwill we rightfully owe to ourselves.

Sobered, I realize that the crux of the issue lies neither on man nor woman specifically, but on us both. I uncover the solution is open unity. I make an open call for justice among men and women for anyone who knows how to communicate openly, to act boldly, freely, and originally, with allegiance to entities involving none but individual will. Although man and woman as ideas involve differences, we have for more in common, and these differences are to be used by us. Not against us. But because differences are complex and there is overlap between us, anyone can do what is righteous.

I proceed to lay out clear causes of action as for steps we can take, and why it matters as to the male and female question. Even though the call to action rests with everyone, there are differences in how men and women seem to pursue that call, and so we must present nuanced paths. I figure out precisely what actions that involves, how the ideas are to be applied, and specifically how this will heal the country. If we can unite in the idea of doing so, there won't be a housing crisis.