Purpose and Intent
This site is focused on the subject of the Simplist Philosophy, or Simplistism. I am also in the process of creating that philosophy in a formal sense. My personal goal is to be able to define myself as a Simplist. A principle of Simplistism is the expression that “It is far better to act like a thing than to just be called a thing.” This principle comes from the Human habit of giving a name to a collection of acts so that the practitioners of said acts could be referred to in order to separate them from other groups. This process is represented in science as taxonomy.
My intent is to act like a Simplist by presenting views that should be consistent with Simplist values in order to determine what Simplistism really is. This post uses a commonly expressed phrase and gives it a value and purpose in a Simplist world.
Origin and Intent
The “America First” phrase is said to have its’ beginning in the America First Committee which was advocating that America stay out of wars and entanglements with foreign countries. It is commonly referred to as isolationist in nature as it seems to suggest that America deny the existence of the rest of the world and “go it alone” in the course of making decisions. It was mostly used as a slogan for politicians who were trying to qualify their platforms or suggested policies as better than their opponents. The current President has used it to justify his position on many issues and a base for opposing any position contrary to his.
A new meaning and a new intent
It should be noted here that a Simplist philosophy exists only as a method for solving the many problems that face the United States of America, it does not attempt to address issues of North America or South America. We use the term America because the citizens of the U.S commonly refer to themselves as Americans.
America First – a statement that describes the obligation of it’s citizens to place the country first in consideration of its’ voting decisions. By this, we mean that the founding principle of equality of all citizens should supersede all else. The majority of Americas’ history has been the result of the failure of it’s citizens to vote for equality for all, but rather to decide the inequality of other citizens.
The founding fathers may have created the problem by specifying that only men had unalienable rights and thus went on to assert that truth by establishing the constitution as for men and men only by allowing only men to be able to affect it. By its’ actions they created a government that meant citizens were definitely not equal from the very beginning. They gave themselves rights other citizens did not have which totally contradicted the whole idea of a government ‘of the people, for the people and by the people’. They clearly established a government ‘of the men, for the men and by the men’.
It is reasonable to suggest that they were victims of their times in that they were working from what they had known at the time. It took subsequent generations of citizens becoming less ignorant through their experiences of the injustices ingrained in the law before men finally worked to correct the original mistakes. It is important that the founders had created a system of government which allowed for the necessary changes. This was, perhaps their only saving grace.
Unfortunately, there were always people in every generation that chose to remain ignorant and thus opposed changes that would give freedom to people that they felt did not deserve it. Again, they put their personal preferences above the principle of equality for all. This new meaning of America First does not advocate for a new right or a restraint of Freedom of Choice. It is only presented as a method to understand America from the beginning to today. In the broadest sense, it is only meant to be a tool presented for use. Like all tools, the value is determined in relation to the user. If you see no use for it, then it has no value. But, like a hammer may have a specific purpose to drive nails, any user may decide to use it for other purposes that involve hitting things besides nails. The best I can do is to give examples of its’ use and let you take it from there.
In consideration of the trend to place blame on others for the cause of an event, we choose to assign the blame based on our personal value system and thus ignore the value system of another without considering the equality of all in any other sense than that they are entitled to their opinion. America First is about putting aside that individual value system when casting a vote so that All Americans can live under the value system that was intended by the Founders’ ideas of Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness. Instead the people have chosen to change that value system rather than adhere to the principle of equality for all, by dividing themselves into groups that represent their value system of choice, and thus place their vote based on a collection of related value systems. We started by dividing first into parties of conservative vs liberal value systems, with the intent to make our value system the law of the land as decided by the majority. With each new generation new value systems emerged that centered on the preferred value system of choice and each generation multiplied the previous choices so that now a majority of all is accepted to be an impossibility, so only a sufficient number of people need to be chosen and all people need not be considered. The result has been that politicians refer to their responsibility to their constituency instead of referring to America as a whole in order to dodge responsibility for the effects inflicted on others by their choices.
It may also help to explain the state of current politics to point out how it is that so many problems have existed for so long. To get elected a politician need only promise to fix a problem of importance to a majority of citizens. Polling is used to determine what the selected problem should be. In any case, the cost of the political process is a primary concern. How the needed funds are obtained is a secondary concern. The issues about sources of funds can be argued as political intentions of the opposition. The result has been that more people are declaring themselves as running for election only because of the amount of money to be made in the process alone. The effect is that a general distrust of politicians has transitioned into a general distrust of government.
Under the political excuse of the America First banner as a reason for acting in an abnormal way, the elements of the protagonists have expanded into providing alternative facts said to support their notions of conspiracy. Their manifest intent is only to drive a wedge between their system of values and all other systems of values. The existence of services like Fox News, OAN and QAnon is so they can spread the needed information to convince their adherents that the chosen system of values is not just the “right” one, but the only one that is acceptable for the future of the America they perceive.
Under the new definition of America First, people should be able to recognize the part that they have played in the creation of this situation. This is not to imply that the people should be blamed or that anyone should be blamed. Placing blame has no relation to a solution that can solve the problem. To fail to consider all citizens is to suggest that equal rights for all is a myth and was never intended to be a real goal of a democracy. To call for unity around a specific cause is only a method of some to suggest a possible solution. The only unity that counts is to recognize that if we allow each others rights to be contested then we allow our own rights to be contested. The very notion of ‘all for one and one for all’ is thus evaporated. To return substance to that notion requires only that we commit to making our decisions to vote based on the idea that all effects one and one effects all.
To relate it to the present situation the problems of today are considered to be a result of Donald Trumps decision making. This a textbook case of confusing a container for the thing contained. Americans have always made their choices based on their own system of values ( commonly expressed as their own “self-interest” ). Trump is only the latest example of the attempt to prioritize his system of values above all others. The objective is always the same: To make the chosen system of values the law of the land and thus force all others to accept those values by rule of law. The fact that his election was a surprise to some was based only on the fact that he had no foundation to work from so why would people vote for him. He had only expressed a clear intent to destroy all that came before him. In that case, his intent was clear to those that voted for him because it opened the door for people who shared the value system of choice to justify making their value system the law of the land.
The people that want him re-elected are still desperate to get their value system enacted into law and cling to the hope that giving him more time will result in that outcome. Their only problem is that Trump is not committed to their value system. He is only concerned with his own. So far, his displayed value system seems be focused on getting what he wants without regards to any specific value system. In that way he is just like any other American in that he pursues his own value system by making his choices without considering the choices of others.
The Republican party is closest to achieving their goal of establishing its’ own value system as the law of the land by patiently and methodically installing the structural elements necessary to support their aims while refusing to allow any others to interfere with their desired outcome by stacking the final Judges ( The Supreme Court ). Thus they will be swayed to support their value system and confirm it as the Law of the Land. Of course, the only hiccup is that a Judge who has taken an Oath to be impartial may decide to adhere to that Oath at any time. As always, they can evaluate his conclusion in any way they like, but the conclusion still stands as a rule of law.
So, considering all the circumstances it is correct to say that our democracy is in danger. All it takes is for enough of the citizens to select a value system that excludes all others and they will establish a ruling class that controls all laws. This might satisfy the conditions necessary to still be considered a democracy, but it won’t be ‘our’ democracy.
So my final act is to leave it up to you to decide.