A friend gave me the term "isocracy," but I think
what I believe about equal responsibility is "isonomy."
In ancient Greece, the word "democracy" was rarely used except in a pejorative sense.
The ancient Athenians usually called their system
isonomia, "equality under the law." "Democracy" was associated with "mob rule" that led to the weakness and collapse of city states. Later, democracy was associated with the Terror of the French Revolution, and, in the 19th century, the United States did nothing to remove its tarnish. Most of the world considered the genocide of the Native People, the Mistreatment of Blacks, and the American Civil War to be the result of the disorderly "democratical" governance of the USA. They could point to the very different situation in Canada, which also had self-government, but avoided the Three Great Sins of the USA.
I disapprove of the Pledge on political and moral grounds, but I also have a personal grudge against it, too. When I was in the third grade in elementary school, I got to class a trifle late, and it had already started the Pledge. I quickly put my coat on a hanger, and then joined in. Afterward, the teacher criticized me in front of everyone; according to her, I should not have put my coat on the hanger, but immediately stood to attention and started reciting. Even my childish mind found this attitude to be really silly, and passing years increased my contempt for such idolatrous ways of thinking.
It is comforting, I think, that there is no such thing as a "Jealous God" -- I imagine that, otherwise, a lot of Christians would be in deep trouble for their violations of the First Commandment.
.
Dear Numan thanks for more interesting and informative background. While I believe in Christ as other Christians, I was brought up gentile, will always think in secular terms as my native language, and will always fit in better with people like you and DT who explain things in secular terms I can follow. I certainly would like both of you to be on the team as I ask more people to work with us towards a consensus on God. your openness and willing to work with diversity even where you honestly disagree is refreshing and much needed.
this is what is going to make the process work, we need more like you from all sides!
as for jealous god i have two thoughts on this
a. one group pointed out that jealous shares the same root word as zealous
so the same way a father may favor his family or a husband his wife
god and jesus are protective of their flock or children in a way that is zealous
b. we see this same jealous relationship with govt
no one can put local state law above constitutional law
right now people are stalling on the gun laws because there
are flaws going against the law of the land, so they wont compromise
either fix the flaws or the good parts of the reform won't pass either
so there are times where we must recognize the higher authority first
and then we can have all the secondary requirements under that umbrella
with the teacher who went to extremes to berate you in ways that were minor
the point was to keep the order of the classroom at all costs
to listen to the teacher for sake of authority even if that person is wrong
you can challenge later but not in front of everyone
this happens when society is immature and members are treated as children
or followers; to ensure safety the police or authority issue orders no one can question
we eventually outgrow this phase and set up our own structures not depend on others
1. for when authority figures can't admit they were wrong but have to stick to their
word to keep authority and save face, I call this the aunt polly effect
from huck finn and tom sawyer when the aunt blamed the wrong person
and had to go through with the punishment because she already announced it and couldnt retract
i disagree with this, but it happens in society such as with the death penalty where
the gov rarely reverses a decision especially if the board of pardons paroles does not recommend it
they will not go against each other. t his happens in the party politics also to everyone's risk
2. for when someone rebels in public to make an authority figure look bad by challenging their authority
and then they have to overcompensate to show theyre still in charge
i call this the anna and the king dilemma
in the story, the king explained to anna that he had planned to spare the unjustly convicted couple
to give them mercy, but after she spoke back against him in front of the public he had
no choice but to execute them to show he was in charge so it is her fault they had to die
i disagree with both these things but understand these politics go on
that is why i push for restorative justice not retributive justice where you have to play these power games to stay in charge
with restorative justice and mediation you share voice and influence on the outcome equally with the other parties affected
so I believe in isonomy and then where ppl are equal first, then you can choose to defer autority to other reps second
but never give up power to ppl who don't represent your interests to begin with
where people have unequal power then we have unequal access to justice
i believe we can use the classroom and school model to organize people
by level of development and work toward equality one stage at a time
right now, as long as people are not equally educated to represent themselves
then we have the classroom experiences as you described where the teachers or principals just dictate
from the top down to keep the school in order. China with its billions in population has to use the dictator
model in order to control the masses, until each district or state could be democratized more and still keep the greater order
without threatening it. so that is why they use the anna and the king type of govt, where you cannot make the leaders look bad because
they cannot afford dissension and disorder with that many people in the population to organize and keep in line.
I mean --- No, I'm not so there.
