Ultimate Governance

Seems like the government of the United States is asking the whole world to bow to Democracy. Our politicians used to speak about "freedom," but that has actually been replaced, word-for-word, with democracy. Iraq "needs democracy."

WHY?!?

I haven't finished Plato's response in one of his dialogues about "justice," but this is what he has laid out so far (in the words of a friend who is questioning Socrates). Justice is a virtue only in word. If someone is actually just, they're screwed. This got me thinking.

Democracy forces those involved to live at the lowest, common level. For example, if we all agree to share equally the money we make working a particular project, it only takes ONE person to tip the scale, ONE person to use the situation to his advantage. Then comes the "laws." Rules that force us all to live in and only in the least common, most restrictive culture. Soon, all money will be handled by an "objective 3rd party" who takes a fee, of course.

Don't think so? Iraq was a democracy that exactly allowed Sadam to come to power! One guy, lots of power and guns (and other guys, I know). Now they are trying to re-do democracy. Doesn't look like it's working! Or how about the nuke issue in the Western Pacific?

And seriously, do we even have any idea how many fully stupid, restrictive laws we even have?!!? Can't spit on the sidewalk in Scottsdale, Arizona.

Lowest common denominator rules all in democracy. Great. Sign me up. How the HECK did "democracy" and "freedom" get tied together? Democracy & restriction, democracy and containment, democracy and corruption. But not democracy and freedom.

So what's better? Someone in charge. Someone who can offer the people access to a future that evolves wider than the past. I'm not saying growth is necessary, that progress = good. But compression? Ugh.

Worship #2

So I'm talking with my brother about some of this and the ramifications of it in the U.S. In particular, our dire need to never NEED anyone. Anti-trust laws, "free market" economy, consumerism, etc. have fed the following paradigm: don't need, but if I do, then I need to diversify so I don't need just ONE source.

When I diversify, I no longer know what it is that I'm exactly trusting/idolizing. "Money" is a common topic, as it should be in the U.S. Do I trust my 'having an income,' or 'money in the bank,' or 'retirement accounts?' I honestly don't know at this point. Or do I need to have all three so that if one fails, I can still "feel" secure because I have one or two other idols to fall back on? If I lost my income, would I be "okay" because I had some retirement accounts and some money in the bank? If The stock market closed forever and I lost my retirement, would I feel okay because I have a job and some savings? What if I lost two of them, would I feel the fear? Or do I have to loose my whole, diverse web financial support?

Here's what I am afraid I do. Because I can loose one of the three, then I convince myself that I am not trusting in money but I AM trusting in God to provide. But is that really true? Am I still trusting my "web" of finances, even when one falls off?

Do I trust that my public abilities will give me significance? When I lost one or two, I felt okay. But is that because I have others? Or am I really, actually trusting God for my significance? If I only had one thing I did that made me feel significant, and I lost it, THEN I could know that if I am trusting God or myself.

My webs, my diversity of emotional and trust investments, are making it hard for me to see if I am trusting in God Himself or money (or people or ________). Ugh.

Is "worship" self-focused . . .

I read of the lives and societies of those more than 1,000 years ago (e.g. people in the Bible, Plato, Egyptian history, etc.). I read of "worship" (what the Bible often calls "idolatry") and have come to a newer perspective for me.

The gods worshiped for most of all time (pretty much until the advent of the Greek pantheon) have been gods of human need. Sun gods, rain gods, crop gods, earth gods, cattle gods, local business gods (the god of carpentry, the god of tents, etc.), the gods of countries. With the occasional, male-hormone driven gods (Aphrodite, etc.). Ask males who let themselves consider sex constantly and one will find them saying Aphrodite is also a need-based god!

When God repeats over and over in the Old Testament, "I am God, have none others beside me. . . YHWH our God is ONE . . . etc." I wonder what He is contrasting Himself with?

I wonder if I have focused more on the temples and sacrifices rather than the gods themselves. Is the God of the Bible saying, "Worship Me" or is He actually saying, "Trust Me"? His "competitors" are sustenance gods.

So in the Old Testament when God says, "Don't work on the 7th day" to an agricultural society (not to mention the 7th YEAR off, too!), is He not saying, "Trust ME"?

I was told that money or a car or anything else that takes my admiration, time, money, etc. could probably be labeled an "idol" -- anything that received my worship or sacrifice. But maybe that's not it. Maybe it's that I was relying on my friendships to make my life good-enough. For me, lack of friendships was "dying." My idol wasn't my "friends" as much as it was my friendships. Others may have relied on their very nice cars, but only because they trusted the car to bring them what they NEEDED.

So maybe "worship" should NOT be described as "worth-ship." Maybe it's much more self-focused than that. Maybe it's about who or what I'm going to trust to sustain me! Money, job, promotion, less-and-less debt, web of friendships, sex, control of my now (or future or past), control of my kids (or wife or friends or superiors or subordinates or customers), retirement savings, public esteem. Not because I deem them such "worth" but because I trust them to sustain and/or protect me from harm.

If you've made it this far, what do you think? Is worship about ascribing worth or about dependence? Or something else?