Mandalay Bay (October 1, 2017) On Considerations Of Pleasure and Pain

Mandalay Bay

(October 1, 2017)

-

On

Considerations

Of

-

Pleasure and Pain

-

-Constitution-

The definition according to

Merriam-Webster

Definition of Constitution

1: an established law or custom

2a: the physical makeup of the individual especially with respect to [the] health…

2b: the structure, composition, physical makeup, or nature of something

*

The Matter Of the Second Amendment

Exactly what degree of consideration did the Founding Fathers give to the psychology of gun ownership? If they could have considered psychology in the formulation of, the Second Constitutional Amendment, which in its, painfully sparse, one-sentence edict, still guarantees the maintenance of a national militia.

Could the most revolutionary intellects of the late 18th Century. Have given thought to the actual psychology of their peers-in-freedom at that time? Or to the states of mind of far-distant citizen-progeny: those yet to benefit or otherwise be affected by ‘gun ownership’, centuries hence?

Psychology As Science

Of course we all know. That, for as long as there have been sentient minds (human and animal), there had to have been “psychology”. What then, were states of mind called before the science of psychology was invented?

According to Internet sources:

Psychology as a self-conscious field of experimental study began in 1879, when Wilhelm Wundt founded the first laboratory dedicated exclusively to psychological research in Leipzig, Germany. Wundt was also the first person to refer to himself as a psychologist.”

A Projectile For Your Thoughts

It would be another one hundred years after the adoption of the United States Constitution. Before the science of psychology would emerge in its most primitive form. A form devised to enable the incipient, clinical study of the human ‘psyche’.

*

So. The ancient, vaunted, scriveners of the laws of a fledging America, our Founding Fathers, convened. In order to fashion an official set of legal rules devised to guide personal comportment and national governance.

The resultant document became a careful selection of basic laws. The document was the glorious…The Constitution.

At that time, it is very unlikely that even those venerable 18th Century minds could have given any meaningful consideration. To something, which wouldn’t even become known to exist until the late19th Century: a time long after the Founding Fathers themselves had left the scene.

As a science, “psychology” wasn’t a factor in the 18th Century. As a premise, it is unlikely that “psychology” was a factor for consideration by the Founding Fathers.

The momentous and serial convocations set for the sole purpose of creating a government for the nascent ‘united states’. Were completely unequipped for and devoid of agenda items designed to delve into what would become known only to citizens of the centuries that would follow as: the scientific study of the human mind. Psychology.

Of the vast tide of principles and ideas that washed through the halls during debate it is more likely than not that nary a word was even mentioned in Philadelphia. Regarding the lifestyle of citizens who would eventually inhabit the far-off future. As it might pertain to: the mental well being of millions of Americans who were yet to be born.

Freedom From Oppression

Certainly. The welfare of the governed would become a focal point of those who conceived the early laws, however. The pursuit of happiness was amply described in dulcet but firm Jeffersonian intonations. Intonations: which still speak to: ‘We the People…’

They speak articulately and with yet fresh flourish through our, nonpareil, Declaration of Independence. The ‘pursuit of happiness’ was a virtual preoccupation.

As well, were the basics of life and liberty: guarantees. That were thoughtfully placed as such solid set-stones.

Conceptual cornerstones. So carefully, laid in order that they define a solid footing of rights and, then, provide secure foundational support for an ever-arching structure of laws. All things, which, in turn, would tend to favor the continued progress of a fresh-minted, American society.

A society that promised a more perfect social order that would be completely untethered from ‘Mother England’ and absolved of the Puritanical oppressions of that far-off existence. Was the ‘consummation devoutly to be wished’ by those Constitutional giants of American history: our Founding Fathers.

Fettered Forethought

It is something of a mystery to modern day thought, however. That folks who were so fervently preoccupied with personal freedom would still fail to satisfactorily resolve the matter of wider cultural milieu and individual mind set (psychology?) that had obtained during that tumultuous era of the birth of the nation. That, among many others, encouraged the energetic embracing of the right to legal ownership of…one human by another.

Though it might seem somewhat counterintuitive for modern Americans to consider with the aid of a 21st Century psychology. Is it possible that those great patriotic minds could possibly believe that the practice of human bondage would continue to be perfectly acceptable in a “free” society of the future?

After all, it wasn’t until nearly a century later that adjustment to the Constitution would solve the slavery issue. After all, Constitutional adjustment of that weighty issue did come to pass, however.

*

In ‘Black and White’

Or. Were even the great minds of the Founding Fathers able to have realistically contemplated that there would come a time in the far-distant future of American life. When a printing “press”, itself the object of a specific and detailed, guaranteed, Constitutional “freedom”. Would be totally superfluous in the context of communication amongst the masses in generations to come?

If the Founding Fathers could have contemplated the obviation of the “press” in the furtherance of communication, would they not have anticipated the technology that would eventually displace it? Could they have had such mental powers?

*

On the Matter of Patriotic Omniscience

Alas. The foresight of our Founding Fathers did have restrictions, after all.

Thus. The enabling documents of a free society were in constant need of Constitutional tweaking as well.

Even before and then after, the adoption of their laws. Constitutional Conventions were a means to attempt solution to the volubleness of the rules that were intended to fairly and legally govern the peaceful behavior of the masses and efficient operation their State.

*

‘A well funded Militia,

being necessary to the security of a free state…’

Moreover, could the Founding Fathers possibly have conceived of a time, any time? When a military budget for the support of even “A well regulated militia…” to serve the existence of their “more perfect union” would approach the sum of: $640 billion dollars? The United States Defense Budget for the current fiscal year is just such a dazzling sum.

It might be posited with some authority, too. That even the most sage of the Founding Fathers had no inkling of what the centennial or the bicentennial or times even more further distant from the date of the founding of the nation…

Would reveal in the context of explicitness in individual or cumulative, human psychological behavior. Or the dizzying, undeniably powerful advancement of higher and higher and eventual highest: of high technology. Encased in inventions invented to aid in the dispatch of individuals or…entire cultures for that matter…

*

Ask Not, What Your (Constitution) Can Do For You…

That was then…

It might well be said that the Founding Fathers, then, fraught with conflict, controversy and combat. While in the close aftermath of a brutal Revolutionary War, were far nearer true existential crisis both as individuals in their persons occupying a raw continent and as a nascent body politic in a wider, hostile world.

It could be argued with some success. That, generally speaking, those early Patriots were more at risk at home in America then, than are ‘We the People’ of the 21st Century, now.

Moreover. At that far-off time the Founding Fathers were conspicuously devoid of the modern luxury that is: overall societal stability in the culture of Constitutional guaranty that is American life today.

Then, at that time, those ‘Patriots” were truly threatened. Threatened in their personal well being as well as in the very integrity of their government’s corporate existence.

Threatened. By an overbearing, overseas ‘mother country’ and in a more proximate and continental sense: harassed from the still raw, hinterland-occupant. That was the serially displaced, deservedly resentful, restive, neighbor. The: native “Indian”.

They wisely devised a Constitution, those Patriots. That would be gladly served by the willing and earnest allegiance of each and every of their early-American citizen brethren.

After all, it was at that time in a formative stage of life as an 18th Century nation. When its early leaders and their fellow settler-citizens had to be circumspect in all things. In order to: survive.

…this is now

Whereas, in later generations and until the present time. Today. Blessed with the enviable luxury of established American cultural integrity. Nationally confident in being armed with immunity from outward threat that comes with firm possession of dominant world diplomatic and military power…

The United States of America would come to regularly display a strange, collective national hubris. That, as a nation only a sense of ample security engenders. Which, while abroad evinced an image of sometimes, arrogant power and prestige.

While at home. Enabled. The incessant and free question of the well established, guarantees of the still coveted but now aged document of Constitutional protections

Furthermore, attacks on the details of the Constitution. Do; on many occasions encourage the questioning of the very intent of the Founding Fathers. As well as the procedural pestering of its premises in a way that sometimes constitute borderline abuse.

All at the hands of modern day, civilly rebellious citizens who pose as a cadre of

real, aspiring and would-be ‘Constitutional scholars’. Who freely parse the structure of the staid and seminal document.

*

The difference

It goes without saying. At the time of the convening of those Constitutional conventions by the Founding Fathers, things were different. Things were more dire and demanding.

The national populace, then, seemed more willing to infuse a true energy of respect for the laws of the land. All from a sense of their need for: survival.

Then, so long ago, the strength of the country and respect for its laws must, by necessity, have come from within. Come from within the restless mind and intrepid spirit of those who had been truly threatened in personal existence and tested in national, Constitutional expression. Centuries ago.

In generations thereafter, during centuries later, however, the luxury of more comfortable and less threatened lives for each, latter-day American citizen. Seems to have encouraged a particular confidence.

A confidence that energizes some Americans to playfully dissect and intentionally test the real and putative applications of those legal tenets that had, in all good conscience, been devised by the Founding Fathers. Long ago devised in order to define personal comportment and state governance for America and her ever-expanding population.

*

In Service To the State

The Constitution, in more recent years has become not so much something that was once long ago happily servedby the populace. Rather, it seems to have become a device perceived and often assailed, as something that had been devised; only so that it could be tested, bent and extruded in every, which way. Tested, within a more and more excessively litigious society and, often, politically indulgent legal system.

The Constitution. Something that could ultimately be twisted into an interpretation that would eventually be considered more and more in the service of its populace rather than a staid and sacred thing that would be happily, eagerly served by its citizens.

Thus. The document would no longer eventually be seen, by some, as a venerable text to be honored and followed.

Rather. The Constitution would become a thing to be used as a legal mechanism to achieve various and sundry ideological goals.

Goals aspired to by individual citizens as well as goals sought to be perfected during wider cultural “tectonic movements” to come. Movements that: might tend to appeal to the wider body politic as well.

*

The Founding Fathers were motivated. Motivated to create ‘a more perfect union’.

*

We the People of the United States in Order to create a more perfect Union

The collective desire of the Founding Fathers was, arguably, to create a perfect State. The right to act in the free defense of that State was of paramount importance.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution briefly resolved that issue. The “right” to bear arms would secure the State…

Motive

&

Motivation

Motive as defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary is: “something (such as a need or desire) that causes a person to act.”

Motivation as defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary is: “the act or process of giving someone a reason for doing something.”

*

Motivation

&

The Affect of Technology

With the aid of machinery whose advanced technology would have been totally incomprehensible, even to the genius of the Founding Fathers, the most ignorant among their 21st Century American citizen progeny are able to extend the effect of the most vile and selfish of motives. All under the guise of a specific Constitutional “right”.

A “right” declared by the Constitution. That certain unparalleled intellects of the 18th Century felt compelled to bequeath to their fellow Americans in order that they, as individuals be equipped to defend their State were it imperiled.

*

The Constitution

Of

Pleasure and Pain

As the elusive virtues of “legal” gun ownership were violently exclaimed from the 32nd floor of a Las Vegas hotel on October 1st the country gave pause. While nonplussed authorities fruitlessly pondered the shooter’s “motive” in killing scores of innocents.

The media fed itself. Hungrily.

The ‘Mandalay Motive’ might never be known. The circumstances that might have encouraged the mind of the hotel occupant-murderer appear to be so remote from the earmarks of such types of events, which events happen to visit with greater and greater frequency as technology improves. Yet so often happen with a trail of specific clues used to punctuate the morbid purpose.

As technology improves the ability of the average American citizen to conveniently enjoy all manner of graphic absurdity readily exists. With but a glance at our own palms, we can view in an instant, in “real time”: everything. Including mayhem.

The same power and genius of high technology that enables us to ‘read our palms’ for information, also begets the frightful capacity of various powerful, easily manipulable, instruments of death.

Thus. With the advent of better technology can come great pleasure and great pain.

*

The Constitution

Of

Compensation Psychology

It is the belief of many professionals and laypersons alike. That there are those in society: who yearn for the enhancement of external measures as compensation for their own lack in personality trait.

It is also the belief of many. That there is, for some among us, an element of enjoyment derived from even the gentlest of trigger stroke: a ‘rush”.

This rush of ecstasy might be craved more so by the elite gunner. Or, perhaps, even by the new-initiated, as well as rank-and-file, too.

No matter. It is a universal belief that there is a distinct thrill derived from feeling the emission experience.

The rush that comes with the powerful stream of countless bullets during their rapid ejaculatory escape from the hot bore of a pulsing weapon. Or, perchance, the consummate emotional intensity derived from the unending jerk of that most coveted of gun-grails: the automatic weapon.

According to some, it is unfathomable. Indescribable. It is pleasurable beyond words…

*

The Constitution

Of

Insult or Homage?

With the multitude of deaths that are brought into this world via the abuse of personal firearms: what effect? Is each death that is derived from the “right” to be armed as a United States citizen something realized at the expense of the reputation of the each of the Founding Fathers?

Or did each and all of those Founding Fathers fully intend for the “right” to be infused with abuse? Or pleasure?

Or did one or all of the scriveners of the Constitution, without the aid of the high science of psychology. Successfully anticipate the fate of a populace centuries removed from antique Philadelphia society. Where a one-sentence Constitutional “red herring” was quietly writ. That would fully enable both debate and deadly abuse in the generations of Americans to come.

Were the Founding Fathers that clever? Were the Founding Fathers that depraved?

*

‘The thrill of a bullet passing…’

*

“Nothing in life is so exhilarating as to be shot at without result.”

-Winston Churchill

*

Posted 5 minutes ago by DILULIUS, King of Troy

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.