Several books have been published about Google’s questionable business practices. Not many addressed how this overreach happened and what it means for the political landscape of the world going forward. Keeping in mind that this misrepresentation does not only apply to Google but to most global corporations.
One hypothesis about Google’s amoral activity is traced to the nature of moneyed corporation and its massive proliferation since the nineteenth century. Corporations today dominate the world’s economy. This domination has been instrumental in advancing a corporate doctrine that now permeates the policies of the West.
This doctrine in many respects runs counter, challenges and encroaches on the nature of human speech, human congregation and human civilization.
This belief system is defined in these terms: A corporation is an artificial person and as such it is an amoral entity with the sole purpose to be profitable for sake of its shareholders. There is no other prerogative than expansion, growth and profits. One must also take into account the misplaced identity of a corporation defined as a “U.S. Person” and as a lawful permanent resident.
When these corporations congregate in an organization like World Economic Forum (WEF) their aggregate market and monetary power allows them to prescribe and lobby policies that encroach and sidestep citizens’ benefits in favor of corporate interests.
Since the nineteenth century moneyed corporations have seen their power increase and used it to influence government policies. During the past century corporations have embarked on a media campaign to promote the status of the consumer while overshadowing the state of the citizen. With the introduction of World Wide Web, the power of Big Tech has increased exponentially to such an extent that global corporations are challenging the legitimacy of nations-states and their respective constitutions.
Amoral Person
By amoral is meant neither moral or immoral, but lacking in moral capacity. Alphabet (GOOG) is a corporation, as such it has a legal definition of “artificial person” as opposed to a human being defined as “natural person”. The definition reflects a fundamental difference between an artificial person, as an amoral entity, and a human being who is born with a free will and a moral aptitude to choose between good and evil.
Sergey Brin and Larry Page have endorsed the company’s motto Don’t Be Evil because as individual human beings they have the ability to discern ‒and express‒ the difference between what is good and what is evil and make appropriate decisions. This human prerogative outlines the fundamental difference between a natural as opposed to an artificial person. The distinction is illustrated by what former Google’s CEO Eric Schmidt replied when asked how does a company like Google determine what is evil? He said: “Evil is whatever Sergey says is evil”.
When an individual becomes a shareholder of a moneyed corporation he or she abdicates his or her individual sovereignty as a moral being and becomes incorporated into an association that is defined by its charter. Consequently the greater the number of shareholders the greater the dilution of morality. The only concern of a moneyed corporation is to increase its market share and its stock valuation.
The Spoken and Written Word
An essential principle that defines a human being versus an artificial person is language.
Language re-produces —re-creates— reality. Society is only possible and only exists through language; and through language the individual.
Emile Benveniste, Problems in General Linguistics
Benveniste also describes how stories about the creation of the world relate the divine power of language. In Genesis 1:3, God literally uses his speech to create the world. Language is God’s primordial tool. Without it he could not reveal his existence, neither could he communicate to his people the world described in the Bible. It might be inferred that before the first words of Genesis are written there is nothingness, and before the order of syntax is put forth there is chaos.
Gen. 1:3 And God said…
In similar fashion, numerous ancient myths provide a good example of the creative power of the divine word. In ancient Egypt the god Ptah of Memphis, in a comparable fashion, created the world through his spoken word. While Sumerian myths describe how divinities first plan their creation by thinking, and then the world comes into being through the power of speech.
In the first verse of the Gospel of John, the apostle identifies Christ with the Word in the beginning. The verse is an important confirmation about the nature of language in God’s creative endeavor.
John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word: the Word was with God and the Word was God.
The point Benveniste is trying to make is that although language has a mysterious beginning, and for many a divine origin, it reflects the unique human faculty to communicate. More so, it is the ability to create and re-create the world we live in to enable the spread of our human cultural heritage; like mythology, religion, music, science, math, software codes and hypertext markup language, so on and so fort.
Corporations use language for advertising purposes to promote products and services to entice sales and generate profits. Ads are also used to modify behavior by converting people into loyal consumers. It’s safe to say that the language used in ads to portray a product does not reflect the real thing but is a make believe it’s a real thing. The product becomes a mediated artifact. The language of advertising has become the prevalent voice of mainstream media blurring the boundary between fact and fabrication promoting an artificial reality disconnected from the natural world.
Who Is Speaking and Says What?
At the SEC Registration Statement of Google’s IPO, Larry page in his Letter from the Founders wrote the following:
Don’t be evil. We believe strongly that in the long term, we will be better served—as shareholders and in all other ways—by a company that does good things for the world even if we forgo some short term gains. This is an important aspect of our culture and is broadly shared within the company…
We will live up to our “don’t be evil” principle by keeping user trust and not accepting payment for search results…
Larry Page spoke as a moral individual. It is assumed that he believed his intention to do good when he wrote the letter. However, a fundamental change occurred when Google was incorporated. The change alienated the two creators from their creation setting the stage for a divided self between moral individuals and an amoral association. Another change occurred with Google’s IPO. It widened its fiduciary duty to shareholders located all around the world making the corporation global in scope.
Once incorporated, Larry Page’s good intentions were no longer relevant. The motto became an emblem of Google’s amoral predicament. The corporate charter and the language of advertising took over leaving behind any moral prerogative previously held by the individuals who created the search engine.
Artificial Person
The meaning of person has been carefully manicured since the Robber Barons. The ensuing court battles since then have created a deceptive confusion about the definition of an elusive someone. In 1886 Chief Justice Waite cut the argument short in court when he ruled that corporations are legal persons. What he omitted to do was define what a person is.
The court does not wish to hear argument on the question [whether corporations are persons]. We are all of the opinion [that they are].
Chief Justice Morrison R. Waite
The original Latin meaning for person is persona, a mask worn by an actor. One must keep in mind that the mask is a prop that allows an actor to perform a theatrical impersonation. An actor does not embody himself as a human being but is a mediated character. The misunderstanding of what a person is also stems from the fact that the Latin meaning of corporation is corpus or body. The word body in this sense does not mean a physiological organism commonly understood as a human body, but a society or an association.
Here the person is one of the “things” about which we speak rather than itself a speaking subject… The person, therefore, remains on the side of the thing about which we speak rather than on the side of the speakers themselves who designate themselves in speaking.
Paul Ricoeur, Oneself As Another
Paul Ricoeur explains that a person is a “thing” that we speak about, not a “thing” that speaks back to us. By definition a person does not have the ability to partake in a conversation. And it might be inferred that an artificial person does not have the physiological capacity to speak. And as such it does not have the same First Amendment rights as “people” have. This characteristic is exemplified by the joke: I’ll believe a corporation is a person when they put one in jail.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Furthermore, a corporation cannot procreate. This is illustrated by the oxymoron of corporate citizen. Citizenship is granted either by birth or through the process of citizenship, a ceremony that involves taking the pledge of allegiance to the United States of America.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
The Fourteenth Amendment: First Article
Sergey Brin was born in Moscow in 1973. Russia was still part of the United Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). His family immigrated to the US in 1979. He later became a citizen. To become a US citizen Sergey had to recite the pledge of allegiance. As for Larry, it is assumed that in the course of his life he recited the pledge of allegiance to the flag, the symbol of the nation-state.
With Google’s IPO Larry Page and Sergey Brin’s stake in the company caused a change in their individual integrity. They became involved in two separate ruling systems. As citizens they are subject to laws enacted by the government of the people. And by being major shareholders of Alphabet they submit to rules defined by the rules of the market.
Many of us own shares in varied companies or mutual funds, have an IRA or ROTH account, or receive benefits from a pension fund that is invested in the stock market. Over the decades the overwhelming speculation in the stock market, made by a wide range of market players, has given corporations a dominating role in all aspects of our lives, especially in government.
Marshall McLuhan explained; it is the medium ‒the corporation is the medium of all economic activity‒ that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action. In other words, corporations were successful in promoting their doctrine on governments with the incursion of non-elected corporate appointees in crucial government positions. The intrusion has enabled the implementation of an alien corporate doctrine that is a direct challenge to the U.S. Constitution created by the Founding Fathers.
The conflicting influence is evidenced by a “pandemic” where global agencies, private institutions, corporate media, charitable foundations and NGOs ‒aligned as a body of global corporations‒ used the authority of government to imposed their medical agenda and remedy without an open, transparent and scientific debate. As it happens, the policies that have been enacted have favored stock evaluations of global corporations at the expense of the safety and health of the population at large.
A Divided Self
Google dominated the World Wide Web by comoditizing users’ private data. It distorted human communication with advertising and encroached on human rights in the process.
Educated citizenship today requires more than an understanding of government, which is just the tip of the iceberg of social organization. It also demands an understanding of the companies that influence our government and culture. The firms that order the Internet and direct the flow of capital have outsized influence in Washington.
Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society
What lays ahead is a conflict between We The People as a mystical body versus a divided self U.S. Person representing global corporate interests rather than citizens.
By mystical is meant a people having a spiritual character by virtue of a union that transcends human comprehension. A union that includes people of different ethnic backgrounds, language, age and varied religious beliefs who are inspired and guided by the principles of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness and by being connected to the land and their respective communities.
In contrast to a franchise economy that is estranged from the people and the location from which a corporation extract its profits.
Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters.
President Grover Cleveland
The warning President Grover Cleveland gave during the State of the Union Address on December 3rd, 1888, fell on deaf hears. As a result the Congress faces a battle to stop a global U.S. Person from taking over the whole body politic.
Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes. And armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few.
James Madison
Many articles have been written about the growing similarities between the rise of Italian fascism ─corporatismo─ and the current corporate capture of republics around the world. I propose some observations on a prevailing corporatist doctrine behind a global takeover by the Investor State.
The word fascism comes from the Italian fascio meaning bundle. Mussolini was attracted to this ancient Roman symbol representing strength and authority. It was meant to symbolize the different regions of Italy bound together to create a unified nation.
In order to understand fascism one has to keep in mind that Italy has been a country only since 1861 following what is known as il Risorgimento. Prior to the unification, Italy had been ruled by a dominant Church in Rome, by kingdoms and powerful city states and finally by foreign powers.Today Italy is made up of 20 regions, five of which have autonomous status. Each of these regions have their own dialect and distinct foods. They are different in many respects except Italian as their official language. Which was imposed to the whole country by banning the teaching of dialects in schools.
These dialects could very well be considered languages as they are incomprehensible to the inhabitants of other regions. Friuly, where I come from, is part of a n autonomous region that speaks Furlan that is recognized as a distinct language. Friulani for instance, don’t understand Sicilian and vise versa. You could say that Italy was, and still is, a cauldron of multiculturalism. This agglomeration of regional rivalries prompted Mussolini to remark: “It is not difficult to rule Italy, it is useless.”
Mussolini was born in 1883 in Dovia di Predappio in the northern region of Emilia-Romagna, famous for its Ferraris, Parmigiano and and its famed prosciutto. He was a turbulent student but got good grades. His father was a socialist and his son was too. In 1902 Mussolini emigrated to Switzerland in order to escape his military service. Not an uncommon trait among our more bellicose leaders. During his stay in Switzerland he became an active member of the socialist movement of the country. Benito later came back to Italy and dabbled in journalism and eventually founded a newspaper, Il Popolo d’Italia ─The Italian People. In 1917 he was called up for military service and was wounded in a grenade accident during a training exercise. The incident allowed him return to editing his newspaper and avoid the service.
Mussolini made his early mark in the world of politics mostly by fighting anarchists and communists allied with the Soviet Union. He eventually became prime minister with the help of King Victor Emmanuel III. The King was fearful that if he did not choose the fascist leader, Italy which was prone to regional discord, would end up in a civil war. Mussolini was quickly able to consolidate his power by exploiting fears of division in an environment of postwar depression and a general feeling of anxiety among the middle class.
Mussolini had been an active socialist member until he abandoned the idea of class struggle in favor of stati corporativi. A similar concept was promulgated by Pope Leo XIII in his encyclical Rerum Novarum in 1891. It was issued to counter the growing influence of socialism, communism and class struggle. Instead the Church promoted its own Catholic associations managed by “corporate bodies” as an alternative to class struggle. Mussolini’s change of heart made him appealing to a greater number of voters and powerful institutions. Under his leadership business owners, workers, trade unions, professionals, and other economic groups were organized into 22 associations—or guilds. They were given representation in a legislative body known as Camera dei Fasci e delle Corporazioni.
The symbol of the fascio (bundle) was meant to indicate the unifying strength of all the guilds and of corporations, most of whom had a non-profit charter. The unifying body also integrated a geographically fragmented and diverse Italy into a greater market area. This idealistic union led to a totalitarian political system that became known as fascism.
Prior to Italy’s move to fascism, the country had been a liberal democracy. Mussolini’s claim to be a compassionate leader helped him get the backing of liberals in parliament. With their support Mussolini introduced strict censorship laws and changed the rules of elections in 1925 and 1926. His victory helped him seize dictatorial powers and proceeded to discredit all his political opponents. With the support of his allies he skillfully used his control over the press to create the myth of Il Duce . The Leader who demanded total loyalty from his subjects. Any resistance was dealt with his fascist militia called the Brownshirts. With his alliance with Hitler and the unfolding WWII, he eventually succeeded in securing complete power. However, under his regime his government became too centralized, incompetent and corrupt.
In 1929 Mussolini signed a concordat with the Vatican that recognized Vatican City as a state. In return the Church recognized Italy as a sovereign nation. The name Benito, meaning “blessed”, is an appropriate depiction of a mutual anointment by the Church and State. Il Duce then promoted the idea of a new Roman Empire that made him increasingly popular. However, dreams of a grand empire did not extend farther than the bombing of Corfu, the invasion of Albania and later Ethiopia.
In June 1940 Mussolini declared war on Britain and France. He attacked Greece in October and as a result lost a great portion of Albania. Undeterred, he declared war on the Soviet Union in June 1941. Shortly after in December, he declared war on the United States. An act that would eventually seal his downfall.
Meanwhile, the US was fostering a deal with the mafia allowing the 1943 invasion of Sicily by an Anglo-American coalition to be met without resistance. Il Duce might have forgotten that in 1866, Palermo revolted against the political power of Italy. And to this day they do not consider themselves Italian but Sicilian.
Il Duce’s policies included subsidizing of big corporate business by the government: Most of it at the expense of small business, self employed entrepreneurs and the poor. As a point of reference, Mussolini consistently demanded wage reductions from labor. The one-time socialist leader also abolished the inheritance tax, a measure that resulted in further subsidizing of the wealthy by the poor. Eventually wages and living standards for the average Italian dropped sharply.
Mussolini allowed huge amount of money to be spent on public works and toward heavy industry and a growing “military industrial complex”. However, Mussolini who at the onset privatized a great number of state owned assets, later began reverting these policies and demanded strict centralized control over the country’s industries.
We owe the term corporatism to an Italian philosopher named Giovanni Gentile who defined it as the “the merger of state and corporate power”. In retrospect fascist era can be summarized as an alliance of corporate interests represented by old money and aristocracy who had shifted its wealth from feudal to corporate shareholding. And by the rise of industrial corporate leaders who endorsed Mussolini to unify a country and benefit from a bigger economic market.
Bundled Inc.
Laws enacted by Congress in the past three decades have been substantially more valuable to big business. The gradual erosion of antitrust legislation resulted in mergers and acquisitions resulting in the consolidation of corporate power. Ironically President Bill Clinton repealed federal antitrust laws that had been in place since the Great Depression.
Near zero interest rate policy has seen a transfer of savings into the stock market, excessive consumption and an unhealthy accumulation of debt. Leaving investors chasing bubble after bubble in an illusive speculation. This erosion of savings was compounded by relentless tax cuts in favor of the rich. With the nefarious effect that the bulk of the country’s economy was diverted in the hands of a growing number of wealthy billionaires, fund managers and CEO’s.
In the beginning of the US’ Republic, only men who owned property could vote. Today the rulers of the “ownership society” determine the outcome of an election. The process of cartelization and concentration of power is such that both parties are subservient to a corporatist agenda. And even if the majority of Congressmen and women are honest people, and we believe they are, only a minority of controlled swing votes can determine the outcome of important legislation favorable to special interests or big business.
In the US, the corporation is considered a legal person. All corporations have a similar legal structure, abide by the same accounting rules and practices. Corporations may sell or produce different things but in respect to their legal structure, they are one similar legal entity defined as an artificial person.
This legal person is not a full human being. Although a company is comprised shareholders that are human beings, each stockholder abdicates his or her individual humanity and submit to the corporation’s charter to be strictly profitable. And while corporations have the same rights as a citizens, their responsibilities toward society can be deferred indefinitely by putting their enormous financial resources into endless litigation or by declaring bankruptcy and morphing into another corporate entity.
The growing association of varied transnational corporations is depicted here as a bundle of one global incorporated body. This foreign body is exemplified by the emergence of the World Economic Forum (WEF) that has made public its goal to challenge and takeover the sovereignty of the individual and the nation-sate.
It should be made clear that the corporation plays an essential role in our economic development and is beneficial to society as a whole. However, there is a distinction between the role of domestic corporation and malignant corporatism. When the corporation becomes bloated through mergers and acquisitions and eliminates competition then becomes counter productive. When these corporations align themselves together with the government and the war industry, they can become a malignant threat to human civilization.
Since the Reagan years the process of cartelization of big business has been steady and relentless. The citizen is loosing more and more of his political representation and relegated as a mere consumer. Many political leaders are wearing a disposable mask of the corporate body.
One must remember that corporatism is made possible by a growing bureaucracy paid for by citizens’ tax money controlled by corporate lobbyists. And a population that is spied on by big tech and the deep state in order to expand its control over the population.
Furthermore, the great leaps of technological innovation made over the past few decades are now being used to promote a transnational corporate messianism. This new type of corporatism is defined by a doctrine that society should be organized in the image of the an artificial person known as a “corporation”. In order to convert human beings into trans-persons known as shareholders. With the ultimate goal to replace the sovereignty of citizens and the nation-state with the sovereignty of the Investor State.
I didn’t expect a religious topic like the Antichrist to make headlines, especially when raised by figures like podcaster Alex Jones or wealthy technocrat Peter Thiel. Their comments reignited my interest in a subject I had set aside years ago.
This essay, the first of a three-part series, begins with Martin Luther’s use of the term “Antichrist.” The second part will explore the theological interpretation of the Antichrist as described in 1 John 2:18–23, 4:2–6, and 2 John 7. The final part will offer a philosophy of religion perspective on the elusive Deceiver.
When I began researching this topic, I struggled to connect John’s Antichrist to any contemporary evildoer. That changed with the COVID-19 government mandates, which allowed businesses, including liquor stores, to remain open while prohibiting Christians from congregating in churches. Church, meaning the assembly or congregation of believers, IS the mystical Body of Christ.
Martin Luther’s Antichrist
Several factors sparked the Protestant Reformation, including the invention of the printing press and the religious activism of Martin Luther (1483–1546). The printing press reduced costs and sped up the distribution of documents like Luther’s 95 Theses across northern Europe, playing a pivotal role in the Reformation’s spread. Other factors included ongoing conflicts among potentates within the Holy Roman Empire and the corruption of religious institutions.
Luther’s path to labeling the leader of the Papal States as Antichrist began with his objection to the sale of indulgences by Johannes Tetzel. His outrage flared when he learned that a Church emissary was collecting payments on behalf of sinners who died without completing penance in purgatory, as a prerequisite for entering heaven.
Born in Eisleben, a northern German town about 100 miles southeast of Berlin, Martin Luther was raised by hardworking parents who were strict disciplinarians. His father was a leaseholder of mines and smelters, intended for Martin to become a lawyer to support the family’s business. Luther enrolled in legal studies, but his life changed when he was jolted by thunderstorm and lightning that struck nearby. Martin later confessed he was terrified of dying without confessing his sins and spend eternal damnation in hell.
When I was terror-stricken and overwhelmed by the fear of impending death, I made an involuntary and forced vow. Help me St. Ann… I will become a Monk.
Soon after, Luther abandoned law school and joined an Augustinian monastery, much to his father’s disappointment. He later described his years of prayer, meditation, and Bible study at the monastery as the happiest of his life.
Like many Germans, Luther strictly adhered to rules. He had little tolerance for dishonesty or duplicity. Wholly devoted to Jesus Christ and His teachings. Luther in the course of his life was ordained a priest, learned Greek and Hebrew in addition to his fluency in Latin ‒the language of Europe’s religious and political elites. He subsequently earned an honorary doctorate in biblical studies. He also translated the entire Septuagint Bible into German.
When Luther learned of the indulgence sales, he publicly voiced his objections in his 95 Theses, which he nailed to the door of the Castle Church in Wittenberg. The 95 Theses, or observations, were intended to spark a theological debate with Church officials about the justification of paying a fee rather than making penance. The document unexpectedly ignited a movement that contributed to the disintegration of the Holy Roman Empire.
Theses 28
It is certain that when money clinks in the chest, avarice and greed increase, but the intercession of the Church depends on the will of God alone.
Like many of his countrymen Martin had a frank way of expressing his opinion. He held the view that being straightforward and honest was a quality to be proud of. However, some of the wording of his 95 Theses was perceived as an insult by the Church’s curia and an affront to the Pope’s authority. Luther had valid reasons to question the moral justification of indulgences, but his blunt language provoked indignation among clerics, who demanded action be taken against the arrogant monk. The Church invited Luther to Rome to defend his claims. He wisely declined, fearing arrest.
Instead, a Pope’s emissary was sent to Wittenberg, Germany, to set up a disputation with the religious apostate. Johannes Eck was a skilled and polished debater. He had the backing of Church leaders that held as true the Pope ruled by divine right. Luther, who couldn’t match his opponent rhetorical skill, fared poorly in the debate.
Upon returning to Rome, Eck urged Pope Leo X to take decisive action against the German heretic. Luther’s refusal to recant his writings prompted the Pope to issue a Papal Bull threatening excommunication. On December 10, 1520, Luther publicly burned the document at the gates of Wittenberg, leading to his excommunication in January 1521.
I am at a loss to know whether the Pope be Antichrist or his apostle.
His resolve strengthened when the Church burned two young Augustinian monks at the stake in Brussels. In defiance, Luther left the priesthood, married, and abandoned monastic attire for common or academic clothing. He began identifying himself as an Evangelical, no longer loyal to the Holy See.
He and his mission had the support of his mentor, Johann von Staupitz, as well as a good portion of the German population. And he gained the backing of the powerful Frederick the Wise. Many Germans resented the Papal States for collecting indulgences to fund the costly construction of St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.
History portrays Johannes Tetzel as the main culprit in the indulgence controversy. As a matter of fact he was merely an emissary acting on behalf of Cardinal Albert of Brandenburg. The Cardinal had borrowed money to bribe his way into controlling more dioceses in Saxony, splitting the indulgence proceeds to repay his debt to the banking house of Fugger. The other half of the money to fund St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome.
Pope Leo X (1513–1521), born Giovanni di Lorenzo dè Medici, was the second son of Lorenzo the Magnificent, ruler of Florence. He was made a cardinal at early age of thirteen, his family ensured their influence in Rome and the Holy Roman Empire. After Leo’s death, his cousin Giulio dè Medici was a contender for the papacy, but Adrian VI (1522–1523), a Dutch humanist dedicated to Church reform, was elected Pope instead. His short reign was unpopular among Romans, who resented him as an outsider. He was the last non-Italian pope until John Paul II in 1978.
Clement VII (1523–1534), born Giulio dè Medici, became the second Medici pope. Orphaned after his father’s murder, he was raised by Lorenzo the Magnificent ,and subsequently declared legitimate by the Church. Both Leo X and Clement VII transformed Rome into a cultural and political center of Europe. Critics remarked they neglected the spiritual and moral duties of the papacy, contributing to the Holy Roman Empire’s decline.
Antichrist
In 1545, Luther published Papacy Institution of the Devil, linking the Antichrist to the Apocalypse. Although Revelation to John does not mention the Antichrist, Luther identified Satan as the chief agent at the End of Times. Throughout his struggle with Rome, Luther was preoccupied with an imminent end of the world. His battle with the Church arguably hastened the end of the Holy Roman Imperial world.
Theses 86
Why does not the Pope, whose riches today are ampler than those of the wealthiest of wealthy, build this one Basilica of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with that of poor people?
Luther associated Antichrist with greed and the pursuit of political power. He criticized the leader of the Papal States for prioritizing materialism—specifically the construction of St. Peter’s Basilica—over the spiritual salvation of Christians. He condemned pontiffs for their ties to Florence’s political and banking elites, who adorned the basilica with Renaissance art while neglecting spiritual duties.
Luther argued that the love of money had displaced a direct communication between individuals and God. Many Church sacraments, he believed, had become barriers to a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Arguing that Christians are saved by faith alone. God’s presence being celebrated by the freedom of individual Christians to congregate as the mystical Body of Christ: And objecting to the confusion between to power of money and the power of the Word of God.
Bibliography:
Martin E. Marty, Martin Luther (Penguin Books, 2004)
Martin E. Marty, October 31 1517: Martin Luther and the Day that Change the World
(Paraclete Press, 2016)
Rudolf Pesch, Antichrist (Sacamentum Mundi, Palm Publishers, 1968)
One of the oldest Semitic appellatives of God is ‘el.1 The designation has been widely used in ancient Israel and Babylonia. It is also found in the oldest names as a component of: Ishma-el, Bethu-ell., and Isra-el.2 The original meaning of the word ‘el is still uncertain, but a probable origin may stem from the root ‘lh, which conveys the sense of “to be strong and powerful”, “direction”, or even “a sphere of control”. We also find the root alongside the proper name of deities such as: El-Shaddai (God Almighty), El-Elyon (God Most High), and El-Roi (“El sees me”, “God Seeing”).3
Among the most appropriate epithets of El are “Mighty”, “Leader”, or “Governor”. Its most forceful significance was meant to stress an attribute of majesty, with the intent to inspire fear in the face of God’s “mighty” presence.
Another important feature in the Scriptures is the frequent use of the appellative El in connection with the patriarchs’ names. The “God of Abraham” for instance, is the “El of Abraham”, the “Fear of Isaac” is the “El of Isaac”, and the “Mighty One of Jacob” is the “El of Jacob”. The designation was also used to describe the “God of the fathers”; i.e. the “El of the Fathers”.4 This feature indicates a special relation between the deity and the individual leader. The God of the leader became, henceforth, the God of the family and of the tribe. As such it also established a tribal bond between the God and the group.
Gen. 33:18 And Jacob came safely to the city of Shechem, which is the land of Canaan, on his way from Paddanaram; and he camped before the city. And from the sons of Hamor, Shechem’s father, he bought for a hundred pieces of money the piece of land on which he had pitched his tent. There he erected an altar and called it El-Elo’he-Israel (that is God, the God of Israel).
Several divinities of the ancient Near East in the second millennium BCE were for the most part assigned to a specific cultic place. The more stable kingdoms living during that period were constantly threatened by wandering nomadic tribes. War was an ongoing reality, especially among the emerging powers seeking to expand their dominion. The survival of the smaller semi-nomadic tribes depended on the initiative of their leader.
The pervasive use of magic in connection to their tribal gods was common as a way to inspire confidence, strength, and protection against rival enemies. The religious life of the group was closely intertwined into the nuclear social structure. Herdsmen, clans, and tribes, most of them semi-nomadic, were constantly in search of new ways to provide for their own subsistence and that of their flock in a harsh environment. The best fertile lands were already occupied by the powerful rulers of the city-states.5
The text of Genesis reveals that the worship of El among the early Hebrew migrant tribes had the same specific function of social cohesion and protection. Consequently, the random contact with other tribes and cultures brought about spontaneous opposition to rival cultic deities which endangered the integrity and cohesion of the group. This is especially the case of El and its opposition to Baal, the warrior storm-god, the King of the Gods.6
Another word commonly used for God in the Old Testament is ‘elohim.7 Etymologically it is connected to El. It is used mostly as an “abstract plural” or a “plural of intensity”. Elohim can best be translated into the Godhead. It is mostly used as a superlative to elevate the rank of the divinity above the pantheon of the other gods. This expression was utilized primarily in Babylonia and in pre-Israelite times to express the unity of individual gods that combined the totality of the higher divine reality. The plural form became recognized as an expression of superiority. In that sense, the narrative uses the plural form of ‘elohim to glorify the God of Sinai as the supreme divinity, and to express the superiority of ‘elohim to other gods.
The name Elohim is also an appellation for God which is used to replace the name Yahweh. Among other epithets used in the Bible to replace the unspeakable name of God ~YHWH~ is Adonai, or the Lord.
Yahweh
El, in all likelihood, is linked etymologically to ilu, a widely popular high-god of ancient Mesopotamia and the most prominent deity in the Canaanite religion. El, which we have identified with the God worshiped by the fathers, was also a prevalent God in Canaan, what was commonly known as Palestine.8
Ex: 6.2 And God said to Moses, “I am the lord. I appeared to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob, as God Almighty, but by my name the lord I did not make myself known to them. I also established my covenant with them, to give them the land of Canaan, the land in which they dwelt as sojourners.”
P, who wrote the quote above, makes it quite clear that the identity of the gods worshiped by the forefathers are not to be mistaken with Yahweh, who disclosed himself to Moses for the first time. In the text, Yahweh informs Moses that he was known by the forefathers as El Shaddai; i.e., the God Almighty. The account also reveals the whole new reality of Yahweh who links the promise he made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and finally to Moses.
Yahweh’s promise links his presence to the enduring existence of his people’s posterity; ie, the descendants. A promise which is revived again and again through the kings and prophets in whom Yahweh chooses to inspire his authority.
Ex. 3:14 God said to Moses, “I am who I am”. And he said, “Say this to the people of Israel, `I am has sent me to you.'”
In the quote above J links God’s name with the verb “to be”, or “to exist”.
Ehyeh-asher-ehyeh9
I am who I am
The significance of the tautology ehyeh-asher-ehyeh, with the emphasis on the redundancy of the verb ehyeh, “to be”, is meant to enforce the idea of vitality and presence. The context in which God speaks, and to whom he speaks, implies an apperception of the divine presence which is linked with the promise made by God to the forefathers.10
The essence of the being of God is portrayed in terms of presence and of relationship. All the attributes are closely related to the twofold relationship between Yahweh and Moses and the realization of the promise to free the people from Egypt.11 The closeness is explained when God says to Moses, “But I will be with you”.12
When God tells Moses to go to the people and tell them that “I am has sent me to you”, he implies that when the hero utters the words “I am”, Moses will assume and ultimately embody God’s divine authority. Yahweh’s personal presence and existence is, shall we say, determined by Moses’ acquiescence of his mission. Yet it is the ongoing quality of the promise that is eternal, not God’s spokesmen. As such, the promise transcends Moses’ historicity.
Individuality is also stressed by the pronoun “I” which can only exist in the act of speaking to others or to oneself.13 Yet the first person singular indicates the presence of the image-less individuum vaguum. In the narrative the “I” exists or stands out as an individual being since God’s words are audible and comprehensible to the hero even though God’s reality is image-less. As God introduces himself, a distance is set between Yahweh and Moses. The alienation stems from the mystery of the distant promise that God had made to the forefathers. But as soon as Moses realizes the scope of his destiny, the hero finally understands the message and goal of the revelation. Then, the separation narrows. As Moses accepts God’s mission, he eventually identifies with the promise. More so when Yahweh reassures Moses that he will be with him and that his mouth will be God’s mouth. At the outset, Yahweh is an wholly other alterity to Moses yet he becomes one with God and wholly other entirety with the acceptance of his mission and the covenant.
Although God forbids the use of any graven images to portray or to identify him, the text is full of metaphors to suggest that his identity is accessible to us:
Ex. 33:11 “Thus the lord used to speak to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend”.
God here is depicted as a friend, and the intimacy of the relationship is further symbolized by its anthropomorphic and metaphorical nature.
Throughout the Bible, the narrative uses the anthropomorphic to reveal God.
Gen. 1:3 > God speaks
Gen. 1:26 > God created man in his image
Gen. 3:8 > God walks in the garden
Gen. 32:24 > God wrestles with Jacob
Exod. 15:8 > God has a nose
Deut. 11:12 > God has eyes
1 Sam. 8:21 > God has ears
Ps. 2:4 > God laughs
Isa. 42:14 > God pants and groans
We have seen in Genesis how God speaks to the world. He speaks to his prophets, to his people and to the reader/hearer. This ability to communicate is essential in order for his will to be known and God’s existence to be propagated by reading or hearing His Word.
God was present in the beginning. He was present with Abraham, Jacob, Isaac, and Moses. God is always present in his promise and his word. Therefore, God transcends any personal relationship to encompass the people and their progeny he IS always present among the living.
______________________
1 The term Semitic is used here to represent the family of languages of which Hebrew, Aramaic, Ethiopic and ancient Assyrian are a part.
2 Ilumma-ila and Ibni-ilu, in Babylonia; IlL-awwas and Jasma`-ilu in Southern Arabia.
3 El-Shaddai (Gen. 17:1); El-Elyon (Gen. 14:18f); and El-Roi (Gen. 22:14).
4 El of Abraham (Gen. 31:53); El of Isaac (Gen. 31:42); El of Jacob (Gen. 49:24).
5 See Max Weber, Ancient Judaism, New York, The Free Press, 1952.
6 See M. Weber, Ibid., 154. Also Walther Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament, London, SCM Press, 1969, 180, Gerhard von Rad, Old Testament Theology, London, Oliver and Boyd, 1965, and Edmond Jacob, Old testament Theology, New York, Harper and Brothers, 1955, 56.
7 Gen.1: 26; 20:13; etc.
8 Ronald E. Clements, The God of Israel, Atlanta, John Knox Press, 1979, 64.
9 Torah, Philadelphia, The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1982, Ex. 3:14.
10 One interesting hypothesis on the origin of YHWH -called the tetragrammaton- relates to an extension of the prehistoric word hu rendered “He”, the god. Another similarity points to the Dervish cry Ya-hu which can be translated into “O He”. The original expression may have been Ya-huva, if the Arabic pronoun huwa is taken to mean “he”. It is possible that the name Ya-huva could have meant “O-He” also. Such an expression could easily have evolved into Yahu and finally Yahweh. It is also interesting to note the rhetorical character in the original use of the word. M. Buber, Moses, Oxford, Phaidon Press Ltd, 49f.
11 See Martin Buber, Moses, Oxford, Phaidon Press Ltd, 192-195.
12 Ex. 3:12.
13 See Ivan Illich and Barry Sanders’, ABC: The Alphabetization of the Popular Mind, San Francisco, North Point Press, 1988, 70f.
February 4th marks the anniversary of the birth of Dietrich Bonhoeffer (1906-1945): A remarkable German theologian. Bonhoeffer was involved in several clandestine missions to help Jewish people escape Nazi Germany. He also participated in failed plots to overthrow and assassinate the Fuhrer. His unpatriotic actions led him to the gallows. He was executed on April 9th 1945. A few weeks before Hitler committed suicide and the end of the war.
Bonhoeffer took part in a little known resistance movement against Hitler. He had been a spy and was determined to publicize to the world the existence of Nazi concentration camps and Hitler’s treatment of the Jews. Bonhoeffer’s had also worked with contacts in England, particularly Bishop George Bell. He had hoped that the British government would show support for the resistance of which he was a part. He also tried to convince his British contacts to participate in a military coup against Hitler. History reveals that due to their distrust of him and the Germans, England’s help never materialized.
What made Bonhoeffer exceptional is that he could have taken a cushy job teaching at good University or become a minister in an affluent parish. He could have blended in with the crowd like most of his countrymen and ignore Hitler’s folly. He could have stayed in the US after his latest visit instead of returning home. However, he could not leave his family and friends behind, or abandon his country at a crucial time.
He came from a good and affluent family. His father was a well respected professor of psychiatry and neurology. His mother had obtained a university degree. A rare feat for the time. She undertook to educate her children at home and explaining that: “Germans have their backbones broken twice in life: first in schools, then in the military”.
Bonhoeffer was torn between his passion for the Word of God and the love for his country. The German Church of the time was split between the emotional grips of patriotism and the commands of the Gospels. What made Bonhoeffer stand out from all other theologians of his era was his commitment to Christ. And to this day he remains an example of what it means to be an authentic “disciple” of Jesus Christ.
Like Jesus he stood up for the outcast. He was opposed to Antisemitism and expressed his views publicly against the racial policies of the Nazis. He stood against the predominant views of appeasement by the so-called Christian Church of his country. The Gestapo eventually caught up with him and forbid him to teach or preach. Before he finally was imprisoned he spent two years secretly teaching and supervising his students illegally in small parishes. He was arrested in April 1943. And until his death he remained a man of faith and stood steadfast against the delusion of tyranny and misplaced nationalism.
Germany was divided between a predominant German Evangelical Church and a religious right faction called the Deutsche Christen ─German Christians. The German Evangelical Church had a strong nationalist tradition and had a history of being subservient to state authority. Whereas, the German Christians became the more predominant voice of Nazi ideology. They even advocated the removal of the Old Testament from the Bible. With their help, Antisemitism became widespread and enthusiasm for Nazism took over Germany.
To this day many questions remain unanswered. How could a majority of Christians living in Germany not stand up to Hitler? How could they condone his racial policies? And how could they overlook the illegal invasion of other countries, justify hatred and war? The answer might lie in the art of casuistry!
Casuistry is the theological discourse that deals in resolving special moral cases of conscience especially in regards to matters of conflicting duty or responsibility. Mostly it appears in the form of sophistry: A justification of an act that is morally wrong making it appear to be morally right. For instance, the Church was able to morally justify acts violence during the Inquisition, contradicting the messages in the Gospels. It did this by diverting the issue away from the killing of innocent victims by demonizing them. The Nazi did the same thing with the Jewish people. Making them the victims and scapegoats of unresolved conflicts within their own German economy.
Bonhoeffer’s preoccupations were confronted by both theological and political issues. The racism of his country had finally convinced him that the religious traditions of his time were spiritually bankrupt. Disillusioned about his Christian contemporaries he described them as living a “religionless Christianity”. Where moral values were being replaced by cynicism and ideology. He realized that tribalism and nationalism had overtaken religion and the universal principles of true spirituality. He lived first hand the consequences of a religionless Christianity by his persecution, incarceration and execution.
In the face of his moral turmoil, Bonhoeffer’s book The Cost of Discipleship literally lays out his Christian position: To stand up morally against the tyranny of war, racism and hatred. Such a moral stand however has a cost. And since he was a man of his and God’s Word, he paid the price with the sacrifice of his life.
Most of all, Dietrich Bonhoeffer is among a few in history of Christianity who deserves to be called a Christian. To this day I cherish his memory, his moral example and character. He will remain an indisputable model of what is to be a “Christian”, especially amidst times of ethical decay, lawlessness and political tyranny.
Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters.
President Grover Cleveland, State of the Union Address, December 3, 1888
We live in a corporatized world. Most of us either own stocks, have an IRA account, are a member of a union or church, live in an incorporated city, work for an NGO, own or work for a small, medium size business or a transnational corporation. These are different types of corporations. Some are non-profit (501c3), like unions, churches, NGOs, etc, and other are for profit corporations. The non-profit bodies are organized for public good and don’t have earnings as an ultimate concern, whereas moneyed corporations are comprised of shareholders who have an interest in profit oriented enterprises. That being said, moneyed corporate power has increased consistently ever since court challenges brought into question the nature of a human being, a natural person, versus that of a corporation, an artificial person. This began during the era of the robber barons with legal battles that have created a favorable environment for corporations eventually leading to the emergence of the Investor State. An outcome made possible by promoting an ambiguous understanding of the term person.
Many of the legal challenges began in the nineteenth century by lawyers who filed successive legal challenges on behalf of dominant railroad corporations, arguing that a corporation is a legitimate person with similar Fourteenth Amendment rights that were granted to former slaves. Since then, moneyed corporate influence has increased in proportion to its economic power as evidenced by successive Supreme Court victories in favor of corporate rights. These victories were matched with the successful corporate lobbying of congress. All of this has led to a corporate doctrine that has permeated our cultural mindset and changed the social, religious and political landscape of power.
Keep in mind that a corporation is invisible, immortal and in the case of the body of the transnational corporations, it is omnipresent and omnipotent. These attributes endowed this emerging power as a quasi-religion, making the transnational corporations, that has transcended into the “Investor State”, the most powerful economic body in the world. As a result it functions like a subliminal deity. In that capacity it has replaced institutionlized religions as the major purveyor of mediated doctrine settings the standard for human models of behavior. Role models that were typically managed by traditional religious institutions.
The following is a brief interpretation of how it happened.
*
Prior to his nomination as Supreme Court Chief Justice in 1874, Morrison Remick Waite was a successful attorney representing large corporations and railroads companies. In 1886 he presided over the Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific Railroad Company supreme court case involving unpaid property taxes by the Southern Railroad Company. The case was ruled in favor of the defendant based on the argument that the Santa Clara county had no jurisdiction including the value of fences siding the tracks in its tax assessment of property value levied on the railroad company.
Nothing about this ruling is remarkable in itself and would have been lost in the annals of jurisprudence, except for a controversial comment made by Chief Justice Waite which has been used as legal justification in favor of moneyed corporations ever since. The statement was not part of a ruling, nor part of the opinion of a majority or minority of the Court; nonetheless it’s been accepted as quasi-legal precedent. Keep in mind that the Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific Railroad Company case was not about a ruling on the meaning that any person, including a corporation, had equal rights protection under the Fourteenth Amendment.
The chief legal adviser for the Southern Pacific Railroad Company was a lawyer and former judge named S. W. Sanderson. He was know for his view that a corporation was a person under the Constitution and should be treated the same as natural person ̶ a human being. He used this argument to prove that the provisions of the Constitution and laws of California are in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment, an opinion that was most likely shared by the Chief Supreme Court Justice who made this comment in the case:
The court does not wish to hear argument on the question whether the provision in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws, applies to these corporations. We are all of the opinion that it does.
The lead lawyer for the Santa Clara County was a man named Delphin M. Delmas, also known as the silver-tongued orator of the west. He made a passionate plea against the fallacy put forth by the defense:
To my mind, the fallacy, if I may be permitted so to term it, of the argument lies in the assumption that corporations are entitled to be governed by the laws that are applicable to natural persons. That, it is said, results from the fact that corporations are [artificial] persons, and that the last clause of the of the Fourteenth Amendment refers to all persons without distinction.
One of the reasons the quote by Chief Justice Waite gained accepted legal status is because it was recorded by a court reporter named J. C. Bancroft Davies as a head note and published in a collection of Supreme Courts Reports (1885-1886). Davies held several jobs throughout his career. Among them he was a journalist, an assistant secretary of State and a US diplomat. He was also the president of the Newburgh and New York Railway Company. In 1883 he became the Reporter of Decision of the Supreme Court of the United Sates. In his capacity of recorder he published and interpreted Waite’s statement above as follows:
The defendant Corporations are persons within the intent of the clause in section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which forbids a State to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
To this day the non-ruling head note of corporations are persons within the intent of the clause in section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment has been inadvertently accepted as a matter-of-fact.
I leave it to the reader to interpret Section One of the Fourteenth Amendment and make his or her own mind as to the meaning of any person which is believed here to refer to all persons born or naturalized in the United States.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
In order to redress what is considered to be a misinterpretation of the meaning of any person, various semantic and literary analogies are used to help clarify essential differences between a natural and artificial person.
Dr. Frankenstein and the creation of a person in his own image
In Mary Shelley’s book Frankenstein; or the Modern Prometheus, the author recounts the story of a science student named Victor Frankenstein who creates a person in his own image; an Adam of his labors. This creation turns out to be a vindictive killer responsible for the murders of Victor’s brother and his childhood friend. The killings were committed by the creature as an act of revenge for being lonely and rejected by society because of his hideous looks. As a result the monster demands that Victor create a female companion to cure his loneliness and to enable him to procreate like a human being. Feeling threatened, Victor at first agrees and proceeds to create a mate, but then relents and destroys the female companion out of fear that they will procreate and create havoc in society. The monster finds out the doctor’s action. In retaliation he murders Victor’s newly wed wife Elisabeth. The story ends with Dr. Frankenstein in pursuit of the monster in order to destroy his wretched creation. After a long chase Victor dies in the North Pole without completing his mission. Upon finding out of his creator’s death, the creature wanders in the freezing wilderness seeking death.
Shelley’s book is a literary creation and the creature is a fictional person. In a similar fashion a corporation is a literary creation, more precisely a juridical artifact described as an artificial person. Both of these creations are fictional and are made in the image of man. The term man here does not relate to gender but to the creative properties of an individual being.
There is an essential distinction between a naturally born being and an artificial person, a creature of the law. The first is a unique individual while the second consists of two or more individuals, referred to as a “body” which is synonymous with corporation.
The original meaning of person -persona- is a mask used by an actor playing a role in a drama or in life. Hence, it is a guise played by a character in a play or movie. This sense has somehow changed since the nineteenth century when the term person came to be understood as a human being. The period corresponds to the growth of moneyed corporations during the Industrial Revolution exemplified by the Southern Pacific Railroad Company legal case.
The first thing to understand is the difference between the natural person and the fictitious person called the corporation. They differ in the purpose for which they are created, in the strength which they posses, and in the restraints under which they act.
Man is the handiwork of God and was placed upon earth to carry a Divine purpose; the corporation is the handiwork of man and created to carry out money-making policy.
William Jennings Bryan
What relevance does a quote from a congressman who lived in an era when it was acceptable to make Christian references to God to a world that is overwhelmingly secularized? Foremost, it shows how far secularization has unfolded in our cultures today.
Secondly, a corporation is man’s creation. In this sense it is a legally modified organism that is challenging the premise of creation described in Genesis that God created Adam and Eve in his image. He created them male and female in order that they procreate the divine essence of life to reproduce, multiply and take dominion over the world. The argument here is that although the corporation is comprised of human beings, and as such is a body, it is not an individual and does not have the biological capacity to reproduce.
For the purpose of this analysis, I rely on basic functions of religion as they are appear in our cultures. They relate to the Roman experience of religio centered on a dynamic attribute of the sacred that establishes a separation, a buffer zone if you will, between beings and things that are sacred from beings and things that are common and ordinary. The word religion has many definitions and varies with various religious perspectives and experiences. The function of separation between the sacred and the profane is nonetheless found in most religions past and present. As a parenthesis, there are several examples of separation between the chosen/holy/sacred, and the common/unclean/impure in the Jewish holy scriptures, but there is no Hebrew word for religion. Whereas, in the New Testament the term is used as the scriptures were written in Greek by people who lived under the influence and control of the Roman empire.
Let’s steer away from a Judeo-Christian concept of procreation and use a more pagan example of fertility. We owe the Romans the terms for religion, person, corporation and Genius. The meaning of soul ̶ animous/anima ̶ is closely related to the word Genius, meaning to cause to be born. Genius is a specific attribute of male fertility distinct from the female property of giving birth represented by the goddess of childbirth Juno/Lucina. Genius is a unique personality, a physical and moral sum each one of us embodies at birth. According to the Romans, this essence of life has a divine origin. Hence, Genius signifies two converging principles, life common to all human beings and the unique aspect of life each individual incarnates when we are born. Every human being is unique yet part of the whole mystery of life. The essence of life is immortal. And although the individual dies, life goes on after his or her death through the natural and human capacity to procreate.
In a more related context, the Declaration of Independence is considered a sacred text. It is sacred precisely because it is set apart from other ordinary documents on the grounds that it outlines the creation and the historical foundation of the United States of America. In similar fashion to our analogies of religion, the text describes the act of Separation from the Political Bands of the king and corporations that have abused and usurped the rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness of We the People. More to the point the document was signed by the Founding Fathers. In terms of literary criticism the term Fathers is a metonymy: A figure of speech that refers to procreating fathers and mothers having children born in the United States constituting the people.
A metonymy is a figure of speech that uses one word of one thing for another of which it is an attribute; like, the White House for the people working in the oval office; or, church as the physical building referring to the worshipers in the temple.
Secularization
Before we go any further, the meaning of secularization needs clarification. It is commonly understood as a decrease in church attendance and a declining role played by institutionalized religion in society. This idea about secularism is somewhat misleading and is the result of an assimilation of religion with Christianity, the consequence of Christendom having dominated the western cultures for many centuries. However, secularization does not mean that the secular world is devoid of any religious dimension or that contemporary culture has rejected the sacred. What the term implies is that the core function of religion has morphed elsewhere. In periods of cultural change the sacred inconspicuously metamorphoses in other hierarchical power schemes.
The Surfing Madona Mural – Incinitas, CA
The following are some examples of the sacred from one religious/sphere to another. They show how corporate empowerment was made possible by the conversion of language. Words and symbols that are the creative endeavor and human heritage are being converted into highly protected logos and corporate trademarks that are legally protected with unlimited financial resources.
The first Olympiads were essentially a religious ceremony created in honor of Zeus, the dominant god of the Greek pantheon. Today the Olympiad is an international sporting event involving most countries on the planet. They have been taken over by official sponsors consisting of the biggest transnational corporations in the world. The games have the same function as they did originally; namely celebrating competition, victory, and instituting order and hierarchy. This is accomplished by not only separating the contestants from the audience, the victors from the competition, but also separating the special status of the gods and winners from the masses. Mainly, the Games were a ritual to commemorate the status of the gods. Today the separation consists in elevating corporate trademarks and logos from the masses of ordinary words and symbols. Nike for instance, who was the Greek god of victory, is today the name of a powerful transnational corporation.
December 25th was originally a pagan festival celebrating the winter solstice. It later became the date of the celebration of the birth of Christ, although there is no historical data to support that Jesus was born on that day. Now Christmas has reverted back to a period of consumerism. The change shows that the sacred dedication of a holiday switches back and forth between different religious belief systems. It is not the intrinsic nature of certain beings and things or their representations that are sacred, it is the underlying incursion of power established by hierarchy that proceeds to separate and confer different levels of status of sacredness on beings and things.
The word economy has evolved from a theological meaning of the divine government of the world to the art of managing the resources of the people and of its government. The conversion is attributed to renowned anti-clerics like Voltaire and his contemporaries who were successful business men. Following the aftermath of the Reformation and the development of the Renaissance, a wave of freethinkers and monarchs from various countries challenged the moral and political power of the Church in Rome. During the declining power of the Holy See, kings felt justified in confiscating the Church’s vast property in order to finance their conquests and wars. Hence, the original meaning of secularization was the confiscation of Church property by potentates or worldly powers for monetary ends. This confiscation also applies to religious language, symbols and icons.
In most minds Santa Claus is an American Icon. This notion overshadows the fact that Santa is a conversion of Saint-Nicholas. The result of fictional alterations of an historical figure created by advertising, framing the image of the Santa as we know him today. Only since 1773 has he been known as Santa Claus and perceived as a secular figure rather than a saint. The transformation of Saint-Nicholas was made possible with the help of various media; newspaper articles, poems, books, postcards, sketches and advertising. Santa became a mythical icon conjured from a patchwork of different sources no longer Saint-Nicholas or Sinterklaas. He is an entirely different person transformed into a venerated icon by the media. His mission is no longer to help children in distress but to be a consecrated agent of marketable goods.
From its early settlement and until the nineteen sixties, the US was a predominantly Christian nation. Sunday was still observed as a day of prayer, of church going and of rest. The Lord’s Day was considered a religious holy-day. Like the Sabbath, it was set apart by God for a time of worship and rest, separate from the other ordinary days. With the spread of TVs in people’s living rooms the sacred attribute of Sunday would slowly change and be phased out of the religious framework of the nation. The day of rest was converted into a day of business as usual, enabling an additional day of consumer spending. A change was taking place in the religious fabric of America. Market forces and secularism was shifting the sacred allocation of time and worship elsewhere.
The decline of institutional religious influence over the population was made possible by the advent of media. The preaching of the good news shifted from the clergyman in church to TVs in people’s living rooms and in temples like the theaters. This event promoted a proliferation of new religious movements (NRM). Some examples include, the Hollywood star system, the pop-rock star phenomenon and the professional sports system, endorsed by a consumer oriented culture propagated by the media. The important thing to remember is the function of the sacred: To separate and establish a boundary between the sacred sphere of the promoters/idols/stage and the followers/fans/audience. In Kanye West’s song I am a god. It is not West who is a god but his image consecrated by the the media that is a god.
Marshall McLuhan explained: “The “content” of any medium is always another medium… the “medium is the message” because it is the medium that shapes and controls the scale and forms of human association and action.”
The content of mass-media is a myriad of moneyed corporations. Its message shapes human association that eventually evolved into the Investor State. Although a new comer, the the legal notion of Investor State is the result of consistent legal battles, political lobbying and media promotion of the artificial person impersonating a human being. The corporate empowerment has currently assumed a dominant function in the economy and in politics as evidenced by the involvement of the Investor State in trade agreements with countries around the world.
As we conclude, we as citizens have a civic duty to question the incursion of transnational corporations in the public sphere and inquire about the impending challenges posed by the Investor State. Among the questions we need to ask is: What legitimacy does this Investor State have? A state is by definition an organized political community living under a single system of government. On whose authority did the Investor State become a state? Who are the members of this corporate body and who are its financial backers?
It is important to stress that transnational corporations are indispensable and have an essential role to play in the world economy. However, their role is to be the servant of the people not the people’s masters. A public debate is needed in order to clarify the function and limits of the Investor State in respect to elected governments to establish a balanced and healthy relationship between the rights of human beings and those of corporations.
Debbie W., Richmond, CA
Extremely Interesting Read. Deeply researched account of the symbols om the US dollar.
I’ve always been curious about the symbols on the one dollar bill and the little book explains them well. Highly recommend this read.
Peter O., Santa Fe, NM
Good and entertaining… This book is full of historical facts about the symbols on the dollar. You won’t be bored reading it. The author keeps delivering relevant info till the end. And once you’re done reading the book, you’ll never look at the dollar the same way again.
L. K. M., Seattle, WA
Great read! Extremely well researched writing of the history, symbols and makeup of the US currency.
After reading the book you will love the tender you exchange everyday. Highly recommend.
R. S., Santa Monica, CA
Well researched book on the symbols of our currency. Very interesting and revealing aspects behind the history of our currency.
Joanne A., Novato, CA
Everything you ever wanted to know about the one dollar bill. This book explains all the symbols on the one dollar. Who knew it was so detailed? Very interesting!
M.J.B., San Diego, CA
Great Read! Well researched, packed with interesting facts about the US dollar. Quick read.
Highly recommend.
Carl L., San Francisco, CA
If you’re curious as to how the symbols found on the US dollar came to be, look no further than
Michael Rizzotti’s well researched book. In addition to providing the reader with the history and context, the author expands on related subjects such as the Federal Reserve and the dollar’ s evolution to becoming the reserve currency of the world. All in all, a good, well written read.
Ricky I., Palm Desert, CA
Interesting and Detailed. A unique and well researched explanation and interpretation of the symbols we have all seen on ou US dollar. Mr. Rizzotti vividly introduces us to the history of the symbols; and quite interesting interpretations on how and or why these symbols were included on the dollar.
Since the nineteenth century moneyed corporations have seen their power increase and used it to influence government policies. During the past century corporations have embarked on a media campaign to promote the status of the consumer while overshadowing the state of the citizen. With the introduction of World Wide Web, the power of Big Tech has increased exponentially to such an extent that global corporations are challenging the legitimacy of nations-states and their respective constitutions.
We live in a corporatized world. Most of us either own stocks, have an IRA account, are a member of a union or church, live in an incorporated city, work for an NGO, own or work for a small, medium size business or a transnational corporation. These are different types of corporations. Some are non-profit (501c3), like unions, churches, NGOs, etc, and other are for profit corporations. The non-profit bodies are organized for public good and don’t have earnings as an ultimate concern, whereas moneyed corporations are comprised of shareholders who have an interest in profit oriented enterprises. That being said, moneyed corporate power has increased consistently ever since court challenges brought into question the nature of a human being, a natural person, versus that of a corporation, an artificial person. This began during the era of the robber barons with legal battles that have created a favorable environment for corporations eventually leading to the emergence of the Investor State. An outcome made possible by promoting an ambiguous understanding of the term person.
