Volume 6, Issue 41
In the late 1800s, Japan was beginning to be influenced by Western civilization. Certain entities of the Emperor’s Council sought trade relations with the West for monetary gain. To develop economically, these trade interests required Japan to modernize. Such modernization required centralized federal control of a national military. The Samurai were an independent force and an impediment to this new era of national structure. The Emperor’s Council ordered the Samurai to stand down, relinquish their weapons, and disband. These ancient warriors deemed such change as an attack on their ancient culture, and therefore, on the honor of the Emperor. A rebellion arose. The Samurai made one last stand in 1877 against the Japanese National Regiments in the Battle of Shiroyama. Armed with U.S. military training and weaponry, the National Army decimated the Samurai.
The word Samurai in Japanese actually means “in service.” They lived to serve the Emperor. Yet, when the Emperor, through his personal council, decreed the process of modernization, the Samurai rebelled.
The Samurai abandoned the greater cause of their purpose, serving in humility. They themselves became the purpose of their existence. This determination in clinging to a cultural past, disguised as masters of societal purity, doomed them to extinction.
In 1860, the United States faced its own cultural crisis. The abomination of slavery had run its course. No righteous defense for its furtherance could be rendered. The southern states, clinging to a cultural past, chose to secede from the Union rather than pursue a Constitutional common cause. Abraham Lincoln, in his speech delivered at the Cooper Union in New York City, accused the Democrats of making themselves their own purpose. He asseverated,
“Your purpose, then, plainly stated, is that you will destroy the Government, unless you be allowed to construe and enforce the Constitution as you please, on all points in dispute between you and us. You will rule or ruin in all events.”
Fast forward today to the confirmation of Judge Brett Kavanaugh as a Supreme Court jurist. Our country is bitterly divided. Each side accuses the other of acting for the advancement of a cause that only serves the purposes of themselves. Neither accepts the argument of the other that the principles of the Constitution are the basis for their partisan debate.
Both sides of the acrimony must be careful not to make themselves the cause or purpose.
The composite discourse on the culture wars agree on one thing. That innate in the human soul or psyche is a foundational awareness of fairness. This inherent emotion drives the definition of righteousness for each individual.
Christians believe in the conclusions of C.S. Lewis on this issue. God ordained, in the spiritual DNA of mankind, a code of right and wrong. Lewis believed that individuals seek their purpose in God, consciously or unconsciously, pursuant to God’s calling, by and through biblically instituted morality.
Atheists believe that there is no eternal purpose to life. The universe is inorganic. Existence of humanity is an accidental occurrence. Therefore, life emerged out of the primal ooze by happenstance, accompanied with the capacity, through evolution, to reach a point at which humans can reason. Fairness, as a concept, then resulted, in the determination of right and wrong, from evolution.
Either theology is based on faith. Faith is believing in something you cannot prove empirically. C.S. Lewis believed that the atheists’ faith, that righteousness emerged out of cold, dark universe based on no eternal purpose, was the greater leap. Regardless of your theology, fairness must be considered in the scope of the greater good, and therefore, the greater cause. For unity in purpose to encompass diversity in identity requires a greater calling benefiting the entirety of society. The definition of fairness necessitates equal attribution to both parties in the debate. This is so whether originating from a Christian or an atheist belief system.
Making oneself the purpose, clinging to a cultural past, will doom one’s cause to extinction.
The United States today is on the verge of civil trauma. It does not have to result in civil war. Democracy allows for the ventilation of issues, and therefore, causes, to be reconciled through free elections. We are a country that protects free speech as a constitutional right. The compromise at the ballot box deserves our respect and our confidence. The open forum of public debate is an adequate mechanism for the advancement of all causes.
The Me Too movement is unique in that it pursues a change in culture under current laws. It desires fundamental respect for the position of women in society. This absolutely has merit. This is not like women’s suffrage which required a change in the law for women to have the right to vote. The Me Too movement seeks to ensure that men in society respect existing laws in fairness and attitudes towards women. In the pursuit of this purpose, respect must be measured for the constitutional rights of those with whom the movement disagrees.
The national elections are four weeks from today. Participate. And in that participation, accept the decision of the public in the reconciliation of divisive issues.
In casting one’s vote, it is critical to adhere to the cultural values embodied in the Constitution of the United States that make the Union worth saving. Pursuing one’s own agenda, without consideration for an overall agenda, is making one’s own cause the purpose.
The motto of the Samurai was: “I will die by my own sword or my enemy’s sword.” Victory or suicide were the only honorable outcomes. It is not necessary today to destroy our political enemies or to fall on our own sword.
In determining one’s position on the issues of our times, it is paramount that one be reflective, cognizant, and committed to universal liberty.
If the United States is to meet its potential in the destiny of nations, every citizen’s cause must be infinitely sensitive to discernment of purpose.
My name is Marc Nuttle and this is what I believe.
What do you believe?