"How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!" (Samuel Adams, letter to John Pitts, 21 Jan 1776)
"It does not require a majority to prevail...but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen to set brush fires in people's minds" (Samuel Adams)note-I could not source this, and due to its tone am a bit doubtful that it originates from Adams.
One is not the loneliest number. The larger the number the higher the loneliness rating. Were it not for all of the other numbers, One would not be lonely. One does not arrest himself, and force himself to work in a gulag, nor does One dictate to a nation. It takes a large number of fractions combined to make a unity of so-called "Ones" to make the One feel lonely.
But One may be the largest, most intimidating and powerful number. One is the number that frightens the other numbers who believe in a fractional/decimal system in which no single individual is able to function without the crutch of others. These little fractions are afraid of the Whole Ones who have no regard for shattered parts which must be glued together to look like anything, and even then, the vessel of parts is leaky and dysfunctional, only good for looking at--from a blurry distance.
One of the United States of America's mottoes is E pluribus unum, "out of many, one." This simple little phrase is actually very tricky and could be read any which way. It's like one of those drawings that looks like an old hag one way, and a young beauty turned the other way.
Traditionally, E pluribus unum is understood to mean that out of many people one nation is made. This seems a good and true meaning. But to the Fractions, this means that no one is complete until they are part of a greater crowd.
This Bard would like to add a bit of his own meaning to the phrase E pluribus unum. The Bard believes that One is complete in itself and that each One of us is a wonderful little universe walking around amongst other little universes. This Bard has often looked upon genealogy charts and marvelled upon the hundreds of people it took to get to the point that made him. The Bard is a virtual nation of saints, sinners, ethnicities, explorers, colonists, criminals, vagrants, preachers, soldiers, and dreamers. Out of these many and diverse people One person was made. The Bard is complete and has his own riot swimming around in every cell of his body.
If these many contributors can get along within the internal parts of one body, why can we not get along with the many on the external parts of the body? Why do we believe that everything has to be material and external to make us complete when each of us is already complete?
One is not the loneliest number. It is when One is beaten, ignored, and derided by the Fractions that One is lonely. The loneliness comes not from being One, but from being surrounded by so many others and not one, not a single one will act as One and extend a hand of love or a voice of support.
A single One can affect more good than one crowd. It is the One who sits next to the sick, the one who creates the masterpiece, one that defends the defenseless against the crowd of combined fractions.
One can also affect great evil, but only if the fractions believe they are not whole without following the evil one. It takes a crowd of fractions to follow and enact evil. No dictator, king, czar, or plantation owner has any power unless a large group of people who believe the lie of incompleteness submit to degradation, and hatred caused by fear.
It only takes one domino to topple the other dominoes, one spark to set a forest on fire, and one chromosome to alter a life's expression, and one empty cave to change time.
One rogue cancer cell uncaught by the immune system can wreak havoc on a body if unchecked, if the immune system is suppressed. And an immune system that is overly zealous, that acts as an angry mob is called an autoimmune disorder. There will always be small inflammations and offenses to the system, but when the system behaves as Nazi Socialists it is similar to an over active immune system. It would have been better for the body to have reacted less angrily and aggressively.
And it is not the cancer cell that is so dangerous, but the suppressed immune system that is too tired and blind to catch the problem before it spreads to other organs. Each of us has cancer cells in our body and every day, if our body is doing its job it quietly negates them. In a way, it is the helpless mass, the large numbers in the body that are to blame for the cancer's growth, rather than the little cancer itself. If each cell saw itself as whole and independently powerful, it would be able to confront the single cancer cell when it came across it as it wandered along its epic journey.
In a way, our modern society is only an external and material acting out of what happens to each of us as One person every day on an internal and unseen level. Our fear and hatred is much like an over active immune system that does not understand that negatives exist within the system, that inflammation occurs, but that in due time it will clear up with a more gentle and calm approach.
Our internal body and external life are a delicate balancing act which require much thought, consideration, love, and strength to keep from falling off the tightrope.
And Samuel Adams represents a whole One, a fighter cell that also bolsters and invigorates those around him, which is why I have included his quotes here. Were it not for him, I would never have delved into this subject. And I hope I've made him a little proud to know that his One voice has reached through the generations and encouraged this little One.
"It is not infrequent to hear men declaim loudly upon liberty, who, if we may judge by the whole tenor or their actions, mean nothing else by it but their own liberty--to oppress without control or the restraint of laws all who are poorer or weaker than themselves" (Samuel Adams, The Advertiser, 1748)
"Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature" (Samuel Adams, The Rights of the Colonists, 20 Nov 1772)
"Did the protection we received annul our rights as men, and lay us under an obligation of being miserable? Who among you, my countrymen, that is a father, would claim authority to make your child a slave because you had nourished him in infancy? 'Tis a strange species of generosity which requires a return infinitely more valuable than anything it could have bestowed; that demands as reward for a defense of our property a surrender of those inestimable privileges, to the arbitrary will of vindictive tyrants, which alone give value to that very property" Samuel Adams, Speech at the Philadelphia State House, 1 Aug 1776).
2 comments:
Why cannot men write like this today? We have a few good modern writers, but no one can write like this anymore. Is it that we cannot, or that we choose not to? Maybe it is best if we do not.
But there is a connection between how one writes and how one thinks. Have our brains morphed or shrunk? Or have we just stopped using them?
precurat - Latin for "a man who had already cared for [someone or something)".
already
"Why cannot men write like this today"
I think that some must, but that we have not discovered them.
And even in his own time Samuel Adams was a unique author and thinker. Although hidden away by history, Samuel, in his own time was famous for his writing and quotability. He was seen as a highly dangerous person for his ability to say what most others only vaguely felt, but could not express in word or action.
From my little research, I have found that Samuel Adams is so dangerous that even moderns are afraid of him and don't want us exposed to him and his influence or ecouragement.
Nearly every word, thought, and phrase in the U.S. founding papers seems to be directly taken from something that Samuel Adams wrote at one time or other.
Recent history has worked to depict Saml. Adams as a rough rabble rouser who liked inciting riots and gaining attention. Actually, he was highly educated, and hated those who were puffed up and proud lovers of attention.
Another tactic of more recent historians is to lessen Adams' influence as a single person. They insinutate that one person could not possibly have thought on his own or formulated such powerful writing on their own.
A common theme running through Adam's writing, which is why he was so influential, was one of encouragement to the individual. He continually sought to teach the individual that they are not powerless or helpless against masses.
Samuel Adams is the most influential motivational speaker I've come across in years. And what a great writer!
Our brains have not shrunk. They've been lulled to sleep. This is why Samuel Adams is brilliant. He blows the trumpet and sets the captives free, wakes us, and shows us how to use our brains.
Post a Comment