Royalty In Disguise

A question I would like to ask of anyone who would care to ask is does a king have to call himself a king for him, to assume kingly authority.

Apparently our esteemed Justice John Roberts believes a president can be a king as long as he is not called one.

We are all taught that Americans fought a revolution to be free of kings. I suppose I can’t dispute the fact that we’ve never actually proclaimed anyone to be king, though currently,Donald is waiting for his coronation.

But beyond the title, can we really believe there have been no bearers who believed they were wearing the robes, purple or not? Does the local policeman not assume his blue uniform gives him a royal prerogative to determine who is a criminal? Exactly what is royalty, if not an assumption of betterness? The prerogative of having been born in superiority?

But is this superiority something we learn or something we are? Well it seems to me whenever one has the prerogative of being superior he assumes that he has the prerogative.

What is learned becomes disguised as truth. But that truth cannot extend itself to the one who doesn’t exercise the same prerogative and who is placed into a preposition of the inferior…whatever that situation may be.

And so truth needs to be taught truth and if that taught truth contradicts the learned truth, then the learned truth must be consumed within the taught truth.

We become educated to learn what is true. And so the educated person assumes a guardianship over truth. He becomes the king of truth and those who don’t accept the prerogative are dumber than the royally educated. But Ted Cruz, Ron Di Santo, Mike Pompeo, et. al. were educated at Harvard.

But if we just want to stick with some of Trump's associates, then Harvard educated Steve Bannon had the new idea to defraud Americans into believing all of the ills of society were caused by illegal immigrants. Harvard educated Jared Kushner had the royal idea during covid to sacrifice jobs and maintain market growth. Of course the stock market fell anyway and in August of 2020 lost thirty-four percent,the largest monthly decline since the Dutch East India first originated corporations.

Then we have the brilliantly Harvard educated Kayleigh McEnany’s recognition that doubts could be seeded by attacking the voting by mail policies in elections; despite voting by mail 11 times in 10 years, including while at Harvard.

And of course we have Harvard educated Robert F. Kennedy; Harvard educated Pete Hegseth; Harvard educated Elise Stefanik. How about the scholarly Russell Voight who was educated at George Washington, where I attended classes.

And then you tell me Maga voters are just to dumb to know the truth? But why are they dumb if they have learned Harvard is educational purple and are the smartest of the smart in America. If such is true, then why do those who learn what the Harvard purple are teaching any less intelligent than the verbatim they hear at their teachers’ feet?

There are a whole lot of mistruths that one must go to school to at least learn to read and write. I learned to read and write without going to school,then when I went to school they tried to teach me I was not able to understand what I read because I hadn’t learned so from them.

Today I understand if you want to become educated in Florida to be able to learn that Africans eagerly signed up to board slave ships to come to gather skills and become civilized and grow human noses. Well maybe that last part was only what I had to learn because in the 50’s we were still using Owsley inspired texts.

And now having become educated by the purple education system; no matter the side of the political aisle you may have learned to place yourself within; you can’t know are not voting for people who are revolutionizing themselves against the “captains” of industry, at war with each other to expand their kingdoms with the people as the sacrificial warriors thrown into battles to possess whatever they are told they need to possess.

I am not at odds with learning. If we want to teach people to learn then we need to teach them how to learn and not what to learn. You don’t teach them that in America all men are equal because as soon as they walk out the door of the classroom, they will either treat someone as an inferior or be treated as inferior to someone.

Learning is done by experience, and experiences can be rote; but the best learning experience I should think is for the teacher to teach people a methodology on which they may proceed to seek knowledge rather than providing them with gift- wrapped answers. Eliminate all text books and guide them in learning how to find differing opinions and relating those opinions to their own circumstances and experiences.

And ultimately that’s going to be the result anyone, and maybe they’ll believe the Harvard Bannons and maybe they’ll believe the Yale Krugman, but without having taught a methodology of discernment we remain in the camps of the royals and no one can ever discern anything but “MeSideBetter’YourSideWorse.”

Educated people, please feel free to remain superior, if you can tell me why one educated perspective is smarter than another educated perspective. Faced with such evidence I would willingly concede and retract this article.