October 1, 2025: From What Ashes Does the Phoenix Arise?

If there is in fact a heaven and a hell, all we know for sure is that hell will be a viciously overcrowded version of Phoenix.  Hunter S. Thompson

I can be changed by what happens to me.  But I refuse to be reduced by it.  Maya Angelou

It is change that needs another chance. Hoo-nōs

It does little good to rise from the ashes of a life we’ve torched if we simply keep repeating it.

No real learning occurs without a change for the better. Even then, we need to know how to define “better” and we need to know how to move beyond the plane where the problems occurred.

A quick reference: The U.S. Constitution was adopted in 1787 and ratified two years later in 1789.  The Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments to the Constitution) were ratified two years later in 1791, a very short time frame before the needed edits were realized.

“Originalists” may believe that amendments to the Constitution must reflect the original intent of the “founding fathers,” but it’s hard to believe the founding fathers themselves would believe that what they got right then, is and should be what is right now.

A few questions: Do amendments need to be undone if they are no longer useful OR is there simply a need for Congressional and Judicial clarifications since amendments should enhance the basics reflected in the Constitution (a good example is the Bill of Rights)?

Here’s another question: Why has the divide between the haves and the have-nots dramatically increased?  The only interpretation in this question is “why?”  Merit does not just mean success through smart and hard work; timing, biology, social connections, etc. also matter.

As we all know (or should know), interpretation is not the same as objective data (yes, objective data itself is subject to interpretation). But using only one point of objective data does not often tell us which direction the “slings and arrows” fly.  For instance, the oft used phrase “are we better off now than before?”: who’s asking, who’s answering, and what’s the motive? It is us questioning our interpretations as well as uncovering as much objective evidence as possible that is a better compass heading than “a one size fits all, all the time” ethos.

In any case, good luck with politics and clarifications interacting well when deliberate incivility, polarization, and living like the past is our mast are the motivations.

Look around. What has been allowed to be created?  What laws, what intent allow a unitary power in any realm to flourish while others flounder (all those who flourish are not just those who have merit and not all those who flounder are simply the inept)?  What laws, what intent, allow some to wield power that permits others to be rounded up and herded away from the Constitution and its Amendments by eliminating due process and checks and balances?

Allowing authoritarianism, under the banner of unitarianism, to flourish while due process and checks and balances wane (it is almost the same folks who rail against a central government and towards individual and state rights who buy into authoritarianism) moves crucial resources we all need to flow towards the few. My humble guess is that’s not what the founding fathers intended.

Uncertainty can be a tough pill to swallow.  But certainty of the kind we are now seeing is a dagger in the back. It’s not the first time, but it is the first time the technology of destruction and the breadth of disinformation is landing like the asteroid-caused extinction.

Clearly a different path is needed. Justice grounded in fear, comeuppance and retribution, as well as “it’s fair to grab all one can,” is just “a horse running loose in the hospital” (thanks for the comedy, John Mulaney).  We can codify better laws, but we need a behavioral change that practices an ethos of civility, fairness, and integrity, all of which are at least as important as a warrior ethos.  Learning always requires practice as that’s how it becomes behavior.  And yep, I’m still practicing—it ain’t preaching you’re reading.