: A way of protecting each individual's innate rights
Whilst on the one hand we are moving into an era of more and more political freedom and democracy and the dissolving of borders, the growth of litigation and regulation has also injected a paralyzing uncertainty into our everyday choices. All around us are warnings and legal risks, threat to freedom of expression, secrecy bills, etc. that leave us feeling powerless and insecure. Government service is seen as a bureaucratic jungle and is dysfunctional in many counties rather than as a noble calling and a place of service to fellow human beings and society at large.
Citizens are paralyzed by legal self-consciousness and continuously checking whether they have checked the rules. We have become a culture of defensive followers of rules; trained to frame every solution in terms of law or possible risk. The person of responsibility has become the person of caution.
It is said that all this law is just the price of making sure society is in working order. But the fact that society is not working is all too painfully evident. We are not only confused and often denied of our rights, but maybe most alarmingly there is gross falseness and double-dealing when it comes to rights and justice. The cost of everyday living is out of control forcing people to be slaves of debt.
And we are not safe. Not as countries and not as individuals. As a matter of fact – the risk keeps growing. We are literally sitting on a (nuclear) time bomb.
It is safe to say that the world is not in a good shape. Behind the systems that we rely on is immense power and monetary figures that one cannot even begin to try and understand. They make no sense. Peaceful protesters seeking social justice are jailed while hedge fund managers receive multi-billion dollar bailouts and multi-million dollar bonuses.
How far can one trust your doctor, your teacher, your rabbi, your policeman and woman, your psychologist and the psychiatrist, the scientist, the lawyer, the media, your financial adviser, your voting system and your president?
The error and the solution lie in our conception of freedom. We think of freedom as political freedom that is decided upon when we make our choice in the ballot box (for those who have the privilege). Some are even free to live and work where they want.
Freedom should however include the power of personal conviction and the authority to use ones common sense. French political thinker and historian best known for his Democracy in America and The Old Regime and the Revolution Alexis de Tocqueville says: "freedom is less necessary in great things than in little ones. . . . Subjection in minor affairs does not drive men to resistance, but it crosses them at every turn, till they are led to sacrifice their own will. Thus their spirit is gradually broken and their character enervated."
The activism of Occupy Wall Street is the rage and revolt against the un-bearing social injustice and suppression experienced by the masses of the world. All people, including the government officials, the doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc. , want to be free to make their daily choices by focussing on their goals and letting their instincts, mainly subconscious, to get them there. We want to feel our way to success and make things work through trial and error.
The overlay of law on daily choices destroys the human instinct needed to get things done. Bureaucracy does not teach, rules alone do not make things happen, and accomplishment is personal. Modern law however pulls the rug out from under all these human powers and substitutes instead a debilitating self-consciousness.
In this sphere, dealing with morality, human rights, government, law and justice we want to determine how our liberty may be restored when we do not all see it the same way.
Here we want to distinguish between:
1. How liberty is currently approached as law that sets boundaries that proscribe what we must do or can't do, for example -- you must not steal, you must pay taxes, and
2. How liberty could be approached as the same legal boundaries protecting an open field of free choice in all matters.
It is the second component; the provision of "frontiers, not artificially drawn," as philosopher Isaiah Berlin put it, "within which men should be inviolable", that the law need to consider. Instead of being all proscription and no protection, the law must affirmatively define an area free from legal interference.
We need to abandon the idea that freedom is a legal maze where each choice in life is merely like picking the right answer. The new goal for law should be to define an open area of free choice. This will require judges and legislatures to affirmatively assert social norms of what is reasonable and what is not. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. suggests that "The first requirement of a sound body of law is that it should correspond with the actual feelings and demands of the community."
Instead of changing public goals, the goal should be to make it possible for citizens to achieve their goals. Instead of building structures to defend daily freedom judges would aspire to keep lawsuits reasonable; understanding that what people sue for ends up defining the boundaries of free interaction.
Instead of bureaucratic micro-management, schools will be run by the instincts and values of the humans in charge, and they will be held accountable for how they do. There will be flexibility and consultation in how Government officials meet public goals and choices that aspire to balance for the common good and not purely to appease someone’s rights. Citizens should be liberated to individual freedom in daily choices. The higher purpose is justice for all.
A New approach to morality does not arise from feeling of jealousy, hate, resentment, or animosity of any kind. It calls on us to look at our individual shadows and acknowledge when our own antagonism towards the ultra-rich borders on its own sort of greed and will to power.
In this sphere we are considerate of the Natural Laws of the Cosmos that are all in an inter-relationship with one another: perpetual, immutable, and self-administering - meaning that they do not require a government, policemen, courts and jails to enforce it for maintaining order.
According to theses Seven Spiritual Laws of the Universe by which everything in the Universe is governed. Everything in the Universe exists in perfect harmony by virtue of these Laws that can be applied not only in the field of Law and Justice in society, but in all spheres of society.
We learn that Love that regulates the stars and the planets lie at the core of everything and all of Life; also matters of law and justice, human rights, morality, ethics, etc. We have an innate knowing that comes from the heart about that which serves the greater good, and although we may escape human laws, we never escape the laws of our own nature which at the very core is Love.
Instead of creating a mindset of judgment, guilt and punishment, through Oneness Consciousness, humanity is made aware of our mutual responsibility toward one-another and our natural environment. We are encouraged to support Spiritual Principles, global ethics, and universal values such as respect, justice, peace, dignity, freedom, responsibility and cooperation that form the basis of Oneness Consciousness.
Oneness politics, human rights, governance, law and justice is based on Love.