Running for President Article – Feedback

by | Sep 16, 2023 | Culture, Personal | 0 comments

Feedback on Running for President Article

To: Grant
From: Thomas
9/16/2023

Grant, thanks for the feedback on that article; I’m glad you liked it. I read it to Margo, and she was very happy with it. She feels that returning the nation to Biblical morality is the only solution that will work to solve the problem of corruption and the intentional Satanic misdirection of the nation.

It took about an hour to read this essay out loud. I doubt many people will read what I’ve written on my website. I write these articles for myself. Writing is a way of refining my thoughts, making them definite, and arguing for them like Thomas Sowell and VDH. I must present my arguments understandably and convincingly. This effort will be just an exercise in self-fulfillment if I don’t promote and argue for these ideas on the public stage.

Before I make a big push to enroll the public in my theory/plan/candidacy, I want to have digested as many topics and perspectives as possible so that I’m prepared to respond to questions about my stands on issues and challenges to my platform. I think I’ll get most of my audience from my YouTube/Rumble videos and video/podcast appearances. A few friends have video blog/broadcast/podcast opportunities that I will be welcome to appear on, but before I try to present my ideas, I want to be prepared with ideas and their implications.

The issue of writing and organizing books or articles in a coherent/linear/well-organized/terse way is an ongoing challenge. Inspiration and seeds of ideas drive my style. When I start to write, I don’t have the idea fully developed. Typically, I have a seed thought, which I write down and then start to expand on that thought, trying to fill it in with examples and logic justifying my proposition. I then develop definitions, conflicts, points of ambiguity, moral dilemmas… etc.  The result is not linear/coherent/well-organized or terse. To put it in that flow would require starting over, making an outline, and writing from the outline. I don’t do this generally. After pursuing the articulation of a topic, I’m usually exhausted or tired of the subject. The problem is that the final work is too long, repetitive, and free-flowing to be a bestselling/influential piece of literature/polemics.

I continue to work on developing a generalized strategy to analyze and solve real-world problems and present the analysis-solution cycle in an organized, linear, logical way. My lack of a generalized analysis strategy results in an inhomogeneous quality to my articles. Maybe that’s good since it’s not predictable, and maybe more interesting because it’s varied. But, having a template to analyze and solve problems would probably make my presentation more linear and comprehensible. (I did an AI question on solving problems and made a webpage with the 10-part/section analysis method of creating solutions and documenting them with papers/articles.)

I changed the sentence about supporting the best man (and did not include women) for president if I am not going to be elected. I thought about that when I wrote it. I had put in a candidate I was supporting, and Margo thought I should not support anyone now since she thought my approach to solving the problems of America was the only one that would work. I rewrote the sentence quickly.  I know of no women in the race, so it seemed irrelevant, but I understand the issue of alienation – some are very sensitive to it. I don’t use inclusive language very much. I just refer to men and women as men. Both are human.  It is a rebellion against the Left/woke/feminist world, which has made a big deal about women’s rights and the disrespect/alienation of women by not including “she/her” pronouns in writing. Years ago, a study showed a social bias/feeling of depreciation produced in women as they read literature/research/stories using only man/men/he/him pronouns. So now, everyone uses He/she interspersed through novels/writing. I find this social bow to feminism/political correctness annoying and grammatically clumsy, so I don’t play along.  I think it creates and adds to our sense of division into competing clans/tribes/identities when we are all just Children of God. The gender discrimination issue is too petty, and I refuse to play the game. I don’t think less of women and don’t care if my use of “he” exclusively reinforces another person’s bias toward male superiority. I use he/she as needed when there is clearly a specific gender to which I am referring, but otherwise, I don’t worry about alienation – I think I’ve come to expect alienation, as I’ve experienced so much of it for so many years. (Margo and I were the only ones who spoke openly against the lesbian influence in the naturopathic profession.)

My real stand, as you no doubt noticed, is my stand about Godly sexuality. I don’t participate in verbal pronoun equity because the two issues are somewhat connected. I don’t bow to the pronoun Nazis. I have used the he/him-only convention in my writing for years.  I used to write he/she for all generic pronoun sentences, but it doesn’t flow well and acknowledges their victory. I have gotten very little pushback from my clan in using male-pronoun-only writing – everyone on our side of the aisle knows the actual agenda. In general, my constituency, the Christian audience, doesn’t care. I think most people who have accepted Christ as their Lord believe that we are all beloved by God, regardless of our gender, and realize that it is not our gender that makes us superior or inferior. The Biblical hierarchy of male/husband responsibility as the captain of the ship, the point of accountability for leadership and decisions in the family, is just an acknowledgment that every group must have a leader who takes responsibility for the decisions/acts of the group. It seems that responsibility and power are conflated, which is a point of contention among feminists. This group wants to direct the world to bow to their demands/worldview; thus, the male-as-point-of-accountability/responsibility is an obstacle to imposing their agenda. To me, being the point of accountability/responsibility seems like a burden, not a position of glory or being elevated to the top of a hierarchical/master-slave relationship.  I’m not much into pride, authority, or power. Men have positions and roles, and so do women – you do what you must do because you are put in the position.

That was an important distinction/elaboration of the problem-solution cycle you made between Mission, Strategy, and Tactics.  I took your seed idea/suggestion, made a webpage, and expanded that concept into a procedure to be used by the Coalition Cells. The Mission, Strategy, and Tactics concept should be good to use as a template for the Coalition cells as they develop their own Mission, Strategy, and Tactics positions for which they advocate strategies and tactics to other Coalition cells. Likewise, upon agreement, the Coalition of Coalitions could present their proposals for action to the executives/administrators, legislative representatives, and judges. The short mission, strategy, and tactic statement should be a good shorthand/summary format for presentation for action/legislation/change to the responsible parties in government.

(Note: It takes a lot of work to reduce an analysis-solution cycle down to this level of specificity. But it makes the solution more actionable if a complex social issue has been reduced into a few sentences. However, creating a terse Mission, Strategy, and Tactics summary statement reduces the resolution/granularity/specificity of the problem and solution. So, I think having a longer analysis piece/White Paper/10-step analysis-solution cycle as background to accompany the Mission, Strategy, and Tactic 3×5 PBC (paper brain cell) is important so that there is no ambiguity in the terse presentation.)

You are correct about eating an elephant/wall of text/tome of information problem. I will consider how I can reduce the length of my manuscripts (dividing into smaller segments is probably the easiest to do, given that making it shorter requires a massive and difficult rewrite). Putting more white space in the text is also important. I normally don’t do as many bullet points (with their associated zero white space) as I did in this piece – I usually do paragraphs. This article was a little longer than some/most, but not by a lot. Breaking long documents up into installments is a good suggestion. Short paragraphs with breaks between are a good method of giving the brain a break.

Thanks for the input. Very helpful and appreciated!

Thomas

0 0 votes
Article Rating
guest

0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments