Whatever natural endowments we bring to the role of leadership, they can be enhanced; nurture is far more important than nature in determining who becomes a successful leader. The truth of the matter is that you always know the right thing to do. The hard part is doing it. God has in Himself all the power to defend you, all wisdom to direct you, all mercy to pardon you, all grace to enrich you, all righteousness to clothe you, all goodness to supply you, and all happiness to crown you. However, there are times that try human’s souls. Historically we saw how this has worked in the dialogue between masses and power figures; but we also saw how human energy and fear created evil on the simplest levels of social organization. We talked mostly about spirit-power motives and guilt, but sometimes it was more simple and direct: it could be a matter of sheer physical appetite. Some tribes loved the taste of human flesh and incorporated captive men, women, and children with joy and gusto, with simple stomach motives, we might say—as in Melanesia and among some South American tribes. Sometimes men went to war out of personal frustration in the tribe, to work off jealousy dealing with pleasures of the flesh and grief, or even simple boredom. #RandolphHarris 1 of 19

Life on primitive levels could be monotonous, and warfare was often the main source of new experience, travel, real stimulation. In fact, on the primitive level it is almost transparent that warfare was a “game” for appropriating others and enmeshing one’s life with them; we see this clearly among the Plains Indians, where warfare was often really a kind of athletic contest between tribes. However, organismic urges are by their nature sadistic, and primitive beings often wreaked evil on a captured enemy because of one’s desire to gloat and strut; one tortured to affirm oneself, to increase one’s own sense of importance by humiliating others. And so we see that even without spiritual motives, without otherworldly ambitions of any kind, humans cause evil as an organism by enjoying their feelings of animal power. Again, sheer energy causes evil. We can have no psychological evil unless we stress the driving personal motives behind human’s urge to heroic victory. It may seem on the surface that empty, passive, disinterested people are led like sheep to perform vicious acts, that humans easily loses their judgment in the crowd, that one gets carried away by numbers, by shouts, by cleverly phrased slogans and colourful banners—this we might call the “impressionable spectator” theory of aggression. #RandolphHarris 2 of 19

No doubt there is considerable stimulus given to humans by the size and enthusiasm of the group around one. After all, one worships power and had to respond to the obvious power of numbers, thrill to the spectacle of masses; it is visible proof that nature favours humans if she has made their kind multiply so; she seems on the side of human’s victory. Another thing we see is that humans are stimulated to believe in their heroic destiny by the sight of another human face: it shows the miracle of creation shining out of humans, and the fact that this miracle has deep in its eyes and in its head the same beliefs as you, gives you the feeling that your very beliefs are supported by natural creation. Little wonder that the sight and feel of thousands of such miracles moving together with you gives such absolute righteous conviction. So there is no argument about the fact of mass enthusiasm; the question is how important it is as a cause of aggression. Perhaps it is the most important case, due to mental contagion and the herd mind. Why the contagion from the herd? The motive is in the person and not the character of the herd. We know how mobs can be stopped by stopping their leaders, or how panic breaks out when the leader is killed. #RandolphHarris 3 of 19

Mobs identify with the leader, but beyond that we also see that humans bring their motives in with them when they identify with power figures. One is suggestible and submissive because one is waiting for the magical helper. One gives in to the magic transformation of the group because one wants relief of conflict and guilt. One follows the leader’s initiatory act because one needs priority magic so that one can delight in holy aggression. One moves in to kill the sacrificial scapegoat with the wave of the crowd, not because one is carried along by the wave, but because one likes the psychological barter of another life for one’s own. “You die, not me.” The motives and the needs are in people and not in situations or surroundings. It is true that human’s urge to self-transcendence, one’s devotion to a cause, has made more butchery than private aggressiveness in history, and the devastating group is hatred is fed by the love of its members, their willingness even to die in its name. We know that as soon as primitives developed identifiable gods and a large social conglomerate to give their loyalty to, their own natural sadistic appetites were translated into the large-scale sacrifices of others that we see in history: one no longer looked for a skull to eat the brains from, or to shrink for magic power, or to plant in ground facing the enemy so as to mock them—one now could not get enough skulls for paving the temple floor, as in Polynesia or West Africa. #RandolphHarris 4 of 19

It is true that Adolf Eichmann, a German-Austrian SS-Obersturmbannfuhrer and one of the major organizers of the Holocaust, felt physically sick on the one occasion when he actually watched the deadly gas at work, which proves that he was not personally a sadist—but does not prove that he had no personal stake in the killing. People are torn in two by the contradictions that result from their needs and not by what they innocently get caught up in. When they are at their most sheepish and submissive, they are giving vent to the Agape urge in their nature; when they twist and turn to please the leader and the group, they are trying to qualify for absolute goodness and purity so as to be worthy of being included in their transcendence. The individual gives oneself to the group because of one’s desire to share in its immortality; we must say, even, that one is willing to die in order not to die. Another way of looking at this is to say that the basic general motive of humans—their need for self-esteem, for a feeling of primary value—is not a neural vessel. True, its contents vary with each individual and with each society; people learn different ways of feeling warm self-value. I myself have written and argued that the self-esteem motive is elastic and neutral, but I now see that this is not quite so. True, there are no instincts that absolutely determine when people should feel good about themselves. However, self-esteem is equivalent to “righteousness” or feeling “right.” #RandolphHarris 5 of 19

Because self-esteem is linked to righteousness or feeling right, this means that self-esteem is based on an active passion: humans cannot feel right unless they live for the heroic victory over evil, the assurance of immortality. From the beginning, then, the self-esteem is loaded with this task universally, and given its form by how it resolves this task. Which, of course, is another way of saying that the self-esteem is based on the cultural continuation of the causa sui project in the child. This is how it has always been understood, only now we add that the character of this causa sui project is definite and inflexible: the securing of immortality (in whichever way this is understood by the individual and the society). Along with the we have to make an important addition to the approach to aggression. It is true that frustrated, deprived, weak, unindividuated people commit aggression very readily; clinical records are eloquent on this. It is true too that there are mechanical people who fear life, who need to control things with secure sense of power, who prefer inanimate objects to living ones, excreta. These are call “necrophiles,” or lovers of death, in opposition to “biophiles,” or lovers of life. #RandolphHarris 6 of 19

This is a valuable distinction in character structures because it helps us to focus on different ways of bringing up children which might lead to one or the other general orientation—to a love of life which develops sentiments of warm humanity or to a “syndrome of decay” which stifles these sentiments. If we could, we would certainly want to avoid raising generations of young who respect computers more than they do others. One explanation of the fact the World is now bordering on nuclear destruction, biological warfare, and the widespread prevalence of a modern Homo mechanicus. It may be that people do not fear total destruction because they do not love life, or are indifferent to it, or even are attracted to death, fascinated by the prospect of total destruction.  From all we know, I think it would be nearer the truth to talk about a cultural type of being who earns ones immortality from identifications with the power of machines, rather than a simple lover of death, Mass destruction committed under the reign of God the Machine is a tribute to the expansion of an implacable, efficient force with which modern humans can identify—it would not be an attraction to the stillness of death itself. This attraction seems to me more of a Buddhistic sentiment—that is, the achievement of a certain kind of maturity and transcendence. #RandolphHarris 7 of 19

The mechanical humans may scorn and fear living things, but I think it is precisely because one feels that they do not have the power over life and death that machines have; one’s eternity symbol is then the machine which transcends both life and death. Even for Hitler death was not an end in itself, but a power transformation. However, the fundamental Law of Nature, by which people are commanded to endeavour Peace, is derived that humans be willing, wen others are so too, as far-forth, as for Peace, and defence on oneself one shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and be contented with so much liberty against other people, as one would allow other people against oneself. For as long as every being holdeth this Right, of doing anything one liketh; so long are all people in the condition of War. However, if other people will not lay down their Rights, as well as one; then there is no Reason for anyone, to devest oneself of one’s: For that were to expose oneself to Prey, (which no person is bound to) rather than to dispose oneself to Peace. This is that Law of the Gospel; “Whatsoever you require that others should do to you, that do ye to them. And that Law of all humans, Quod tibi feiri non vis, alteri ne feceris. To Lay Down a human’s Right to anything, is to Devest oneself of the liberty, of hindering another of benefit to one’s own Right to the same. #RandolphHarris 8 of 19

For one that renounceth, or passeth away one’s Right, giveth not to any other human a Right which one had not before’ because there is nothing to which every human had not Right by Nature: but only standeth out of one’s way, that one may enjoy one’s own original Right, without hindrance from one; not without hindrance from another. So that the effect which redoundeth to one human, by another humans defect of Right, is but so much diminution of impediments to the use of one’s own Right original. Right is laid aside, either by simply Renouncing it; or by Transferring it to another. By Simply RENOUNCING; when one cares not to whom the benefit thereof redoundeth. By TRANSFERRING; when one intendeth the benefit thereof to some certain person, or persons. And when a human hath in either manner abandoned, or granted away one’s Right; then is one said to be OBLIGED, or BOUND, not to hinder those, to whom such Right is granted, or abandoned, from the benefit of it: and that one Ought and it one’s DUTY, not to make void that voluntary act of one’s own: and that such hindrance is INJUSTICE, and INJURY, as being Sine Jure; the Right being before renounced, or transferred. So that Injury, or Injustice, in the controversies of the World, is somewhat like to that, which in the disputations of Scholars is called Absurdity. #RandolphHarris 9 of 19

For as it is there called an Absurdity, to contradict what one maintained in the Beginning one had voluntarily done. The way by which a person either simply Renounceth, or Transferreth one’s Right, is a Declaration, or Signification, by some voluntary and sufficient sign, or signs, that one doth so Renounce, or Transfer; or hath so Renounced, or Transferred the same, to one that accept it. And these Signs are either Words only, or Actions only; or (as it happeneth most often) both Words and Actions. And the same are the BONDS, by which people are bound, and obliged: Bonds, that have their strength, not from their own Nature, (for noting is more easily broken than a person’s word), but from Fear of some evil consequence upon the rupture. However, all this simply a minor dilemma of clarification of cultural and clinical types; it will take very much more work to sort these things out, and we may never be able to do it in any but a very gross and suggestive way. There is something much more crucial at stake. And we right away know what it is: not only weak, or mechanical, or pathological, or primitive and elemental types aggress, but also well fed, jolly ones—people who have had abundant childhood care and love. The man who dropped the atomic bomb is the warm, gentle boy who grew up next door. The kings of Dahomey who signaled annually for the heads of hundreds of murdered prisoners to be piled in heaps very likely had a child-rearing experience that could have been written about favourably. #RandolphHarris 10 of 19

The reason is absolute and simple: people aggress not only out of frustration and fear but out of joy, plenitude, love of life. People kill lavishly out of the sublime joy of heroic triumph over evil. Voila tout. What are clinical classifications and niceties going to do with that? It is true, I think, that a weak being will more easily, if punished, buy off one’s own death by taking another, and that strong being will be less likely to do this. It is true, too, that most people will not usually kill unless it is under the banner of some kind of fight against evil; in which one is tempted to blame the banner, the propaganda and artificial belief system, and not the people. However, banners do not wrap themselves around people: people invent banners and clutch at them; they hunger for believable words that dress life in convincing meaning. If they did not have nice words to speak (to make sense out of their occasions), people would die. They would die, not because words are nice trimmings to life, but because without words action stop dead, and when actions stops the gnawing realization of impotency and the dumb futility of animal life beings. Words abolish fear and embody hope in themselves. I think it is time for social scientists to catch up with Hilter as a psychologist, and to realize that if people are persuaded about the legitimacy of a cause, they will do anything for heroic belonging to a victorious cause. #RandolphHarris 11 of 19

And I know no psychology, and so far no conditions on this Earth, which would exempt people from fulfilling one’s urge to cosmic heroism, which means from identifying evil and moving against it. In all cases but one this means moving also against individuals who embody evil. The one case, of course, is the teaching of the great religions, and in its modern guise pacifism, no nonviolence. This is a 2,000-year-old ideal at which descriptive psychology stops, since it is an ideal that has hardly yet made a dent in the affairs and minds of people. If you give people political and economic equality, they will still welcome unfreedom in some form. Conservatives must know that the freedom to obey or not to obey, to delegate one’s power to authority, is not so free: it is coerced in the very beginning and by the very nature of human’s perceptions of power and majesty. The talents that people use to amass wealth and social privilege may be due to some real differences in quality of mind and body; but the talent to mystify others is the queen of tyranny, and it is not all natural and neutral, but partly human-made—made by ignorance, thirst for illusion, and fear. As such, it is part of the scientific problem of human liberation, and is not destined to remain wholly in the natural order of things. #RandolphHarris 12 of 19

If the complexities of the psychological dimensions of inequality and the unfreedom at the heart of human nature are sure to please no one who is firmly embedded in an ideological camp, then it becomes even more difficult to know what we are going to do about them or how we are going to approach them. However, few things seem clear: although the radicals may not like it, the science of society will have to go much more slowly and modestly than was at first realized by Rousseau and Marx. Unless, of course, it subserves violent revolution—in which case, as we have learned to our sorrow, the new society that comes into beings has even less a chance of being scientific. As for the conservatives, although they may shrink back in fear, there is nothing to prevent the science of humans from being absolutely critical and meliorative science of society that was envisioned in the Enlightenment. There is nothing in human nature that dooms in advance the most thoroughgoing social changes and utopian ambitions. It used to be thought, for example, that if human’s innate aggressiveness was a drive that had to find expression, then all societies had to have some means of “hate satisfaction.” Many of our best minds have been tortuously struggling with the implications of this: it did not seem possible to have any kind of humanistic, liberating social theory if humans carried within themselves the seeds of destructiveness. #RandolphHarris 13 of 19

And certain the facts of history of war and scapegoating seem to have been born out of a basic drive r a quantum of instinct, or instead results from the fear of death and impotency and can be relieved by a heroic victory over a hate object. A science of humans in society is possible even while admitting the most destructive motives of humans, precisely because these motives become open and amenable to clear analysis, to a tracing out of their total structure in the full field of human affairs as those affairs reflect the torments of human’s inner life, one existential paradoxes. A social ideal could be designed that takes into account human’s basest motives, but now an ideal not directly negated by those motives. In other words, hate object need not be any special class or race or even human enemy, but could be things that take impersonal but real forms, like poverty, disease, oppression, natural disasters excreta. Or, if we know that evil takes human form in oppressors and hangmen, then we could at least try to make our hatreds of people intelligent and informed: we could work against the enemies of freedom, those who thrive on slavery, on the gullibilities and weaknesses of their fellow humans. #RandolphHarris 14 of 19

People hate and love according to their individual understandings and personal needs. The whole thrust of the science of humans since the Enlightenment has been after all a promise that objectivity about evil is possible. This objectivity about evil introduces what we might call the possibility of objective hatred. This clarification of hatred allows us, once more, to makes the circle on the timeless pleas for a moral equivalent to natural sadism, to hope to translate our self-expansion into a furtherance of life instead of the destruction of it. Finally, if we know that we ourselves hate because of the same needs and urges to heroic victory over evil as those we hate, there is perhaps no better way to begin to introduce milder justice into the affairs of humans. This is the great moral that was drew from our demonic times. when we expressed the moving hope that a day would come when each person would proclaim in one’s own fashion the superiority of being wrong without killing others than being right in the quiet of the charnel house. It is imperative that we grown in grace. The term growing in grace is most often used to indicate growth in Christian character. While I think that usage has merit, a more accurate meaning is to continually grow in our understanding of God’s grace, especially as it applies to us personally, to become progressively more aware of our own continued spiritual bankruptcy and the unmerited, unearned, and undeserved favour of God. May we all grow in grace in this sense. #RandolphHarris 15 of 19

As we grow in grace this way, we will grow in our motivation to obey God out of a sense of gratitude and reverence to Him. Our obedience will always be imperfect in performance in this life. We will never perfectly obey Him until we are made perfect by Him. In the same way, our motives will never be consistently pure; there will frequently be some “merit points” mentality mixed in with our genuine reverence for God. So, if you realize your motives have been largely merit-oriented, do not be discouraged. Just begin now to move toward grace motives. Begin to think daily about the implications of the grace of God in your life. Memorize and pray frequently on such Scripture passages as Romans 12.1 and 2 Corinthians 5.14-15. Pray about the aspects of truth in those passages and ask God to motivate you by His mercy and love. When you recognize merit-oriented motives at work in you, renounce them and cast yourself completely on the grace of God and the merit of Jesus Christ. As you grown in grace in this way, you will indeed discover that His love compels you to live, not for yourself, but for Him who died for you and was raised again. The cultivation of a disposition to glorify God saves souls, as well does a knowledge of Scriptures. However, to imagine that none can teach you but those who are themselves saved form sin, is a very great and dangerous mistake. Give not place to it for a moment. #RandolphHarris 16 of 19

This over-idealization of the guru, so widespread could indicate an elementary stage. We may extend great reverence to the person who is worthy of it—saint or self-actualized—but we may bend the knee in worship only to the everlasting Spirit. No human being has the right to receive it, much less demand it, and it is idolatry to give it. One is a human being, after all, a person not a demigod. Worship of the human is not only irrelevant but also, in a sense, irreverent. We may admire one for one’s fine qualities but that does not mean we have to agree with one in all one’s views. So many teachers come to us with their doctrines. Who of them is right and who is wrong? Not because you think, “Our teacher is one to whom great deference is due,” should you accept a doctrine. A superficial emotional approach to truth is less concerned with the message than with the messenger, with thee ideas taught than with their human origin. Many people suffer from the bad consequences of an exaggerated respect for their spiritual guides whereas others may suffer from the consequences of an insufficient respect for them. “And I exhort you to remember these things; for the time speedily cometh that ye shall know that I lie not, for ye shall see me at the bar of God; and the Lord God will say unto you: Did I not declare my words unto you, which were written by this man, like as one crying from the dead, yea, even as one speaking our of the dust?” reports Moroni 10.27. #RandolphHarris 17 of 19

In Thy mercy and majesty, O Lord, behold Thy household, that they may be neither stained with vices of their own, nor held in bondage by the sins of others; but that being ever freed and cleansed from both, they may do service unto Thee; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Hear us, O Lord our God, and separate the hearts of Thy faithful people from the wickedness of the World; that they who call thee Lord with their own voice may not fall back into the service of the devil; through Jesus Christ our Lord. O Lord, bend my hands and cut them off, for I have often struck thee with a wayward will, when these fingers should embrace thee by faith. I am not yet weaned from all created glory, honour, wisdom, and esteem of others, for I have a secret motive to eye my name in all I do. Let me not only speak the word sin, but see the thing itself. Give me to view a discovered sinfulness, to know that though my sins are crucified they are never wholly mortified. Hatred, malice, ill-will, vain-glory that hungers for and hunts after human’s approval and applause, all are crucified, forgiven, but they rise again in my sinful heart. O my crucified but never wholly mortified sinfulness! O my life-long damage and daily shame! O my indwelling and besetting sins! O the tormenting slavery of a sinful heart! Destroy, O God, the evil guest within whose hidden presence makes my life a hell. #RandolphHarris 18 of 19

Yet Thou hast not left me here without grace; the cross still stands and meets my needs in the deepest straits of the soul. I thank thee that my remembrance of it is like David’s sight of Goliath’s sword which preached forth thy deliverance. The memory of my great sins, my many temptations, my falls, bring afresh into my mind the remembrance of thy great help, of thy support from Heaven, of the great grace that saved such a wretch as I am. There is no treasure so wonderful as that continuous experience of thy grace toward me which alone can subdue the risings of sin within: Give me more of it. “I declare these things unto the fulfilling of the prophecies. And behold, they shall proceed forth out of the mouth of the everlasting God; and his words shall hiss forth from generation to generation. And God shall show unto you, that that which I have written is true. And again I would exhort you that ye would come unto Christ, and lay hold upon every good gift, and touch not the evil gift, not the unclean thing,” reports Moroni 10.28-30. Grant, we beseech Thee, Almighty God, that pressing onwards in Thy way with devout minds, we may escape the snares of the sins that beset us; through Jesus Christ our Lord. We pray Thee, O Lord, be present to Thy suppliants; and amid the snares of a wicked World, protect our weakness with never-failing love; through Jesus Christ our Lord. #RandolphHarris 19 of 19

BRIGHTON STATION AT CRESLEIGH RANCH

Rancho Cordova, CA |

Now Selling!

NOW SELLING! Brighton Station at Cresleigh Ranch is Rancho Cordova’s newest home community! This charming neighborhood offers an array of home types with eye catching architecture styles such as Mid-Century Modern, California Modern, Prairie, and Contemporary Farmhouse.

Located off Douglas Road and Rancho Cordova Parkway, the residents of Cresleigh Ranch will enjoy, being just minutes from shopping, dining, and entertainment, and quick access to Highway 50 and Grant Line Road providing a direct route into Folsom. Residents here also benefit from no HOA fees, two community parks and the benefits of being a part of the highly-rated Elk Grove Unified School District. https://cresleigh.com/brighton-station/residence-4/