That a highly organized monarchy of evil spirit-beings was in existence is not made known in the story of the garden. Only a “serpent” is there; but in the serpent is spoken to by God as an intelligent being, carrying out a deliberate purpose in the deception of the woman. The serpent-disguised of Satan is swept aside by God as He makes known the decision of the Triune God in view of catastrophe which had taken place: a “Seed” of the deceived woman would eventually bruise the head of the supernatural being who had used the form of the serpent to carry out his plan. Yet from that point on the name of “serpent” is attached to him throughout the ages, for it describes the climax action of his revolt against his Creator in beguiling and deceiving the women in Eden and blasting the human race. Satan triumphed, but God overruled. The victim is made the vehicle for the advent of a Victor, who would ultimately destroy the work of the devil and cleanse the Heavens and the Earth from every trace of his handiwork. The serpent is cursed, but, in effect, the beguiled victim is blessed, for through her will come the ”Seed” which will triumph over the devil and his seed; and through her will arise a new race through the promised Seed (Gen. 3.15), a race which will be antagonistic to the serpent to the end of time, through the enmity implanted by God. Henceforth the story of the ages consists of the record of a war between these two seeds: the Seed of the woman—Christ and His redeemed—and the seed of the devil (See John 8.44; 1 John 3.10), right on to the furthermost point of the final committal of Satan to the lake of fire. #RandolphHarris 1 of 22

Henceforth it is also war by Satan upon the womanhood of the World, in malignant revenge for the verdict of the garden. Yes, war by the trampling down of women in all lands where the deceiver reigns. And war upon all women in Christian lands too, by the continuance of his Eden method of misinterpreting the Word of God: insinuating into men’s minds throughout all succeeding ages that God pronounced a “curse” upon the woman, when in truth she was pardoned and blessed; and instigating fallen men to personally carry out this supposed curse, though in truth it was a CURSE UPON THE DECEIVER and not upon the deceived one (Gen. 3.14). “I will put enmity between thee and the woman,” said God, a well as between “thy seed and her seed,” and this vindictive enmity of the hierarchy of evil toward women, and especially believers, had not lessened in its intensity from that day. Normative and behavioral aspects of a street gang collectively serve to shape and routinize the violent ways of its members. A gang is defined as an, “aggregated peer group that exhibits permanence, engages in criminal activity, and has symbolic representations of memberships.” For gangs, violence generally services critical, symbolic purpose withing the gang subculture. In many cases, violent themes permeate all aspect of gang life. Most gang members seek to develop and maintain a threatening physical presence. Violence tends to be incorporated into the entry rituals, social gatherings, and story-telling of the group. #RandolphHarris 2 of 22

An overdeveloped sense of urgency and “threat” produces a contagion of violence, a hallmark of which is a never-ending cycle of preemptive and retaliatory violence among and between rival gangs. Gangs share many of the properties of mobs, crowds, and other collectives, and engage in many forms of collective behavior. Gangs have turf, symbols, organizational structure, permanence, criminality, and a sketchy sense of loyalty. One will notice a gang is always brought down when they trust an outsider. They fail to notice tale tale sighs that someone is working undercover. Many times, they also get too greed, to sloppy, think they are too big to fail, and talk too much, which leads to their down fall. Many gangs do not know when to give up and leave. It is like they are begging to be arrested and sent to prison. Their group membership, behavior, and values, however, make them interesting to criminologist who study gangs. Collective behavior explanations provide insights into gang processes, particularly the escalation of violence, the spread of gangs from one community to another, and increases in gang membership in specific communities. Violence, as we have mentioned, tends to be integral to the life in the gang, and gang members engage in more violence than other youths and senior citizens. Our analysis of gang violence focuses on the role of threat, actual or perceived, in explaining the functions and consequences of gang violence. We define threat as the potential for transgression against or physical harm to the gang, represented by the acts or presence of a rival group. #RandolphHarris 3 of 22

Threats of violence are important because they have consequences for future violence. Threat plays a role in the origin and growth of gangs, their daily activities, and their belief systems. In a sense, it help to define them to rival gangs, to the community, and to social institutions. Gangs are set apart from other groups by their ability to create “dread,” a direct consequence of involvement in and willingness to use violence. Dread elevates these individuals to street elites through the community members’ perceptions of gang members as violent. In many neighborhoods, groups form for protection against the threat of outside groups. Sometimes these groups are established along ethnic lines, though territorial concerns often guide their formation. There is a natural progression from a neighborhood group to a gang, particularly in the face of “adversarial relations” with outside groups. The emergence of many splinter gangs can be traced to the escalation of violence within larger gangs, and to the corresponding threat that the larger gang comes to represent to certain territorial or age-graded subgroups. Threat also may contribute to the growth of gangs. This mechanism works in two ways: through building cohesiveness and through contagion. Threats of physical violence increase the solidarity or cohesiveness of gangs within neighborhoods as well as across neighborhoods. The source of gang cohesion is primarily external—the results of intergang conflict. #RandolphHarris 4 of 22

Cohesion within the gang grows in proportion to the perceived threat represented by rival gangs. Threat maintains gang boundaries by strengthening the ties among gang members and increasing their commitment to each other, thus enabling them to overcome an initial reluctance about staying in the gang and ultimately engaging in violence. Thus the threat of a gang in a geographically proximate neighborhood increases the solidarity of the gang, motivates more young men to join their neighborhood gang, and enables them to engage in acts of violence that they might not have committed otherwise. The growth of gangs and gang violence contains elements of what is called “contagion.” In this context, contagion refers to subsequent acts of violence caused by an initial act; such act typically takes the form of retaliation. Violence—or its threat—is the mechanism that spreads gang from one neighborhood to another, as well as contributing to their growth. As the population of people of color grows in a community, many European Americas are prone to [RH1] move when the neighborhood diversifies. This is due to their fears of gang violence, and negative stereotypical beliefs about other racial and ethnic group. Some say White flight is due to increases in crimes, and conflicting political agendas. Many people wonder why there are so few European Americans in low income and middle-class neighborhoods. Well, it is because they tend to become victims of crime and are pushed out of their communities, which creates segregation. Many people do not realize it, but some African Americans are extremely racist. And speaking of segregation, by blockbusting, it is fascinating because many low income races of people do not like living around each other, due to the violence and crime and pests, but then they move to another community, threaten and harass the Europeans Americas until they move and create a ghetto. However, you will then find that these people do not like each other, they do not like living in the ghetto, and want to move out. #RandolphHarris 5 of 22

Yet, the housing authority in many communities are not actually redeveloping. They are creating ghettos by violating fair housing laws and only renting to low income ethic groups, often from the same family, under the rouse of a lottery system. However, the exclude European America applicants, especially if they are young. The ability to manage the property because impossible because the management is in fear of the residence and neighbors in the surrounding houses live in fear and choose to move. As the community becomes undesirable, the property rates decrease because the area is what the insurance company deems high risk neighborhood (HRN), which makes the rates of any time of insurance in the neighborhood increase because more losses are sustained in that area. It also reduces the likelihood of investments in the neighborhood because it is unsafe. The threat of attack by a group of organized youth or senior citizens from another neighborhood is part of the gang “myth” or belief system, and helps to create the need for protection as well as to generate unity in a previously unorganized group of neighborhood youths and senior citizens. The origin and spread of such beliefs explain, among other things, the viability of the gang. Threat performs an additional function: it enhances the mythic nature of violence in the gang by increasing the talk about violence and preparedness for violent engagements. The threat of violence also “enables” gang member to engage in violent acts (especially retaliatory violence) that they might not have chosen under other circumstances. #RandolphHarris 6 of 22

The need to respond effectively to rival gang violence escalates weaponry and increases the “tension” that often precedes violent encounters between gangs. Threat has an additional function, however. As gangs and gang members engage in acts of violence and create “dread,” they are viewed as threatening by other (gang and non-gang) groups and individuals. Also, over time, the threats that gang members face and pose isolate them from legitimate social institutions such as schools, families, and the labor market. This isolation, in turn, prevents them from engaging in the very activities and relationships that might reintegrate them into legitimate roles and reduce their criminal involvement. It weakens their ties to the socialization power and the controlling norms of such mainstream institutions, and frees them to commit acts of violence. When once we clearly recognize the existence of an unseen host of evil spirit-being, all actively engaged in deceiving and misleading humans, Old Testament of the Christian Holy Bible history will convey to us an open vision of their doings otherwise hidden from our knowledge. We can trace their operations in relation to the servants of God throughout all history and discern the work of Satan as deceiver penetrating everywhere. We shall see that David was deceived by Satan into numbering Israel because he failed to recognize that the suggestion to his mind was from a satanic source (1 Chron. 21.1). #RandolphHarris 7 of 22

That is why it is not only important for people to remain active members of the church, but to also take a class on Home Economics and also learn how to remain in compliance with the law and be good neighbors by keeping your home clean, inside and out, and not to make too much noise, nor to have too many people hanging out in front of your property. Since senior citizens and the youth have special license as regards involvement rulings, we might ask whether, in American society at least, the genders are differently defined in this regard. Some evidence suggests that women, in general, are more tightly defined than men. There is at least a popular belief that the female toilet takes longer than the male, and that therefore more is entailed in making a female presentable thana in making a male presentable. So, too, a man who appears on a public street with his hair tousled, his tie loosened, a cigarette dangling from his lips seems to be less of an affront to public decorum than is a woman similarly disarrayed. Drunkenness in a woman has a much higher visibility than that in a man, which can be traced to the symbolic qualities of drinking and drunkenness in women in the past, when drinking customarily symbolized the bawd and the harlot. The lack of a long experience with drinking on the part of women in America may explain the greater loss of control they show in their tippling. Another possibility to be counted is that women are more likely to be badly maladjusted when they first turn to excessive drinking, and as a result their overt behavior becomes more flagrantly disorganized. #RandolphHarris 8 of 22

The high-pitched and overt behavior becomes more flagrantly disorganized. The high-pitched and shrill laughter of the drunken women often brands her behavior more quickly for what it is than in a man. Women are supposed to be neater, cleaner, fresher, and more fastidious about their dress than the opposite gender, so that disarray brought drunkenness also demarcates their condition more sharply. And yet, of course, women are sometimes defined as creatures who are not expected to be full-fledged participants in public meetings, and so can sometimes engage in somewhat taxing side involvements such as knitting, in recognition that they have not been deeply drawn into the occasioned main involvement. Similarly, there are coming to be more semipublic situations where a young woman may half-daringly slip her shoes off, while a man in the same setting cannot; but perhaps this is merely a sign that the female’s tightness of orientation is more than shoe-deep, and that a foot sheathed only in nylon is already almost presentable enough for safe public display. To speak of the general level of tightness or looseness built into a role is to imply a social rigidity: that is, the individual may be unable from the start to fit into certain social gatherings, finding that some are defined too loosely and others too tightly. Correspondingly, the individual will tend to exhibit alienation from those gatherings from which his role causes him to be unsuitably involved, and even be led to exhibit this kind of alienation at times when he does not want to. #RandolphHarris 9 of 22

In this context it is worth considering the relation of work and clothing to the problem of fitting into gatherings. Some clothing, like that worn by deep-sea divers or firemen, is inextricably geared to the task at hand. These personal fronts can hardly serve in nonoccupational situations, nor can hardly serve in nonoccupational situations, nor can the possessor, unless he changes clothes. Even during the coffee-break he will be showing a certain kind of devotion to the job. In the case of white-collar task, however, work clothes transcend the work place and enable the worker to merge into gatherings occurring off the job. Correspondingly, when he is on the job, there will be parts of himself that he need not submerge into work, and this in fact provides him with one basis for self-possession and dignity. Those who must wear a uniform at work, and who cannot leave it in the locker room when they leave the premises, are likely to feel that they are under special constraint to give much of themselves to work and to carry this contribution to any nonwork situation in which they happen to find themselves. In the army, of course, this may be quite explicitly stressed by admonitions to respect one’s uniform. We find, then, that persons often feel unfairly restricted in uniform; they carp about not being able to melt easily into loose gatherings that happen to occur, and they feel their autonomy is threatened. Some individual may, of course, desire to maintain a pervasive alienation from their society at large, and seek membership in informed quasi-military groups partly in order to ensure that they will always be a little out of place. #RandolphHarris 10 of 22

When you come into contact with the second and third lines of work, you necessarily come into contact with the will of others. “Is not stopping the expression of negative emotions more or less the same thing as giving up willfulness?” Why do you want to translate one thing into another? Willfulness may have many forms without a definite connection with negative emotions. “It seems to me that if you give up self-will you will get what you desire; that by giving up the desire, you get the desired results.” That is not self-will. Self-will does not include everything you want. If you are hungry and want to eat, that is not self-will. Self-will means preferring to act by yourself and, in our cause, not taking into consideration the work and the principles of the work. We speak of principles of the work and self-will. We can do things in our own way or not. If my self-will is to swear, for instance, and I give it up because it is against the principles of the work, where are the desired results you speak of? As I said earlier, self-will is always connected with self-opinions, a human always thinks one knows something. Then one comes to a school and realizes that one knows nothing. That is why preparation is necessary for school. One is usually full of self-opinions and self-will. Self-will is like a child saying, “I know it myself; I will do it myself.” Self-will has many features. One is told not to do something and at once one wants to do it; one is told that something is wrong, and at once one says, “No, I know better.” #RandolphHarris 11 of 22

A man who comes to teach school must be ready to accept the teaching and the discipline of the school; he must be free to accept it, or else he will get nothing. He cannot acquire will unless he gives up self-will; just as he cannot acquire knowledge unless he gives up self-opinions. “Must one break self-will oneself, or have it broken?” One must do it oneself, and one must have broken it sufficiently to be in a school. One must be sufficiently free from it to accept things without a fight. One cannot keep all the old views and opinions and acquire new ones. One must be sufficiently free to give up the old, at least for a time. One must be able to understand the necessity of discipline. Will cannot be created until one accepts a certain discipline. Strengthen your self-discipline and discover how it can help you succeed in all areas of your life. Most of life’s mistakes are easily overcome through simple, sincere repentance, a process common to nearly all religious people. In rare instances, we may commit serious transgressions that jeopardize our progress. Church discipline—restrictions and conditions of repentance that prompt a person to reevaluate their situation and return to full fellowship and activity—is a process designed to help us overcome sin in these instances. For all sins, large and small, it is the sacrifice and suffering, mercy and grace—or Atonement—of Jesus Christ that makes repentance possible. Church discipline is designed to help an individual more fully apply the Atonement of Jesus Christ, be cleansed of their sins and move forward in their eternal progression. #RandolphHarris 12 of 22

Repentance brings peace when we place our lives in harmony with the teachings of Jesus Christ. Church discipline is a process that helps the individual feel that change of heart and change of behavior necessary to bring full forgiveness and peace. Someone who has fulfilled the requirements of Church discipline can be completely forgiven and return to full participation in the Church. Protect the innocent. When someone poses a physical threat to others or a spiritual threat to other members, Church discipline is conducted to provide protection to predatory practices, physical harm, abuse, fraud and apostasy. We all possess the God-given gift of moral agency—the right to make choice and the obligation to account for those choices. “That every human may act in doctrine and principle pertaining to futurity, according to the moral agency which I have given unto him or her, that every man or woman may be accountable for his or her own sins in the day of judgement,” reports Doctrine and Covenants 101.78. By “moral discipline,” I mean self-discipline based on moral standards. Moral discipline is the consistent exercise of agency to choose the right because it is right, even when it is hard. It rejects the self-absorbed life in favor of developing character worthy of respect and true greatness through Christlike service (see Mark 10.42-45). Jesus’s own moral discipline was rooted in His discipleship to the Father. To His disciples He explained, “My meat is to do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work,” reports John 4.34. By this same pattern, our moral discipline is rooted in loyalty and devotion to the Father and the Son. It is the gospel of Jesus Christ that provides the moral certainty upon which moral discipline rests. #RandolphHarris 13 of 22

When the fraction using technology is constant over time, we are at an equilibrium of the game. Our preference for gasoline engines over steam and light-water nuclear reactors over gas-cooled is better explained by historical accidents than by the superiority of the adopted technologies. In 1890 there were three ways to power automobiles—steam, gasoline, and electricity—and of these one was patently inferior to the other two: gasoline. [A turning point for gasoline was] an 1895 horseless carriage competition sponsored by the Chicago Times Herald. This was won by a gasoline-powered Duryea—one of only two cars to finish out six starters—and has been cited as the possible inspiration for R.E. Olds to patent in 1896 a gasoline power source, which he subsequently mass-produced in the “Curved-Dash Olds.” Gasoline thus overcame its slow start. Steam continued viable as an automotive power source until 1914, when there was an outbreak of hoof-and-mouth disease in North America. This led to the withdrawal of horse troughs—which is where steam cars could fill with water. It took the Stanley brothers about three years to develop a condenser and boiler system that did not need to be filled every thirty or forty miles. However, by then it was too late. The steam engine never recovered. While there is little doubt that today’s gasoline technology is better than steam, that is not the right comparison. How would steam have been if it had the benefit of seventy-five years of research and development? While we may never know, some engineers believe that steam was the better bet. #RandolphHarris 14 of 22

In the United States of America, almost all nuclear power is generated by light-water reactors. Yet there are reasons to believe that the alternative technologies of heavy-water or gas-cooled reactors would have been superior, especially given the same amount of learning and experience. Canada’s experience with heavy-water reactors allows them to generate power for 25 percent less cost than light-water reactors can operate without the need to reprocess fuel. Perhaps most important is the safety comparison. Both heavy-water and gas-cooled reactors have a significantly lower risk of a meltdown—heavy water because the high pressure is distributed over many tubes rather than a single core vessel, and gas-cooled because of the much slower temperature rise in the event of a coolant loss. The question of how light-water reactors came to dominate has recently been studied by Robin Cowen, in a 1987, Stanford University Ph.D. thesis. The first consumer for nuclear power was the U.S.A. Navy. In 1949, then Captain Rickover made the pragmatic choice in favor of light-water reactors. He had two good reasons. It was then the most compact technology, an important consideration for submarines, and it was the furthest advanced, suggesting that it would have the quickest route to implementation. In 1954, the first nuclear-powered submarine, Nautilus, was launched. The results looked very optimistic. At the same time civilian nuclear power become a high priority. #RandolphHarris 15 of 22

The Soviets had explored their first nuclear bomb in 1949. In response, Atomic Energy Commissioner T. Murray warned, “One we become fully conscious of the possibility that [energy-poor] nations will gravitate towards the USSR if it wins the nuclear power race, it will be quite clear that this race is no Everest-climbing, kudos-providing contest. General Electric and Westinghouse, with their experience producing light-water reactors for the nuclear-powered submarines, were the natural choice to develop civilian power stations. Considerations of proven reliability and speed of implementation took precedence over finding the most cost-effective and safest technology. Although light-water was first chosen as an interim technology, this gave it enough of a head start down the learning curve that the other options have never had the chance to catch up. The adoption of gasoline engines, and light-water reactors are but two demonstrations of how history matters in determining today’s technology choices. The important insight from game theory is to recognize early on the potential for future lock-in—once one option has enough of a head start, superior technological alternatives may never get the chance to develop. Thus there is a potentially great payoff in the early stages from spending more time figuring out not only what technology meets today’s constraints, but also what options will be the best for the future. #RandolphHarris 16 of 22

Although exploratory engineering research can show certain technological possibilities, gaining this knowledge can have a paradoxical effect on our feeling of knowledge, on our sense of how much we know about the future. It gives us more information, but it can reveal a range of possibilities so vast that we feel as if we know less than we did before. The prospect of nanotechnology and molecular manufacturing has this paradoxical effect. It makes certain scenarios—such as a mid-twenty first century World of poverty, or choking on pollution caused by massive accumulations of twentieth-century-style industry—seem very unlikely indeed. This is useful information in trying to understand our real situation and trying to make sensible plans for the future. And yet the range of new possibilities opened up is broader than we could have imagined before. On the negative side, one can imagine building engines of destruction capable of devasting the World as thoroughly as a nuclear war. On the beneficial side, one can imagine futures of stable peace with levels of health, wealth, and environmental quality beyond any historical precedent and beyond present expectations. But recall the energy crisis of the 1980s, when home owners and businesses could be fined $10,000 (2023 inflation adjusted $36,307.04) for turning on the heat, the thermostat, during the winter, was required to stay at 65-degrees Fahrenheit. #RandolphHarris 17 of 22

Within this spectrum of possibilities (and off to its sides) is a range of futures we cannot even imagine. Our actions, day by day, are taking us into one of those futures. Not to some future of our present plans or dreams or nightmares, but to a real future, one that will grow from the intended and unintended consequences of our actions, one that we and our descendants will actually have to live in. Scenarios are useful tools for thinking about the future. They do not represent predictions of what will happen, but instead they present pictures of Worlds that one can imagine happening. By looking at these pictures and seeing how they fit together, we can try to get some idea of which events are more likely and which are less likely, and to get some idea of how the choices we make today may affect the shape of the things to come. We are about to see a fusion of government and private business intelligence on a scale never before known in the capitalist economies. Governments and companies have long had truck with one another. Some giant firms have long provided “cover” for government agents. For example, the Bechtel Corporation, the San Francisco-based construction firm that had hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of contracts in the Middle East, gave nominal jobs to CIA operatives. In return, Bechtel received commercially valuable intelligence from the CIA. At one time U.S. businesses provided cover for some two hundred intelligence agents posted abroad who pretended to be executives. The companies were reimbursed for their costs. #RandolphHarris 18 of 22

On the other hand, while may countries simply “expect” their business people to cooperate with intelligence and may apply pressure if they refuse, the United State of America does not. America business executives, including those who have had contacts with high-level foreign politicians, are seldom debriefed. The line between public and private espionage will continue to blur. As multinational corporations proliferate, many grown their own private intelligence networks—“para-CIA,” as it were. This is as true for European oil companies or banks and for Japanese trading houses as it is for American construction firms. Contact between some of these para-CIAs and the intelligence units of their own or their host countries must be assumed. Paralleling “para-intelligence” operations abroad is the recent spread of so-called “competitive intelligence” units in domestic industry. While designed to operate within the law, these apply, at least on a rudimentary level, many of the same methods and skills used by government intelligence operations. The possibilities for informal links with government increase as these business firms hire former spies and analysts from the ranks of government. Such incestuous relationships will multiply as a consequence of the restructuring of World business now taking place, which is leading to complex-cross-national business alliances. #RandolphHarris 19 of 22

The company entering into a “strategic alliance” with another firm may never know that some of its partner’s operations are actually espionage activities run for the benefit of the government. Or it may want to know—and demand that its own government’s spies find out. Inevitably, such changes will drag many formerly “private” business activities into the public purview, politicizing them, and firing off a succession of charges, countercharges, upheavals, and explosive scandals. Another change that parallels recent developments in business will be a shift of emphasis from mass production to customization of intelligence. Government policy-makers are demanding more and more targeted, particularized, and precise information. This requires either customized collection of information or, at a minimum, customized analysis. To meet this demand—especially in the fields of economics, technology, and environment—requires pinpointed tactical information about so vast a variety of matters that not even the largest intelligence producers, like the CIA, will be able to recruit, maintain, and pay for all the necessary specialists. Intelligence agencies will therefore do what companies are doing: They will contract more work out, breaking up the vertical integration characteristic of mass-production operations. Espionage agencies have always done some contracting out. The CIA and French intelligence have both hired gangster and Mafiosi to carry out unpleasant tasks for them. Intelligence agencies have often set up pseudo-businesses—like the famous “Foreign Excellent Trench Coat Company,” used as a cover by the Red Orchestra spy network during its work against the Nazis in World War II, or the CIA’s “proprietary” airlines used during the Vietnam War. However, spies will soon be forced to rely on independent outside suppliers and consultants to a great extent than ever. #RandolphHarris 20 of 22

The basis for this “out-sourcing” is already being laid by the proliferation of private research boutiques specializing in everything from political risk analysis to technical information searches. Business Environment Risk Information, a Long Beach, California, firm, has made whopping mistakes on occasion, but it is also credited with having told its business subscribers in December of 1980 that Egyptian president Anwar Sadat would be assassinated. He was, ten months later. It also correctly forecast Iraq’s invasion of Iran nine months ahead of time. As long ago as 1985, even before the boom in such shops, there were scores of these info-boutiques. Many employ former senior officials or intelligence agents. The most prominent is Kissinger Associates, which at one time or another has employed Brent Scowcroft, national security adviser to President Bush; Lawrence Eagleburger, the number two man in the American State Department; William Simon, a former Secretary of the Treasury; and, of course, Henry Kissinger himself, a former national security adviser and once Secretary of state. Officials with intelligence connections move in and out of such firms—among them William F. Colby, former director of the CIA, who set up his own shop in Washington after leaving the agency. Said Colby: “The assessment business is a lot like the intelligence business.” Private intelligence enterprises can provide “deniability” to the governments that hire them; they can attract the best professionals at free-market, rather than civil service, wages; they can also perform the niche tasks for which large, bureaucratic sup shops are inherently ill-fitted. What we may well see, therefore, is a far closer fusion or interpenetration of business and government intelligence-seeking. #RandolphHarris 21 of 22

I will continue to hold my banner aloft. I find myself born—aye, born—into a people and a religion. The preservation of my people must be for a purpose, for God does nothing without a purpose. His reasons are unfathomable to me, but on my own reason I place little dependence; test it where I will, it fails me. The simple, the ultimate in every direction is sealed to me. It is as difficult to understand matter as mind. The courses of the planets are no harder to explain the growth of a blade of grass. Therefore am I willing to remain a link in the great chain. What has been preserved for four thousand years was not saved that I should overthrow it. My people have survived the prehistoric paganism, the Babylonian polytheism; and it will survive the modern dilettantism and the current materialism, holding aloft the traditional Christian ideals inflexibly until the World shall become capable of recognizing their worth. I am a Christian because the faith of America demands no abdication of my mind. I am a Christian because the faith of America asks every possible sacrifice of my soul. I am a Christian because in all places where there are tears and suffering the Christian weeps. I am a Christian because every age when the cry of despair is heard the Christian hopes. I am a Christian because the message of America is the most ancient and the most modern. I am a Christian because America’s promise is a universal promise. I am a Christian because for American the World is not finished; men will complete it. I am a Christian because for America man is not yet fully created; men are creating him. I am a Christian because America places man and his unity above nations and above America itself. I am a Christian because above man, image of the divine unity, American placed the unity which is divine. #RandolphHarris 22 of 22