Enthusiasm is undoubtedly a disorder of the mind; and such disorder as greatly hinders the exercise of reason. Nay, sometimes it wholly sets it aside: it not only dims but shuts the eyes of the understanding. It may, therefore, well be accounted a species of madness; of madness rather than folly: seeing a fool is properly one who draws wrong conclusions from right premises; whereas a madman draws right conclusions, but from wrong premises. And so does an enthusiast. Suppose his or her premises are true, and his or her conclusions would necessarily follow. However, here lies one’s mistake: one’s premises are false. One imagines oneself to be what one is not, and therefore, setting out wrong, the farther one goes out, the more one wanders out of the way. Very earlier in the history of the Christian Church the subtle temptation to a kind of inverted humility, which is really the worst and most dangerous form of spiritual pride, disclosed itself in portentous scandals. The Adventists of Thessalonica, who refused their normal obligations in the interest of a complete self-preparation for the Lord’s coming, have had their representatives in many strange sects in Europe and America, who have been carried into amazing   tracks allows an individual to define and redefine one’s experience by the strategic placement of information. Sometimes, the individual receives outside help. For example, when Milgram in 1963 placed a barrier between people, administering electric shocks, and the bogus “subjects” who were supposedly receiving the shocks, he made it easier for the shockers to “disattend” signs of human distress from their hapless victims. #RandolphHarris 1 of 21

In other cases help can come from guides who direct the novice on what to experience and what to block out. Beginning marijuana smokers are cautioned to ignore feelings of nausea. On the other hand, novice hit men like Pete are reluctant to share their “experience” with any one else. It would be a sign of weakness. In still other cases, however, it is possible that the subject can do the reframing on his or her own. And this is what appears to have happened to Pete. “And then the second one [the second hit] came up, [Pete] was still thinking about the first one. Yeah, when he got ready to go, he was to the moment that he killed the second guy, he waited, you know. Going through his mind was the first guy he killed. He still seeing him still see the expression on his face. Soon, the second guy walked up; I mean, it was like just his mind just blanked out for a minute, everything just blanked out. Next thing he knew, he had killed the second guy. He knew what he was doing, but what I mean, he just didn’t have nothing on his mind. Everything was wiped out,” reports Pete. When the second victim approached, Pete says that he noticed the victim’s approach, he was aware of the man’s presence. However, he noticed none of the victim’s personal features. He did not see the victim’s face or its expression. Thus, as if Pete had negatively conditioned himself to avoid certain cues. Since he shot the victim in the head, it is probable that Pete saw him in one sense; this is not the same kind of experience as a dissociative reactions, which has been linked to sleep-walking. #RandolphHarris 2 of 21

Pete says, that “he knew what he was doing.” However, he either did not pay attention to his victim’s personal features at the time of the killing, or he blocked them out immediately afterward, so that now the only aspect of his victim he recalls is the victim’s approach (if we are to believe him). While demons do not possess a material body, they can act upon the human body, as well as the human soul and spirit. They are capable of entering in and assuming control of a human body, speaking and acting through it from time to time and even possessing it, as if it were their own property. That demons are individuals is attested by their intelligent and voluntary action. They think, they speak, they act through a spiritistic medium or through a person over whom they have acquired control. After his second murder, Pete says that killing became routine. He learned to view his victims as “targets,” rather than as people. Thus, he believes that the second experience is the crucial one, and that the disattendance of the victim’s persona features made it so. Because demons are spirit personalities, they can act upon and influence a man or woman’s body and mind. Support from other account of hit men is scant, due to a lack of data. Furthermore, not everyone in Pete’s account supports the “reframing” hypothesis. In talking about later killings, it is clear that he not only attends to his victims’ personal features, on occasion, but he also derives a certain grim pleasure in doing so. #RandolphHarris 3 of 21

“The victim was a nice looking woman. She started weeping, and [she cried], ‘I ain’t did this, I ain’t did that.’ And [Pete] said that he shot her. Like it wasn’t nothing…he didn’t feel nothing. It was just money,” reports Pete. It may be the this evidence contradicts what I said about reframing, but perhaps another interpretation is possible. Reframing may play a more crucial role in the original redefinition of an experience than in the continued maintenance of that redefinition. Once Pete has accustomed himself to viewing his victims as merely targets, as “just money,” then it may be less threatening to look upon them as persons, once again. Once the “main story line” has been established, discordant information can be presented in the “overly track,” without doing too much damage. Foe what I have been referring to as “disattendance” Pete used the term “heart,” which he defined as a “coldness.” When asked what he would look for in an aspiring hit man, Pete replied, “ See if he’s got a whole lot of heart…you got to be cold…you got to build a coldness in yourself. It’s not something that comes automatically. Cause, see, I don’t care who he is, first, you’ve got feelings,” reports Pete. However, the “made rather than born” thesis does explain one perplexing feature of hit men and other “evil” men whose banality has sometimes seemed discordant. In other aspects of their lives they all seem perfectly capable of feeling ordinary human emotions. Their inhumanity, their coldness, seems narrowly restricted to their jobs. #RandolphHarris 4 of 21

Pete, for example, talked about his “love” for little children. Examples of human warmth indicate that the cold heart of the hit man may be less a characteristic of the killer’s individual personality, than a feature of the professional framework of experience which the hit man or woman has learned to adapt oneself to, when one is on the job. As we have been studying ways of deviance neutralization, it is clear that the freelance hit man or woman is an example of an individual who, relatively alone, must deal with a profound and unambiguous stigma in order to enter one’s career. “Heart” seems to be a dedicating factor in becoming a professional. The inhibitions against murder-for-money are real. “Heart” or the ability to adapt to rationalized framework for killing—has been portrayed as the outcome of an initial process of reframing, in addition to other neturalization techniques established during the further stages of professionalizations. People often enter into deviant acts first, then develop rationales for their behaviour later on. This was also the case with Pete, who began his career by first, being willing, encountering a frame-break, undergoing negative experience, being willing to try again (also known as “getting back on the horse”), reframing the experience, and having future, routine experiences wherein his professionalization increasingly enabled him to “deny the victim,” “deny injury,” and “deny responsibility.” #RandolphHarris 5 of 21

Through the process of reframing, the experience of victim-as-target emerged as the “main storyline,” and the experience of victim-as-person was downgraded from the main track to the disattended track to the overlay track. Ironically, the intensity of the negative experience seemed to make the process all the more successful. Thus, it may be possible for a person with “ordinary human feelings” to pass through the novice stage, and to continue with “normal relations” thereafter. This suggests that hit men and women may not be psychopaths, but it is possible that they are possessed. The reframing hypothesis has implications for other people who knowingly perform stigmatized behaviors. It may be particularly useful in explaining personal conversion experience that occurs despite the relative absence of deviant peer group, deviant norms, extenuating circumstances, and neutralization rationales. If all that the Christian Holy Bible and Book of Mormon contains on the subject of the supernatural power of evil could be exhaustively dealt with, we would find that more knowledge is given of the workings of Satan, and his principalities and powers, than many have realized. From Genesis to Revelation the work of Satan as deceiver of the whole inhabited Earth can be traced until the climax is reached, and the full results of the deception in the Garden of Eden are unveiled in the Apocalypse. In Genesis we have the simple story of the garden, with the guileless pair unaware of danger from evil beings in the unseen World. #RandolphHarris 6 of 21

We find recorded there Satan’s first work as deceiver, and the subtle form of his method of deception. We see him working upon an innocent creature’s highest and purest desires, and cloaking his own purpose of ruin under the guise of seeking to lead a human being nearer to God. We see him using the God-ward desires of Eve to bring about captivity and bondage to himself. We see him using “good” to bring about evil; suggesting evil to bring about supposed good. Caught with the bait of being “wise,” and “like God,” Eve is blinded to the principle involved in obedience to God and DECEIEVED (1 Tim. 2.14). Goodness is, therefore, no guarantee of protection from deception. The keenest way in which the devil deceived the World, and the Church, is when he comes in the guise of somebody, or something, which apparently causes them to go God-ward and good-ward. He said to Even, “Ye shall be as gods,” but he did not say, “and ye shall be like demons.” Angeles and men only knew evil when they fell into a state of evil. Satan did not tell Eve this when he added “knowing good and evil.” His true objective in deceiving Eve was to get her to disobey God, but his wile was, “Ye shall be like God.” Had she reasoned, she would have seen that the deceiver’s suggestion exposed itself, for it crudely receiver’s suggestion exposed itself, for it crudely resolved itself into “disobey God” to be more like God! The lawless tyrant, who denies to know their God, or message to regard, must be compelled by signs and judgments dire; to blood unshed rivers must be turned, frogs, lice and flies must all his palace fill with loathed intrusion, and fill all the land. #RandolphHarris 7 of 21

However, when buffers are shaken, conscience awakes. “How can one discover what one’s own buffers are?,” asked someone else. Sometimes it is possible. If one has the right idea of buffers, one may find one’s own. There is a great difference between excuses and buffers. Excuses may be different every time, but if the excuse is always the same, then it becomes a buffer. Buffers are connected with conscience. Conscience is a word we use generally in a conventional sense, to mean a sort of educated emotional habit. Really, conscience is a special capacity which everybody possesses but which nobody can use in the state of sleep. Even if we feel conscience for a moment accidentally, it will be a very painful experience, so painful that immediately we shall want to get rid of it. People who have occasional glimpses of conscience invent all kinds of methods to get rid of this feeling. It is the capacity to feel at the same time all that we ordinarily feel at different times. Try to understand that all our different “I”s have different feelings. One “I” feels that one like something, while another hates it, and a third “I” is indifferent. However, we never feel these things at the same time because between them are buffers. Because of these buffers we cannot use conscience, cannot feel at the same two contradictory things which we feel at different times. If a man or woman does happen to feel them one suffers. So, in our present state, buffers are even necessary things without which a man or woman would go mad. However, if one understands about them and prepares oneself, then after some time, one may start to destroy the contradictions and break the buffers down. #RandolphHarris 8 of 21

The breaking of a mechanical habit, whether good or bad, may be uncomfortable, because we have mechanical habits such as rules of conduct and moral rules which we get from our education. In most cases, therefore, we do not experience conscience; we have too many buffers. As I have said, they are partitions between our emotional attitudes, and experience of conscience means seeing a hundred things at the same time. Partitions disappear and all inner contradictions are seen at the same time. This is very unpleasant, and as the general principle of life is to avoid unpleasant sensations and realizations we run away from seeing them. In this way we create inner buffers. Contradictions seen one after the other do not appear contradictory; they have to be seen at the same time. We are machines and we must see where we can change something, because in ever machine of every kind there is always a point where it is possible to begin. Sometimes people ask if there is anything permanent in us. There are two things, buffers and weaknesses. The weaknesses are sometimes called features, but they are really just weaknesses. Everyone has one, two or three particular weaknesses, and everybody has certain buffers belonging to one. One consists of buffers, but some are particularly important because they enter into all one’s decisions and all one’s understandings. These features and buffers are all that can be called permanent in us, and it is lucky for us that there is nothing more permanent, because these things can be changed. #RandolphHarris 9 of 21

“Does giving up one’s will mean not to act without understanding?” You see, this is another of your mistakes. You think that giving up will means doing something. This happens very seldom. In most cases you are told not to do something. There is a great difference in this. For instance, you want to explain to someone what you think of him or her, and you must not do it. It is a question of training. Will can be grown if one works on oneself and makes one’s will obey the principles of the work. Things that do not concern the work cannot be connected with it, but the more you enter into the work, the more things begin to touch upon the work. However, this needs time. When their chance comes and people are told to do something, or not to do something, they go against it for what seems to them the very bests of reasons. So they miss their opportunity. Time passes, and later they may see that they have missed their opportunity, but it can no longer be replaced by anything. This is the penalty of self-will. About this idea of giving up one’s will: it must be repeated that men nos 1, 2, and 3 have no will, but only self-will and willfulness. Try to understand what that means. Being willful means that one wants to do or actually does something forbidden, simply because it is forbidden. And an instance of self-will is when someone sees that you are trying to do something that you do not know how to do and wants to help you, but you say, “No, I will do it myself.” These are the two types of will we have. They are based on opposition. Rel will must depend on consciousness, knowledge and Permanent “I.” Such as we are, we have not got it. All that we have is self-will and willfulness. #RandolphHarris 10 of 21

Our will is a resultant of desires. Desires may be very well hidden. For instance, a man may want to criticize someone and one calls it sincerity. However, the desire to criticize may be so strong that one would have to  make a really big effort to stop it, and a man cannot make real efforts by oneself. In order to create will, a man must try to co-ordinate one’s every action with ideas of the work; one must in every action ask oneself: How will it look from the point of view of the work? Is it useful or harmful to me, or to the work? If one does not know, one can ask. If a person has been long in the work, there is practically not a single action that does not touch upon the work; there are not independent actions. In that way one is not free, in the sense that one cannot act foolishly without discrimination. One must think before one acts. If one is not sure, one can ask. This is the only method by which will can be created, and for this method school organization is necessary. Without school one can do nothing. The ward system, which forms a central aspect of the social structure in mental hospitals, can also be delineated in terms of involvement rules—the “bad” wards being ones where tight situational orientation is little demanded; the “good” or convalescent wards being ones where many more exhibitions of respect for the gathering are required. Conversely, the “good” wards are ones where other kinds of privileges are available, and the “bad” ones are places where these are not. When staff use these labels they often mean to refer to differences in situational propriety; patients, on the other hand, tend to have in mind the merely-situated component of privileges on the ward. #RandolphHarris 11 of 21

The same term, then, will designate the same ward but will tend to connote different things to the two status levels. It may be added that, in general, mental hospitals seem to operate on the basis of a privilege quota: the patient who requires situational license must sacrifice the merely-situated component of privilege, and to the degree that one desires the latter, one must be ready to “behave oneself.” The communal institutions of Central Hospital were themselves differently defined as regards tightness. In the large 300-man refectory, which fed the men on 900-patient chronic men’s service, eating with one’s hat on was not forbidden; the place had something of the atmosphere of a train depot. However, at the Red Cross House (containing a large sitting room-dancehall), the staff felt that patients should have some “respect” for the place, and act in it as they would in their homes. Posted signs, collective bawlings-out, and other injunctions established that no hats, no spitting, no refuse on the floor, and no “horsing around” were to be permitted. When we see that some of these controlling factors inhere in the behavior setting, we can more readily understand why some mental patients may improve greatly merely by being brought down to a “better” ward; but we cannot as easily determine how much new human material a setting can incorporate without losing it customary involvement structure. #RandolphHarris 12 of 21

Just as there are differences between situations in regard to the tightness of conduct occurring therein, so, of course, there are differences between different roles, each of these differences being maintained across several different situations. At one extreme we have the mental patient on a chronic ward who has not yet decided to try to get out by good behavior. One may feel that one has earned and paid for the right to act loosely and that one might as well exercise it. One this plays the role of an “involvement freak,” and, as already suggested, shares with children, senior citizens, the homeless, and bohemians the special license and expectation of being frequently remiss in situational obligations. At the other extreme are high ecclesiastical and miliary officers who carry their solemnity in their uniform, and prefer gatherings that are tight enough to be saluted. Here, incidentally, one finds a very pervasive difference between middle- and lower-class males in American society. Those who work without a tie, in clothes they do not have to worry about keeping clean, are persons who can afford to touch and be touched by the physical environment around them. The “informality” of their dress is one part of a complex, the whole of which is the understanding that these persons need not maintain a tight orientation in public situations. While waiting for a bus, the lightrail, or talking to a friend on the street, they can slouch, lean against a building, or squat on any substitute for a seat, and thus express a looseness of orientation to the gathering as such, which is consistent with the role that has been accorded them. #RandolphHarris 13 of 21

That their clothing allows this is as much effect as cause of their situational orientation. (A limiting case is the person such as a chimney sweep or miner, who can soil the environment around one and will therefore have a special basis for circumspection.) Middle-class people in public places, on the other hand, have more obligation to keep relatively erect and stiff, relatively ready to respond interactively. And, again, the fact that their clothing and cleanliness patterns are incompatible with too great a familiarity with the physical environment of the street would seem to be as much effect as cause of their level or orientational discipline. Persons tightly attired can, of course, express meager concern for the gathering, but they are perhaps more likely than those informally dressed to do this by means of relatively subtle cues. Now when it comes time to commuting to work, traffic patterns are a concern. There are two main ways to commute from Berkeley to San Francisco. One is driving over the Bay Bridge, and the other is taking public transportation, the Bay Area Rapid Transit train called BART. Crossing the bridge is the shortest route, and with no traffic, a car can make the trip in 20 minutes. However, this is rarely the case. The bridge had only four lanes and is easily congested. (Sometimes, after earthquakes, it is closed altogether.) We suppose that each additional 2,000 cars the travel time rises to 30 minutes; at 4,000 cars, to 40 minutes. The BART train makes a number of stops, and one has to work to the station and wait for the train. It is fair to say that the trip takes closer to 40 minutes along this route, but the train never fights traffic. When train usage rises, they put no more cars, and the commuting time stays roughly constant. #RandolphHarris 14 of 21

If, during the rush hour, 10,000 commuters want to go from Berkeley to San Francisco, how will the commuters be distributed over the two routes? Each commuter will act selfishly, choosing the route that minimizes one’s own transportation time. Left to their own devices, 40 percent will drive and 60 percent will take the train. The commuting time will be 40 minutes for everyone. This outcome is the equilibrium of a game. We can see this result by asking what would happen if the split were different. Supposed only 2,000 drivers took the Bay Bridge. With less congestion, the trip would take less time (30 minutes) along this route. Then some of the 8,000 BART commuters would find out that they could save time by switching, and would do so. Conversely, if there were, say, 8,000 drivers using the Bay Bridge, each spending 60 minutes, some of them would switch to the train for the faster trip it provides. However, when there are 4,000 drivers on the Bay Bridge and 6,000 on the train, no one can gain by switching: the commuters have reached an equilibrium. Is this equilibrium good for the commuters as a whole? Not really. It is easy to find a better pattern. Suppose only 2,000 take the Bay Bridge. Each of them saves 10 minutes. The 2,000 who switch to the train are still spending the same time as they did before, namely 40 minutes. So are the 6,000 who continue to take the train. We have just saved 20,000 person-minutes (or almost two weeks) from the total travel time. #RandolphHarris 15 of 21

Why is this saving possible? On in other words, why were the drivers left to themselves not guided by an invisible hand to the best mix of routes? The answer lies in the cost that each user of the Bay Bridge inflicts on the others. When an extra driver takes this road, the travel time of all the other users goes up by a little bit. However, the newcomer is not required to pay a price that reflects this cost. One takes into account only one’s own travel time. What traffic pattern is best for the group of drivers as a whole? In fact, the one we constructed, with 2,000 cars on the Bay Bridge and a total time saving of 20,000 minutes, is best. To see this, try a could of others. If there are 3,000 cars on the Bay Bridge, the travel time is 35 minutes in all. With only 1,000 cars, the travel time is 25 minutes, and each saves 15 minutes, but the total saving is again only 15,000 minutes. The intermediate point with 2,000 drivers, each saving 10 minutes, is best. How can the best pattern be achieved? Devotees of central planning will think of issuing 2,000 licenses to use the Bay Bridge. If they are worried about the inequity of allowing those with licenses to travel in 30 minutes while the other 8,000 must take the train and spend 40 minutes, they will devise an ingenious system of rotating the licenses among the population. A market-based solution charges people for the harm they cause others. Supposed each person values an hour of time at $25, that is, each would be willing to pay $12 to save an hour. Then charge a toll for driving on the Bay Bridge; set the $2 above the BART fare. #RandolphHarris 16 of 21

By our supposition, people regard an extra $2 cost as equivalent to 10 minutes of time. Now the equilibrium commuting pattern will have 2,000 cars on the Bay Bridge and 8,000 riders on BART. Each user of the Bay Bridge spends 30 minutes plus an extra $2 in commuting costs; each BART rider spends 40 minutes. The total effective costs are the same, and no one wants to switch to the other route. In the process we have collected $4,000 of toll revenue (plus an additional 2,000 BART fares), which can then go into the county’s budget, thus benefiting everyone because taxes can be lower than they would otherwise be. A solution even closet to the spirit of free enterprise would be to allow private ownership of the Bay Bridge. The owner realized that people are willing to pay for the advantage of a faster trip on a less congested road. One charges a price, therefore, for the privilege. How can one maximize one’s revenue? By maximizing the total value of the time saved, of course. The invisible hand guides people to an optimal commuting pattern only when the good “commuting time” is priced. With the profit-maximizing toll on the bridge, time really is money. Those commuters who ride BART are selling time to those who use the bridge, Finally, we recognize that the cost of collecting the toll sometimes exceeds the resulting benefit of saving people’s time. Creating a marketplace is not a free lunch. The toll booths may be a primary cause of the congestion. If so, it may be best to tolerate the initial inefficient route choices. #RandolphHarris 17 of 21

The coming eco-wars—another growth business for tomorrow’s spies is the environment. Environmental problems increasingly cross national boundaries, so that pollution from the Rhine affect Holland as well as Germany, acid rain ignores frontiers, and the deforestation of the Amazon has global concerns. Increasing environmental knowledge can help reduce such problems, but it also opens the way to sophisticated manipulation of one country’s environment by another’s political policy-makers. A crude example was the 1989 announcement by Turkey that it would shut off the flow of Euphrates River water to Iraq and Syria for a month. The shutdown threatened Iraqi agriculture and Syrian electrical supplies. Its purpose, according to the Turks, was to do repair work on the Ataturk Dam. However, skeptics insisted there was more to the story. Across Turkey’s southern border in Iraq and Syria are the remote bases of Kurdish separatists belonging to the Marxist Kurdish Workers Party. KPW guerrillas have been slipping across into Turkey. In turn, Turkey has been demanding that Iraq and Syria guard the border and prevent such penetrations. This incursion did not stop, and were followed by the Turkish announcement of a dam shutdown. This, in turn, was followed four days later by a guerrilla raid that left twenty-eight dead in a Turkish village on the Iraqi line. The Turkish press clamored for a reprisal against the guerrilla bases in Syrian-controlled territory. #RandolphHarris 18 of 21

Whether the water cutoff was or was not intended to prod the Iraqi and Syrian governments into military action against the guerrillas, it was an event with significant ecological implications, an opening shot, one might say, in the eco-warfare that will become more common and far more sophisticated in the decades ahead. Someday nations may unleash genetically altered insects against an adversary, or attempt to modify weather. When that day comes, intelligence will provide ammunition for the eco-wars. On a more optimistic note, however, because of their satellite remote sensing systems, intelligence agencies may be well placed to take on the task of verifying compliance with environmental treaties, as they now verify arms control agreements. Eco-intelligence will be integrated more closely with political and military planning as both eco-war and eco-treaties become part of the new global system. The spread of new system of wealth creation thus begins to transform one of the universal functions of the nation-state—the collection of foreign intelligence. What we have glimpsed so far, however, are only the most superficial changes. Far deeper ones lie in store. For instance, nanoparticles can get into the body through the skin, lungs and digestive system. This may create “free radicals,” which can cause cell damage and damage to the DNA. There is also concern that once nanoparticals are in the bloodstream they will be able to cross the blood-brain barrier.  #RandolphHarris 19 of 21

For all practical purposes, nanotechnology seems inevitable. With work, it can be made beneficial, but only if we exercise ordinary care in avoiding accidents and extraordinary care in preventing abuse. It is hard to get people to take future technologies seriously. Present-day problems dominate discussions, and ideas about future possibilities take effort to judge. Because of this inertia, broad international regulations of nanotechnology will not be possible until nanotechnology already exists, until people begin to see its results. And then, for regulation to be most effective, researchers and governments in many countries will need to cooperate and be on speaking terms with the technology’s critic. What, then, is the socially responsible course of action, the approach most likely to avoid serious abuse of nanotechnology and most likely to deliver some of its potential benefits? It is, we believe, to point out potential dangers and abuses and how they can be avoided, but also to emphasize the civilian applications in medicine, the environment, and the economy. It is these benefits that provide grounds for advocating open civilian development programs, and for international cooperation that can provide a basis for effective international guidance. To guide nanotechnology will not be simple. We will be confronted with a range of choices greater than we have faced before in history. It is only by grappling with those choices that we will be able to affect them for the better. #RandolphHarris 20 of 21

O Lord, our hope in every generation, we rejoice in the wondrous deliverance Thou didst bring to pass for our fathers. When Haman rose to crush us, Thou wast at our side. Thou didst bring to naught his base designs, delivering us from destruction. In our day, too, O Lord our God, we trust in Thy saving power. We know it is Thy will that evil be subdued and righteousness prevail. Keep us ever steadfast and just, that no weapon formed against us may prosper. Inspire us like Mordecai of old, to be unswering in our devotion to Thee. Like Esther, may we ever be eager to serve our people, even at the peril of our lives. Cause us to know as Mordecai knew, that whether we be born to high or low estate, we share alike our people’s lot. That though we dwell in safety, blessed with abundance, our brother’s hurt is our hurt, in their sorrow, ours. Hasten the day when all oppression shall cease, and tyranny shall forever be crushed; when strife shall no longer set off man from man, but all shall unite in true brotherhood to serve each other, and thus, O Lord, serve Thee. We, who were young and loved each other blindly, now come to know each other in love, married by what we have done, as much as by what we intend. Our hair turns white with our ripening as though to fly away in some coming wind, bearing the deed of what we know. It was bitter to learn that we come to death as we come to love, bitter to face the just and solving welcome that Heaven prepares. It is better to pray than worry, for we will have the sweetness of ripening. How sweet to the Lord by the signs of the World. #RandolphHarris 21 of 21

Cresleigh Homes

This time of year, we’re always looking for ways to put an extra SPRING in our step. Try a little DIY room spray to freshen your space! 🌱🌸

Add 25-30 drops of your favorite essential oil (lemon, lavender, or orange are great options!) to a small spray bottle. Fill the bottle halfway with witch-hazel, and fill the rest with distilled water. Voila!

Need a bit more inspiration? Check out our Havenwood Residence 3 home…Homesite #72 is move-in ready! 😍

#CresleighHomes

The sadomasochistic splitting of power has the characteristics of all symptomatic behavior: it is literally destructive, and it involves a polarization in which one side of the split is apparent, while the other is hidden. People who turn to violence are visibly controlling; what is less obvious are their weakness and feelings of powerlessness. On the other hand, those who habitually play the victim may be quite unaware of their own more subtle methods of control. This is why issues of power are so difficult to deal with: things are not as they appear to be. Weaklings puff themselves up and try to act strong; tough people hide their vulnerabilities; the rest of us fail to look past the surface. We assume that the fabrication of power all around us are genuine, and we fall victim to them. Heinrich Himmler is an excellent example of a vicious, sadistic character who illustrates what has been said about the connection between sadism and the extreme forms of the anal-hoarding, bureaucratic, authoritarian character. The “bloodhound of Europe,” as he was called by many, Mr. Himmler was, together with Mr. Hitler, responsible for the slaughter of between fifteen and twenty million unarmed and powerless Russians, Poles, and Jewish. Whenever one person victimizes another, real power has been lost and replaced by a literalistic drama that is dangerous for both parties. Stage V On forgoing a working agreement, the offender and, in many cases, victim appeared committed to battle. They contributed to and invested in the development of a fateful transaction, one which was problematic and consequential to their face and wider reputation. #RandolphHarris 1 of 19

Both the offender and the victim placed their character on the line, and alternative methods for assessing character focused on a working agreement that violence was appropriate. Because opponents appeared to fear displaying weakness in character and consequent loss of face, and because resolution of the content was situationally bound, demanding an immediacy of response, they appeared committed to following through with expressed or implied intentions. Commitment to battle was additionally enhanced by the availability of weapons to support verbal threats and challenges. Prior to victory, the offender often sought out and secured weapons capable of overcoming the victim. In about thirty-six percent of the cases, offenders carried hand guns or knives into the setting. In only thirteen percent of these cases did offenders bring hand guns or knives into the situation on the assumption that they might be needed if the victims were confronted. In the remainder of these cases such weapons were brought in as a matter of everyday routine. In either event, to inflict the fatal blow required the mere mobilization of the weapon for action. In sixty-four percent of the cases, the offender either left the situation temporarily to secure a hand gun, rifle, or knife, or transformed the status of some existing situational prop, such as a pillow, telephone cord, kitchen knife, beer mug, or baseball bat, into a lethal weapon. The possession of weapons makes battle possible, and, in situations defined as calling for violence, probable. #RandolphHarris 2 of 19

The particular dynamics of the physical interchange are quite varied. In many cases, the battle was brief and precise. In approximately fifty-four percent of the cases, the offender secured the weapon and dropped the victim in a single shot, stab, or rally of blows. In the remaining cases, the battle was two-sided. One or both secured a weapon and exchanges a series of blows, with one falling in defeat. Stage VI Once the victim had fallen, the offender made one of three moves which marked the termination of the transaction. In over fifty-eight percent of the cases, the offender fled the scene. In about thirty-two percent of the cases, the offender voluntarily remained on the scene for the police. In the remaining cases, the offender was involuntarily held for the police by members of the audience. These alternatives seemed prompted by two lines of influence: the relationship of the offender and victim and the position of the audience vis-à-vis the offense. When there is no audience, the offender and victim were intimately related, the offender typically remained on the scene and notified the police. Sometimes these offenders waited for minutes or hours before reporting the event, stating they needed time to think, check the victim’s condition, and make arrangements on financial matters, the children, and work before arret. In contrast, when victims were acquaintances or enemies, offenders typically fled the scene. Moreover, these offenders often attempted to dispose of their victims and incriminating evidence. #RandolphHarris 3 of 19

Seventy percent of the cases, however, occurred before an audience, and offenders’ moves seemed related to audience reactions to the offense. Bystanders seemed to replace the victim as the primary interactant, serving the offender as the pivotal reference for his existing orientations. The audience assumed one of three roles: hostile, neutral, or supportive. In the hostile role, accounting for nearly thirty-five percent of the case, bystanders moved to apprehend the offender, assist the victim, and immediately notify police. Such audiences were generally comprised of persons who either supported the victim or were neutral during the pre-battle escalation. In several of these cases, bystanders suggested, without use of force, that the offender assist the victim, call the police, and so forth. These audiences were comprised of the offender’s intimates, and he or she followed their advice without question. In either case, hostile bystanders forced or suggested the offender’s compliance in remaining at the scene for police. In almost seventeen percent of the cases, the audience was neutral. These people appeared as shocked bystanders. Having witnessed the killing, they stood numb as the offender escaped and the victim expired. In the remainder of the cases, the audience was supportive of the offender. These audiences were usually comprised of persons who encouraged the offender during the pre-battle stages. Supportive bystanders rendered assistance to the offender in his or her escape, destroyed evidence, and maintained ignorance of the event when questioned by the police, breaking down only in later stages of interrogation. Thus, while a hostile audience directs the offender to remain at the scene, the supportive audience permits or directs one’s flight. #RandolphHarris 4 of 19

On the basis of this research, criminal homicide does not appear as a one-sided event with an unwitting victim assuming a passive, non-contributory role. Rather, murder is the outcome of a dynamic interchange between an offender, victim, and, in many cases, bystanders. The offender and victim develop lines of action shaped in part by the actions of the other and focused toward saving or maintaining face and reputation and demonstrating character. Participants develop a working agreement, sometimes implicit, often explicit, that violence is a useful tool for resolving questions of face and character. In some settings, where very small children are murdered, the extent of their participation cannot be great. However, generally these patterns characterized all cases irrespective of such variables as age, gender, race, time and place, use of alcohol, and proffered motive. We know that in the evolution of vertebrates, the bond of personal love and friendship was the epoch-making invention created by the great constructors when it became necessary for two or more individuals of an aggressive species to live peacefully together and to work for a common end. We know that human society is built on the foundation of this bond, but we have to recognize the fact that the bond has become too limited to encompass all that it should; it prevents aggression only between those who know each other and are friends, while obviously it is all active hostility between al men of all nations or ideologies that must be stopped. Obviously, love and friendship should embrace all humanity; we should love all our human brothers indiscriminately. This commandment is not new. Our reason is quire able to understand its necessity as our feeling is able to appreciate its beauty, but nevertheless, made as we are, we are unable to obey it. #RandolphHarris 5 of 19

Indeed, one might be inclined to summarize the whole matter by saying that the individual is obliged to demonstrate involvement in a situation through the modulation of one’s involvements within the situation. However, this would be a loose way of talking. First, that which the individual owes is conveyed through appropriate modulation of situated involvements. What is thereby conveyed, however, is not “involvement,” but rather a kind of respect and regard for that to which attachment and belongingness are owed. At the heart of it is a kind of concern that shows one to be a part of the thing for which one is concerned. Second, a situation, as defined in this study, is merely an environment of communication possibilities, and not the sort of thing to which one can become attached. The little society involved is that of the gathering in the situation, and the little social system found therein is made up from conduct performed in accordance with the norms of situational propriety. Finally, what is owned the gathering is owed the social occasion in which it occurs, the joint social life sustained by the gathering being an embodiment of the occasion itself. Situational proprieties, then, give body to the joint social life sustained by a gathering, and transform the gathering itself from a mere aggregate of persons present into something akin to a little social group, a social reality in its own right. Behind this social function we can see still further ones. #RandolphHarris 6 of 19

When a situation comes into being, mutual accessibility of body signs is not the only contingency faced by those who are present. As already suggested, each person becomes a potential victim or aggressor in the potential occurrence of violent interpersonal actions, such as physical or sexual assault, blocking of the way, and so forth. Further, each person present is in a position to accost or be accosted by the others for the purpose of initiating a state of talk—a joint conversational engagement. And this, too, has its own dangers, for when persons are joined in this way they can command and plead with each other, insult or compliment each other, inform and misinform each other, or be seen (by others) as being on close terms, and the like. Further, when an engagement is sustained in the presence of bystanders, the participants open themselves up to being listened in on and interfered with, just as the bystanders become vulnerable to undesired distractions. Although these various dangers of being in the presence of others are perhaps not frequently realized, especially in middle-class society, the possibility of their occurrence is always there. And it is through body signs that persons present signify to each other that they can be trusted not to exploit these threatening possibilities. Only when these signs are received may the individual feel secure enough to forget about defending oneself, secure enough to give oneself up to the merely-situated aspects of one’s involvements. #RandolphHarris 7 of 19

Aside, then, from the disrespect an individual shows to a gathering by conducting oneself improperly, such improprieties can also cause the others present to fear for their physical and social inviolability, whether rightly or not. And here, incidentally, is one reason for arguing that social situations and the gatherings occurring therein are worth studying, even apart from the social occasion that incorporates them. Ordinarily, situations are thought to be so closely enmeshed in a particular on-going institutional setting, and these settings to be so very different one from another, that excision of situations and their gatherings for separate study might seem questionable. However, it is only in situations that individuals can be physically assaulted, accosted by requests for talk, or drawn away from conversations and other involvements by the antics of bystanders. It is in situations that these accessibilities will have to be faced and dealt with. And in facing these accessibilities and dealing with them, a common and distinctive character is given to the social life sustained in situations, regardless of the uniqueness of the larger span of social life in which each gathering is embedded and of which each is an expression. King James vowed to make deviants conform or he would “harry them out of the land or else do worse.” If from the beginning one did not state making serious efforts to develop will, it is possible to understand and not be able to do anything about a situation. If will remains undeveloped, then the development of understanding cannot help much. One can understand very much, but at the same time not be able to do anything about it. #RandolphHarris 8 of 19

Much like in Elizabethan England, the exiles knew they were supposed to assimilate. Yet they found it difficult to find a way to flee from the profane multitude that harassed them in their gatherings at the manor house of William Brewster at Scrooby. These educated and sometimes prosperous people, knowing they had much to lose, prepared to lose it by booking a ship onto which they sneaked one night in 1607. Someone betrayed them before they could leave for Holland and religious freedom: Officers searched the men’s shirts for money, “yea even the women further than become modesty.” They tried to escape again a few months later, but only some of the husbands and fathers eluded authorities. The families of these pesky believers were then permitted to join them. “Is the will part of being?” Yes, the same as consciousness or understanding. Only if you work too much on understanding and disregard will, then instead of growing stronger, you will will become weaker, or will remain the same as it was. With our will—the will of men nos 1, 2, and 3—we can only control one center, using all the concentration possible for us. We can never control two or three centers, and yet centers are dependent on one another. Suppose that we decide to control one center and, meanwhile, other centers go on by themselves, then they will immediately corrupt the center that we want to control and bring it again to mechanical reaction. “How can one attain this kind of will?” That was explained in relation to “stop” exercise. #RandolphHarris 9 of 19

Those who heard that lecture about “stop” exercise may remember it. To control more than one center is the basis of “stop” exercise. This can only be done if you put yourself under some other will because your own will is insufficient. Sometimes it may be necessary to control four centers, and the maximum of your energy of will can only control one center. So another will is necessary. This is why schools of discipline is necessary and school exercises. “How can we work against self-will? It is possible for us, as we are, to recognize the moments when we have real will?” Not real will; we cannot have that. All we have is self-will and willfulness, or small wills that change all the time. Real will is very far off; it is based on Permanent “I,” consciousness and individuality. We have not got it. About how we can work against self-will: you can study the system. There are certain demands in the system; things you must not do or must do. For instance, you must not talk, because if you do, you will only tell lies. You cannot speak about the system before you know and understand it. In this way, from the very beginning, you meet with ideas of the work opposed to self-will. If you forget about the work, you re not working against self-will. The only way to struggle against self-will is to remember the work. It may be that at one moment the work does not enter at all, but at another moment it does enter, and in that moment you can understand what giving up self-will means. Ask yourself: Is it right from the point of view of the work or not? This is struggle against-self-will. #RandolphHarris 10 of 19

First it is necessary to understand what will is. We have no will; we only have self-will and willfulness. Self-will is self-assertion. Willfulness is going against something, against rules, and so on. Both include a kind of opposition to something and in that form they exist. Man has no original will which can exist without opposition, and which is permanent. That is why it is necessary to subjugate it. This subjugation trains it so that afterwards it can follow a definite line. When it becomes strong enough, it is no longer necessary to limit it. So will cannot be left as it is. Now it runs in all directions. It has to be trained, and in order to train will one has to do many unpleasant things. In an ordinary man will follows a zigzag line or goes in a circle. Will shows the direction of efforts. Effort is our money. We must pay with effort and the time of effort—in the sense of whether it is the right time for the effort or not—we obtain results. Effort needs knowledge, knowledge of moments when effort is useful. The efforts we can make are efforts of self-observation and self-remembering. When people hear about effort, they think about an effort of “doing.” That would be lost effort or wrong effort, but effort of self-observation and self-remembering is right effort because it can give right results. “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. [Every individual] intends only his own security, only one’s own gain. And he is in this lead by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. By pursuing his own interest, one frequently promotes that of society more effectually than when one intends to promote it.” #RandolphHarris 11 of 19

Adam Smith wrote this in 1776 in The Wealth of Nations. Ever since, these word have been music to the ears of free-market advocates. The efficiency of the economic marketplace is then interpreted to suggest that a government should not interfere with individuals’ selfish attempts to maximize their interests. Some free-marketers are inclined to take this idea beyond the economic realm and like Dr. Pangloss in Candide claim that “everything is for the best in this, the best of all possible Worlds.” The sad reality is that Adam Smith’s invisible hand has a relatively small span. There is no general presumption that when every person pursues one’s own interest, the outcome will be the best of all possible Worlds. Even in the narrower sphere of economic affairs, there are important caveats and exceptions to the rule of the invisible hand. Game theory provides a natural way to think about social interactions of individuals. Every person has one’s own aims and strategies; we being them together and examine the equilibrium of the game in which these strategies interact. Remember that there is no presumption that an equilibrium must be good; we have to find out in each situation whether the outcome is a war of each against all, or the best of all possible Worlds, or something between these extremes. #RandolphHarris 12 of 19

Why did Adam Smith think the invisible hand would produce good economic results for society? Well, his argument went as follows. When I buy a loaf of bread, I am using up some socially valuable resources—the wheat, the fuel, the services of the oven, the labor, and so on—that go into marking the loaf. What stops me from over-using these resources is the price of the loaf. (Much like is someone keeps hitting your car, the insurance company charges them a lot of money to repair it, to prevent future accidents. However, if drivers know they can cause an at fault accident and win the lottery, word gets around they got a good one to move into.) I will buy the load only if its value to me exceeds the price I have to pay. In a well-functioning market the price equals the cost of all these resources—the baker will not sell me the loaf unless the price covers all his costs, and competition will preclude his charging me a higher price. Thus I will buy the loaf only if its value to me exceeds the cost of the resources to the rest of society. The market mechanism, therefore, controls my desire to by more bread to just the right extent. It is as if the price were a “fine” I had to pay to compensate the rest of society for using up its resources. On the other side of the picture, the baker, representing the rest of society, is compensated for his costs in supplying the bread that I value, and therefore has just the right incentive to produce it. #RandolphHarris 13 of 19

The simplicity, the clarity, we daresay the beauty of this argument explain its appeal. In fact the clarity carries with it an equally clear message about its limitations. The invisible hand at best applies only to situations in which everything has a price. In many instances outside of economics, and even in many within, people are not charged a fine for doing harm to the rest of society, nor given a reward for doing good to someone else. For example, manufacturers are rarely charged an adequate price for using up clean air, nor compensated for training a worker who might then quit and find other employment. Here pollution is an unpriced good (actually a bad), and the problem is that there is no economic incentive to temper the firm’s selfish interest in supplying a large amount of pollution. When a firm trains a worker, this good is not traded on  market, so there is no price to guide the firm’s action; the firm must equate its own costs with benefits and cannot capture the willingness of others to pay for this service. In the prisoners’ dilemma, when one prisoner confesses, he harms his colleague but is not fined. Because many unpriced or non-marketed activities matter, it is no wonder that individuals acting selfishly often do too much hard to others, and too little good. Within this broad theme, the failures of the invisible hand can occur in many ways. Everyone might do the individually best thing, but this ends up worst from their collective viewpoint, as in the prisoners’ dilemma. Too many people might do the wrong thing, or everyone might do too much of the wrong thing. Some of these problems are amenable to social policies; others, less so. #RandolphHarris 14 of 19

In 1975 a Palestinian consultant to the Iraqi government was given a blunt message. Iraq, in the process of switching its political orientation from the Soviet Union to the West, was in the market for sixty military aircraft, then worth about $300 million. The consultant, Said K. Aburish, tried to negotiate the purchase with a British firm, but the government would not guarantee that spare parts would be available. The Iraqis thus turned to the French, who agreed to sell them F-1 Mirages and to guarantee spare parts. However, the Iraqis sense the French were overcharging them. According to Mr. Aburish, he was then called in by the Iraqis and told: “Drop whatever you are doing, and find out what the bastards charged other countries. You have unlimited expenses—use them to bribe, buy or bully anyone.” Ironically, as he tells the story, he ultimately found the information he needed in the files of the Peace Institute in Stockholm, not exactly a friend of warplane merchant. When France’s then-Prime Minister Jacques Chirac visited Baghdad shortly thereafter, Saddam Hussein, the Iraqi strongman, shoved a paper in front of him with the prices charged other countries. According to Mr. Aburish, Mr. Chirac “volunteered, on the sport, a reduction of $1,750,000 in the price of each plane.” The planes went on to fly during Iran-Iraq war that ended in 1988. This was traditional commercial intelligence activity carried out on behalf of a government. The size of the return—id et, $1.75 million times 60 plane, or a bit over $100 million—against the modest bribe Aburish claims he paid indicates the immense profit possibilities inherent in economic intelligence gathering. It is frequently a low-risk, high-return operation. However, the Aburish case is small potatoes. It is an example of what might be termed “micro-intelligence.” #RandolphHarris 15 of 19

Compare the potential rewards of “macro-intelligence.” When Britain negotiated its entry into the Common Market in 1973, its negotiators were armed with information from the intercepted messages of the other European countries. It is impossible to measure the bargaining edge thus gained, but it would make Iraq’s $100 million look like petty cash. That was macro-intelligence. Today the National Security Agency and the British GCHQ both maintain so-called “watch lists” of companies or organizations they monitor with more than routine interests. These include banks, petroleum companies, and commodity traders whose activities might swing the World price of, day, oil or gain. The Soviets, too, pay a lot of attention to economic data. Says, Raymond Tate, a former official of the National Security Agency, “The Soviet Union has for many years manipulated a lot of commercial markers in the World” by using its intelligence capabilities. However, it is the Japanese, according to Lionel Olmer, a former Under Secretary of Commerce in the United States of America, who “have the most refined and organized system of economics intelligence in the World through a network of ‘operatives’—a word I do not use disparagingly—in their export trade offices. JETRO [the Japanese External Trade Organization] s the main collector. However, Japanese trading companies live and die on information, and they are active everywhere, from Africa to Eastern Europe. We do not know how much of the information they collect is shared with governments, but we assume almost all of it is.” #RandolphHarris 16 of 19

When Olmer was at Commerce, he says, “We spent a year once trying to prove that the Japanese were secretly manipulating the value of the yen—in the period around 1983. We could find no hard evidence to demonstrate that the government was orchestrating up and down moves in the value of the currency. However, we certainly would have like to know.” That is macro-intelligence. In 1988-89 a major commercial tug-of-war broke out between Japan and the United States of America over terms for the joint production of the FSX fighter plane. In those negotiations, says Olmer, “It would have been very helpful if our government were better informed as to the Japanese government’s true intentions. Was it looking to the FSX project as a springboard to help Japan develop a commercial passenger jet business in competition with out own? All we got were a lot of inconsistences.” Here, too, what was at stake was not the sale of a few planes, but the fate of whole industries. These are only the opening skirmishes, however, of an economic intelligence war that will grow more systematic, more central to government policy and corporate strategies alike in the decisive decades ahead. The World’s leading intelligence producers are being driven deeper into economic espionage by several converging factors. First, with the breakup of the Cold War, all the major agencies are searching for new missions to justify their budgets. Second, as the new wealth-creation system forces more industries to globalize, more and more companies have overseas interests to nurture or protect. #RandolphHarris 17 of 19

These firms step up the pressure on governments for political backup and economic intelligence that may be beyond the reach of an individual firm. Whether or not public intelligence should be sued for private gain, these pressures can only mount as globalization proceeds. Beyond this, however, is a startling, largely overlooked fact. As companies, in order to operate in the new super-symbolic economy, become ever more dependent on electronics, building extensive, Earth-spanning networks, transmitting data across borders, exchanging data directly between their computers and those of other companies, the entire business system becomes more vulnerable to electronic penetration by outfits like the NSA or GCHQ, Chobetsu, and their Soviet counterparts. Immense flows of fine-grained business data, once less accessible, will present a vast, irresistible target for intelligence agencies. Finally, as the stake rise in global trade rivalries, intelligence rivalries will heat up in parallel, leading to the intelligence equivalent of the arms race. A breakthrough by one country’s spy service will immediately set all the others racing to outdo it, raising the stakes at each move. Spying, to greater extent than at any time in the past century, will be pressed into service in support not only of government objectives but of corporate strategy as well, on the assumption that corporate power will necessarily contribute to national power. #RandolphHarris 18 of 19

That is why we must expect more refined monitoring crops and mining activities in target nations, more eavesdropping on crucial trade negotiations, more stealing of engineering software, more purloined bidding data, and so on. The entire armamentarium of electronic surveillance may be pressed into commercial service, along with armies of trained human operatives determined to answer precisely the kind of questions Mr. Olmer found unanswerable during his years in the U.S.A. Commerce Department. All of this will led to a boom in cryptography or coding and code-breaking, as companies and individuals seek to protect their secrets from prying eyes and ears. It will also open the door to corruption—the back-door sale of government-acquired data to private parties by agents or former agents. In the absence of enforceable international law, it will also spark bitter international conflicts. That is why it is very important to pay close attention to technology. Potential accidents with nanotechnology richly deserve the attention they will get, and we have confidence that this attention will suffice to make nanotechnology a force for improved human and environmental safety. Abuse is the greater danger, and harder to deal with. When considering a proposed policy, the first question should be, “How will this affect the long-term likelihood of serious abuse?” Guiding technology means making many choices, and being able to deal with the consequences. #RandolphHarris 19 of 19

Cresleigh Homes

Welcome to the newest addition to the #CresleighHomes family – #MagnoliaStation! 🎊

This beautiful neighborhood offers five incredible for plans perfect for any family and any lifestyle. 👏

We are getting a sneak peek on the blog today – click the link in our bio to take a look!

Spirituality does not arrive fully formed without effort. If our spirituality is like  plastic esophagus, then we are starving ourselves, not fasting in a sense. Depictions of violence often glamorize vicious behavior. They offend the Spirit and make you less able to respond to others in a sensitive, caring way. They contradict the Savior’s message of love for one another. Our bodies are temples, and when we abuse our bodies by consuming harmful substances, the Spirit of the Lord is restrained in our lives. The Spirit will not inhabit a polluted temple. Similarly, the Spirit is offended when we pollute our minds with harmful, violent material, whether or not such materials causes us to commit violent acts. Consuming violent media makes it more difficult to keep ourselves unspotted from the World. A diet of violence or pornography dulls the senses, and future exposures need to be rougher and more extreme. Soon the person is desensitized and is unable to react in a sensitive, caring, responsible manner, especially to those in one’s home and family. Good people have become infested with this material and it can have terrifying, destructive consequences. When it comes to our daily lives, sometimes we find ourselves in situations where we may think it is logical to respond violently. However, in retaliating by verbal and physically nonlethal means, offenders appear to suggest to the victim a definition of the situation as one in which violence is suitable in settling questions of face and reputation. When in fact, violence should never be the answer to our problems.  However, programs in the media may make some people believe that violence is a way to resolve problems. #RandolphHarris 1 of 23

Stage IV Except for cases in which the victim has been eliminated, the offender’s preceding move places the victim in a problematic and consequential position: either stand up to the challenge and demonstrate strength of character, or apologize, discontinue the inappropriate conduct, or flee the situation and thus withdraw questions of the offender’s face while placing one’s own in jeopardy. Just as the offender could have dismissed the impropriety, fled the scene, or avoided further contact with the victim, so too did the victim have similar alternatives. Rather than break the escalation in a manner demonstrating weakness, sometimes victims come into a “working” agreement with the proffered definition of the situation as one suited for violence. In the majority of cases, the victim’s move appears as an agreement that violence is suitable to the transaction. In some cases, though, the offender interpreted, sometimes incorrectly, the victim’s move as implicit agreement to violence. A working agreement is struck in several ways. The most prominent response, found in forty-one percent of cases, in our study, involves noncompliance with the offender’s challenge or command, and the continued performance of activities deemed offensive: Case 54 The victim continued ridiculing the offender before friends. The offender finally shouted, “I said shut up. If you don’t shut up and stop it, I’m going to kill you and I mean it.” The victim continued his abusive line of conduct. The offender proceeded to the kitchen, secured a knife, and returned to the living room. #RandolphHarris 2 of 23

She repeated her warning. The victim rose from his chair, swore at the offender’s stupidity, and continued laughing at her. She thrusted the knife deep into his chest. Similarly, a spouse or lover’s refusal, under threat of violence, to conciliate a failing marriage or relationship served as tacit acceptance that violence was suitable to the present transaction. Whether the victims noncompliance was intentional or not, the offender interpreted the move as intentional. Take, for example, the killing of children at the hands of parents. In an earlier illustration, the first move found the parent demanding obedience and backed by a hostile, combative stance. In several of these cases, the child was too young to understand what the parent demanded and the specific consequences for noncompliance. Nevertheless, the child’s failure to eat dinner or stop screaming was interpreted by the parent as a voluntary protest, an intentional challenge to authority. Consequently, the unwitting activities of victims may contribute to what offenders define as very real character contest demanding very real lines of opposition. A second response, occurring in thirty five percent of the cases, found victims physically retaliating against their offenders by hitting, kicking, and pushing—responses short of mortal injury. #RandolphHarris 3 of 23

Case 42 The offender and a friend were passing by a local tavern and noticed the victim, a co-worker at a food-processing plant, sitting at the bar. The offender entered the tavern and asked the victim to repay a loan. The victim was angered by the request and refused to pay. The offender then pushed the victim from his stool. Before the victim could react, the bartender asked them to take their fight outside. The victim followed the offender out the door and, from behind, hit the offender with a brick he grabbed from a trash can immediately outside the door. The offender turned and warned the victim that he would beat the victim if he would not pay up and continued his aggression. The victim then struck the offender in the mouth, knocking out his tooth. In the remaining case, victims issued counter-challenges, moves made when offender’s previous moved involved threats and challenges. In some cases, this move came in the form of calling the offender’s bluff. In other cases, the counter came in the form of a direct challenge or threat to the offender, a move no different from the ultimatum given victims by offenders. Unlike simple noncompliance, physical retaliation against offenders and issuance of counter-challenges signify an explicit acceptance of violence as a suitable means for demonstrating character and maintaining or salvaging face. Just as the victim contributed to the escalation toward violence, so too did the audience. #RandolphHarris 4 of 23

 In these cases, interested members of the audience intervened in the transaction, and actively encouraged the use of violence by means of indicating to opponents that initial improprieties, cheering them toward violent action, blocking the encounter from outside interference, or providing lethal weapons: Case 23 The offender’s wife moved toward the victim, and hit him in the back of the head with an empty beer bottle stating, “That’ll teach you to [molest] my boy. I ought to cut your balls off, your motherf*cker.” She went over to the bar to get another bottle. The victim pushed himself from the table and rose. He then reached into his pocket to secure something which some bystanders thought was a weapon. One of the bystanders gave the offender an axe handle and suggested that he stop the victim before the victim attacked his wife. The offender moved toward the victim. In remembering cases, onlookers were neutral. They were neither encouraging nor discouraging. While neutrality may have been due to fear, civil inattention, or whatever reason, the point is that inaction within a strategic interchange can be interpreted by the opponents as a move favoring the use of violence. Consider the statement of the offender in the following case: Case 48 Police officer: Don’t you think it was wrong to beat [your daughter] when her hands were tied behind her back? [Her hands and feet were bound to keep her from scratching.] Offender: Well, I guess so. But I really didn’t think so then, or [my wife] would have said something to stop me. #RandolphHarris 5 of 23

Whenever another being is not experienced as human, the act of destructiveness and cruelty assumes a different quality. Perhaps this is why so many offenders become violent. They may see the victim as a culmination of all the abuse they have experienced in their lives, the victim then become several people rolled into one. As the victim goes on to represent an architype of offense and abuse, the offender no longer sees that individual as a human being, but more of a target that must be made to pay for its sins. The victim becomes more of a personal devil for the offender, and therefore must be taken out by any means necessary. As Church members, we are seeking to become like Christ and to cultivate loving relationships with our families and those around us. Consequently, the effects of media violence on our interactions with others should be of particular concern. Let us choose carefully the material we allow to enter our hearts and minds and how we respond to others. We must recognize for ourselves the effects of media violence, both temporal and spiritual, and take responsibility for our choices. In our society, there are a vast array of people who are mentally ill and because they are of a certain race, gender, social class, or profession, they have not been held responsible for their actions, and they see life as a game and think they can abuse anyone they want to. Conversely, others have been deemed victims because of race, age, disability, religion, social class, physical appearance, sexuality, gender and so forth. For certain victims, it is hard to seek justice when one has been labeled a victim. #RandolphHarris 6 of 23

Law enforcement is far from perfect, and some law enforcement officials can be criminals. When a person has become a target and politicians, families members, the media and others are trying to make a news story out of a victim, and turn them into an offender, getting help can seem almost impossible. One will be surprised at how people will go out of their way to help corrupt officials. It is truly unbelievable. Sometimes victim’s can get trapped in situations where no one will help them and they cannot escape, and no matter how many years one pleads for help, it never seem to come, even though people in the community make know one is being terrorized. Americans seem so willing to help others, when there is a crisis in another nation, but it is amazing how fast they are willing to condemn their own. People may have the resources and ability to help a target, but they will not. Trying to survive and remain in compliance with the law can be very difficult, but it is possible. When you have no one to turn to and have tried everything possible to save your own life, it is best to turn your problems over to God. Even though you have done this in the past and things may not have gotten better, you have no other option. Sometimes situations can become a battle for your soul. When you have no other options and you have repeatedly reported to authority figures that you are being attacked and they seem to do nothing, keep in mind God is the highest authority figure. #RandolphHarris 7 of 23

Often times, victims may victims may turn to a family member and talk about things people are doing to them, and the person will respond, “Don’t judge that person.” However, one must keep in mind, just like these people are targeting you, not helping you, and participating in the terrorism, God will judge them. Never feel like your life is meaningless. You are of great value to God. Just endure as long as you can, even if it takes over a quarter of a century. We cannot control all that happens to us, but we have absolute control over how we respond to the changes in our lives. There will be times in our lives when we find ourselves on an unexpected path, facing circumstances much more severe than a disrupted vacation. However, no amount of change, trial, or opposition can alter the eternal course. The changes, and resulting challenges, that we encounter in mortality come in a variety of shapes and sizes and impact each of us in unique ways. Although each change may be unique to our individual circumstances, there is a common element in the resulting trail or challenge—hope and peace are always available through the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ. And, maybe others are right, do not judge these people. Just keep in mind that God will. Just like when you needed help and no one was there for you, perhaps God will not be there for them on judgment day. Many people think they are saved, but through their actions and thoughts, they can lose their salvation. Perhaps God is using you to separate the wicked from the good and because the way they are treating you, they are damning themselves to hell. #RandolphHarris 8 of 23

Abuse and discrimination tactics are not always subtle, sometimes they are a combination being overt and covert. However, unliked friends and loved ones, the Savior not only sympathizes with us, but He can empathize perfectly because He has been where we are. In addition to paying the price and suffering for our sins, Jesus Christ also walked every path, dealt with every challenge, faced every hurt—physical, emotional, or spiritual—that we will ever encounter in mortality. Remember, this life is all some people will ever have, many people on this planet will not make it to Heaven, but perhaps your will and your reward will be much greater than you ever imagined. Man wants to remove God from public life and our consciousness so we forget that He exists and focus on this life and think this is all there is, but there is much more to come in Heaven. The mercy and grace of Jesus Christ are not limited to those who commit sins, but they encompass the promise of everlasting peace to all who will accept and follow Him. His mercy is the mighty healer, even to the wounded innocent. In this mortal experience, we cannot control all that happens to us, but we have absolute control over how we respond to the changes in our lives. This does not imply that the challenges and trials we face are of no consequences and easily handled or dealt with. It does not imply that we will be free from pain or heartache. However, it does mean that there is cause for hope and that due to the Atonement of Jesus Christ, we can move forward and find better days—even days full of joy, light, and happiness. #RandolphHarris 9 of 23

Discovering the Mormon Church is a great way to understand what our Savior has planned for our lives. Their strict doctrines and codes for socialization are the path to salvation. I encourage you to turn your life over to God and find a religion that works for you. And rather than blame God for your problems, pour out your heart to Him. The Lord wants you to be of good comfort, and He promises to ease the burdens which are put upon your shoulders, that you will not feel them upon your back. And the Lord will strengthen you that you will be able to bear up your burdens with ease, and this will allow you to submit cheerfully and with patience to all the will of the Lord. Although you mat not immediately delivered from bondage, by turning to the Lord, you will be blessed according to your needs and according to the Lord’ wisdom. Healing blessings come in many ways, each suited to our individual needs, as known to Him who loves us best. Sometimes a “healing” cures our illness or lifts our burden. However, sometimes we are “healed” by being given strength or understanding or patience to bear the burdens placed upon us. In these latter days, the Lord has provided us with numerous resources, our “brazen serpents,” all of which are designed to help us look to Christ and place our trust in Him. #RandolphHarris 10 of 23

A similar picture presents itself when we look at some of the traffic regulations regarding accessible engagements, especially engagements during social occasions such as parties. Prohibitions against improper involvement with others are prohibitions against taking joint leave of the gathering and the encompassing social occasion. Often prohibitions about intruding upon bystanders—persons presumably maintaining an appropriate regard for the social occasion. Rules obliging one to gibe oneself up to occasioned mutual-engagements, and rules against excluding deferential newcomers, are rules assuring that the occasion as a whole will provide the basis of involvement. By maintaining accessibility to all those present, one shows that the gathering is significant enough in itself to ensure that any participant, merely by virtue of one’s participation, has a right to obtain attention and an obligation to give attention to any other participant. Loyalty, damping, spacing, drift—these are all issues basic to the organization of both accessible engagements and the setting of bystanders in which they occur. These issues are difficult even to describe unless reference is made to their function as supports for the gathering as a whole and, behind this, the social occasion. The constraints that apply to objects of involvement, to modes of managing one’s involvements, and (through these) to the management of accessible engagements, seem together to provide evidence of the weight and reality of the “situation.” #RandolphHarris 11 of 23

The determination and definition of aim is a very important moment in the work. It usually happens that one defines one’s aim quite rightly, in quite the right direction, only one takes an aim that is very far off. Then, with this aim in view, one begins to learn and to accumulate material. The next time one tries to define aim, one defines it a little differently, finding an aim that is a littler nearer. The next time again a little nearer, and so on, until one finds an aim that is quite close—tomorrow or the day after tomorrow. This is really the right way in relation to aims, if we speak about them without definite words. However, besides them, we can find many that have been mentioned definitely. “To be one.” Quite right; very good aim. “To be free.” How? Only when one acquires control of the machine. One may say, “I want to be conscious.” Quite right. Another may say, ‘I want to have will.” Very good. “I want to be awake.” Also very good. These are all aims on the same line, only at different distances. “I have come to the conclusion that most of my aims are too remote and I want to work more on the practical side.” Yes, because before you can reach remote aims, there are many things you have to do here and now, and that is where this system differs from almost all other systems. Nearly all other systems begin at least ten thousand miles ahead and have no practical meaning; but this system begins in this room. That is the difference and that is what must be understood first of all. #RandolphHarris 12 of 23

Again and again we must return to this question of what we want from the work. Do not use the terminology of the system but find what you yourself want. If you say you want to be conscious, that is all very good, but why? What do you want to get by being conscious? You must not think that you can answer this question immediately. It is very difficult. However, you must keep coming back to it. And you must understand that before the time comes when you will be able to get what you want, you must know what it is. This is a very definite condition. You can never get anything until you know it and can say, “I want this.” Then perhaps you may get it or perhaps you may not; but you can never get it unless you know what it is. Also, you must want things in the right order. “What does this mean?” One must study and understand the right order of possibility. This is a very interesting subject. “Do you mean in the system?” With the help of the system. However, you can formulate it in your own way. You must be sincere with yourself. You must know exactly what you want, and then you will ask yourself: “Will the system be able to help me to get it?” and so on. However, it is necessary to know what we want. We are never the same for two days in succession. On some days we shall be more successful, on others less. All we can do is to control what we can. We never control more difficult things if we do not control the easy things. #RandolphHarris 13 of 23

Every day and hour there are things that we could control an do not; so we cannot have new things to control. We are surrounded by neglected things. Chiefly, we do not control our thinking. We think in a vague way about what we want, but if we do not formulate what we want, then nothing will happen. This is the first condition, but there are many obstacles. Think about this question, revise what you have already thought about aim, and think how you would define your aim now after the study of these ideas. It is useless to define an aim that cannot be attained. However, if you define an aim that you can hope to attain, then your work will be conscious, serious. What a man can get, what can be promised to him on the condition that he works, is after some time of work he will see himself. Other things he may get, such as consciousness, unity, connection with higher centers, all come after this—and we do not know in what order they come. However, we must remember one thing; until we get this—until we see ourselves—we cannot get anything else. Until we begin to work with this aim in view we cannot say that we have begun work. So, after some time we must be able to formulate our immediate aim as being to see oneself. Not even to know oneself (this comes later), but to see oneself. Even knowledge and understanding cannot help if one does not work on being. If will does not grow at the same time, one can understand and yet not be able to do anything. #RandolphHarris 14 of 23

Brinkmanship in the Atlantic—“At the outbreak of war, the Navy would move aggressively into the Norwegian Sea, first with submarines and then with several aircraft carriers. They would roll back the Soviet fleet, and attack its home base stations, striking ports and any bastions within reach of the carriers’ attack planes.” –John Leman, U.S.A. Navy Secretary (1981-87). “To threaten Soviet nuclear missile submarines is to wage nuclear war. It is very escalatory.” –Barry Posen, Professors of Political Science, MIT. Posen argues that the U.S.A. Navy is following a very dangerous and escalatory policy in the Atlantic. In the event of any conventional conflict with the U.S.S.R., the U.S. Navy will attempt to sink all Soviet subs in the Atlantic. The problem with this strategy is that, at present, the United States of America cannot distinguish nuclear from nonnuclear armed submarines. Hence there is the risk that the United States of America will cross the nuclear threshold unknowingly by inadvertently sinking a Soviet submarined with nuclear weapon. At that point the Soviets will feel justified in attacking American nuclear weapons, and we will be one step too close to an all-out exchange. Secretary of the Navy John Lehman defends the policy just as vigorously as Posen attacks it. He recognized the increased chance that a conventional war would escalate into a nuclear conflict. However, he reasons that the Soviets should recognize this too! The increased chance of escalation was justified because it would decrease the chance of a conventional conflict in the first place. #RandolphHarris 15 of 23

On which side of the fence does brinkmanship lie? Our understanding of brinkmanship is unlikely to please either side. When the goal is to prevent a nuclear way, the policy should not have any effect. The increased chance of a conventional conflict escalating should be exactly offset by a decrease in the probability of initiating a conventional conflict. An analogy might prove helpful. Suppose we try to make dueling safer by reducing the accuracy of the pistols. The likely outcome is that the adversaries will come close to one another before firing. Suppose that the adversaries are equally good shots, and that killing the other person earns the reward of 1, and that being killed incurs the penalty of -1. Then the optimal strategy is for the two to keep on approaching each other, and fire the moment the probability of hitting reaches 1/2. The probability of a fatal hit is the same (3/4) irrespective of the accuracy of the pistols. A change in the rules need not affect the outcome; all players can adjust their strategies to offset it. To deter the Soviets from initiating a conventional attack, the United States of America must expose them to some risk that the conflict will escalate to a nuclear exchange. If the risk along one route grows larger, then the Soviets will advance down that route more slowly. And the Americans will be more likely (as will the Soviets) to offer a concession, knowing that both countries face this bigger risk. #RandolphHarris 16 of 23

Both the Americans and the Soviets should evaluate their strategies by their consequences, not the actions per se. For another helpful way to think about this, imagine that the two parties are engaged in an auction. Instead of bidding dollars or rubles, they are bidding probabilities of disaster. At some point the bidding gets too rich. One side decides to back down rather than escalate to a twenty-three percent chance of mutual loss. However, it may have waited too long, and the probability of a loss could already have turned into the bad outcome. In a conflict between the United States of America and the Soviet Union, the bids are the probability that the conflict will escalate. How the two sides communicate their bids depends on the rules of the game. However, changing the rules alone cannot make brinkmanship a safer game to play. If the United States of America were to change its policy in the Atlantic, the Soviets could simply adjust their bidding strategy to restore the same pressure on the United States of America. In a safer World, the countries can take more escalatory steps. When the threat is a probability, the Soviets can always adjust their actions so as to keep the probability the same. This does not mean that you should give up and be resigned to the risk of nuclear way. To reduce the risks, you have to attack the problem at a more fundamental level—the game must be changed. Were French and German aristocrats to have used less accurate dueling pistols, that would not have helped them to live longer. Rather, they would have to have changed the honor code that initiated a duel at the drop of a glove. As the United States of America and the Soviet Union begin to share the same objectives, that changes the game, not just the rules. #RandolphHarris 17 of 23

As the World of intelligence adapts to the emerging super-symbolic economy, this ravenous information market will demand new products, and new giants will arise to dominate it. Looming in the not-too-distant future is the breakup or terminal enfeeblement of the UKUSA-NATO espionage alliance. As the Soviet Union’s former satellites in Eastern Europe rush off, each to make its own separate deal with Western spy agencies, the World “intelligence balance” is further tilted. In addition, as Japan and Germany take on much larger diplomatic and political (and perhaps military) riles, consonant with their enormous economic strength, they can be expected to beef up their intelligence activities, which in turn will stimulate intelligence and counter-intelligence among their neighbors, trading partners, allies, and adversaries. (We must assume, for example, that German reunification has delivered to Bonn at least some spy networks and “assets” previously run by the East Germans in the United States of America, France, Britain, or other nations.) The Japanese and the Germans may themselves form the nuclei of new consortia, to which lesser powers will attach themselves. In any event, it would be surprising if both the Bundesnachrichtendienst and the Chobetsu were not enjoying substantial budget increases (no doubt disguised or hidden in the budgets of other agencies). #RandolphHarris 18 of 23

These power-shifting changes in the hidden World of intelligence reflect the new “correlation of forces” (to use a favorite Soviet phrase). As the new system of wealth creation intensifies competition among the high-tech nations, it will also shift the priorities of the main spy services. Three specific topics will command top-level attention from spies in the future: economics, technology, and ecology. Technology is a crucial topic in our World today, as many new technologies are being developed. Abuse of nanotechnology can be delayed, perhaps for a long time, by proper regulation. The goal here is not to make regulations so tight that people will have to violate them to get anything done. This would encourage holdouts, underground work, and disrespect for the law. Instead, the goal is to draw boundaries loosely enough to cause little difficulty for legitimate work, while making dangerous activities very difficult indeed. This is a delicate balance to stroke: those fearful of risk naturally try to loosen an avoid regulation entirely. Nonetheless, the problem must be solved, and this seems the best direction to explore. In one approach, nanomachines could be divided into two classes: experimental devices and approved products. Approved products could be made widely available through special-purpose molecular manufacturing systems. Thus, once an experimental device had passed regulatory inspection, it could become inexpensive and abundant. In this way, popular demands for a product could be satisfied without anyone needing to break safety rules. #RandolphHarris 19 of 23

Approved products could include devices like (but superior to) the full range of modern consumer products, ranging from personal supercomputers with 3-D displays, through smart construction materials, to running shoes with truly amazing features. The main cost of such goods might be the royalty to the designer. In Engines of Creation (the first book to examine this topic), this strategy for producing and distributing approved products is called a “limited assembler system.” Note that both approved products and the limited assemblers that build them would lack the ability to make copies of themselves, to self-replicate. Ralph Merkel sees this ability as the one to keep an eye on: “Self-replicating systems can and should be appropriately regulated. There seems no need, however, to have any more than normal concerns for devices which cannot replicate. While we might, as with any device, need law to ensure their appropriate use, they pose no extraordinary problems.” For must products, normal medical, commercial, and environmental standards would apply; the regulatory bureaucracies are already in place. There are great advantages to permitting nearly free experimentation in new technology, allowing creative people to try ideas without seeking prior approval from a cumbersome committee. Surprisingly, this, too, seems compatible with safety. #RandolphHarris 20 of 23

There are great advantages to permitting nearly free experimentation in a new technology, allowing creative people to try ideas without seeking prior approval from a cumbersome committee. Surprisingly, this, too, seems compatible with safety. In the World of nanotechnology, one cubic micron is a large space, with room enough for millions of components. For many purposes, a few cubic microns would amount to a large laboratory space. To a device on a micron scale, a centimeter is an enormous distance. Surrounding a micron-scale device with a centimeter-thick wall would be like surrounding a human being with a wall kilometers thick, and just as hard to penetrate. Further, a micron-scale device can be incinerate in an instant by something as small as a spark of static electricity. Based on observations like these, Engines of Creation outlined the idea of a sealed assembler lab, in which a researcher could build anything, even something deliberately designed to be dangerous, and yet be unable to get anything out of the microscopic sealed laboratory except for information. With a good communications network, a researcher or product developer in Texas could equally easily perform experiments in a remote Maine laboratory run with the security and secrecy of a Swiss bank. A lab would have a responsibility to its customers to keep proprietary work confidential, and a responsibility to regulatory authorities to ensure that nothing but information leaves the laboratory. #RandolphHarris 21 of 23

Researchers could then perform any small-scale experiments they wish. Only approved products, of course, would be built outside the sealed laboratories. While this may not be the best pattern of regulation possible, it does show one way in which freedom of experimentation could be combined with strict regulation of use. By providing a clear separation between legitimate and illegitimate activity, it would help with the difficult problem of identifying and preventing research aimed at damaging ends. A sensible policy will have to balance the risk of private abuse of technology against the risk of government abuse of technology and regulation. Low-cost manufacturing can make surveillance equipment less expensive. Increased surveillance can reduce some risks in society, but the watchers themselves often are not very well watched. Placing bounds on surveillance is a challenge for today’s citizens as well as tomorrow’s, and lessons learned in the past can be applied in the future. In the long run, it seems wise to assume that someone, somewhere, somehow, will escape the bound of regulation and arms control and apply molecular-manufacturing capabilities to making novel weapons. If by then we have had several decades of peaceful, responsible, creative development of nanotechnology (or perhaps a few years of help from smart machines), then we may have developed both ecosystem protectors and sophisticated immune machines for medicine. There is a good reason to think that distributed technologies of this sort could be adapted and extended to deal with the problem of protecting against novel nanoweaponry. Failure to do so could mean disaster. Nonetheless, building protective systems of this sort will be by far the greatest challenge of any we have discussed. The chief purpose of regulator tactics like those we have descried must be to buy time for those peaceful developments, to maximize the chances that this challenge can be met before time runs out. #RandolphHarris 22 of 23

Violence has a great deal to do with shadow, in particular the shadow of power. Take the example Judas.  Judas led them into battle, and fought like a lion and behold, the hosts of the enemy were vanquished and they fled. And Israel had a great deliverance. And they sang sons of thanksgiving, and praised the Lord of Heaven for His goodness, because His mercy endureth forever. And on the five and twentieth day of Kislev, the same day when three years before the altar of God had been profaned by the heathen, the sanctuary of God was dedicated anew with songs and music, and the people praised the God of Heaven who had given them great victory, and they celebrated the Dedication of the Altar for eight days, and there was great rejoicing among the people. Moreover, Judas and his brethren with the whole congregation of Israel ordained that the days of the Dedication of the Altar should be celebrated from year to year for eight days in gladness and thanksgiving. O Lord, Thou has ever been our fortress and our strength; from days of old hast Thou upheld our fathers. When me rose up against them in the days of Mattathias, to desecrate Thine altar and destroy their faith in Thee, forcing the brave Judeans to forsake Thy covenant, compelling them to follow pagan ways—then didst Thou, O Lord our God, reveal Thy saving power; Thy spirit moved the Maccabees to rise against the foe that ruled by force and might. Right was thus triumphant, faith victorious; the mighty hosts didst Thou deliver to the weak. Thou didst bring low the wicked hordes who sought to crush the faithful few devoted to Thy Law. When the battle was over, and arrogance subdued, Thy children all rejoiced and praised Thee in Thy courts. They purified Thine altar and kindled there the lamp that sheds its rays on all mankind, spreading Thy light afar. As witness-bearers to the triumph of Thy right, we kindle lights in gratitude, and praise Thy holy name. Through that resplendent victory, Israel was preserved, to share Thy truths with all mankind, and by these truths to live. O may we consecrate our lives as did the Maccabees, and dedicate anew our hearts and souls to Thee. The glowing lights of Heaven, today as in the past, proclaim that man must live, not by might nor by power, but by Thy Spirit, O Lord of hosts. #RandolphHarris #RandolphHarris 23 of 23

CRESLEIGH HAVENWOOD

Lincoln, CA | from the high $600s

Now Selling!

No appointment needed! Cresleigh Havenwood features four distinct floor plans ranging from 2,293 – 3,377 square feet and offering up to five bedrooms.  Each plan has been thoughtfully designed and includes great features such as large single-story and two-story homes, guest suites, optional offices, garage workshops, and more!

Get the most out of your new home with Cresleigh’s All-Ready smart home featuring all the connectivity needed to keep your house running. Best of all, each Cresleigh home comes with owned solar included! 

Located off of Virginiatown Road and McCourtney Road, residents of the 83 homesites of Cresleigh Havenwood will benefit from a brand-new neighborhood in the charming City of Lincoln. Palo Verde Park, is just down the street and there’s plenty of recreation to take part in all around town. #CresleighHomes