This constitution is based on the theory that humans evolved from some type of ape, and that human behavior is just modified ape behavior.

There is nothing "special" about humans. We are just a different type of animal. It is our arrogance that causes us to believe that humans are better than the animals.

It is more accurate to describe every living creature, including mushrooms, insects, and bacteria, as amazing and impressive. Claiming that one creature is better than another is as idiotic as claiming that argon is better than nitrogen.

Our arrogance causes us to believe that only humans have "culture", but all of the social animals have culture, and all of their children have to learn it in order to be able to fit into their society, and to know how to do certain things, such as how to crack open nuts.

The culture of apes is simplistic, but it is culture. Human culture is so much more advanced than ape culture that it doesn't seem to resemble ape culture, but if there are aliens on another planet that are millions of years ahead of us in evolution, our culture and behavior might seem to be only a slight modification of ape culture and behavior.

Our modern culture evolved from ape culture, but there was no authority to supervise its evolution, and that allowed of changes that were irrational, selfish, and idiotic, especially during the past few centuries. For example, businesses, religions, Zionist groups, charities, sports groups, and other organizations have modifying our culture for their selfish benefit.

Our culture also became modified as a result of immigrants who inadvertently and deliberately made changes to language, clothing styles, music, social customs, food recipes, recreational activities, and other culture.

Although our culture seems to be very advanced, as of 2024, it is still very similar to ape culture. Some examples are:

•	We try to control people with punishments. The social animals control their members with intimidation and physical violence, and humans are still behaving in the same manner. We try to control both children and adults with insults, glaring, and slapping, and our governments try to control us with fines, jails, and other punishments.
•	We fight for food and material items. Animals fight with each other constantly for food, nesting materials, and water, and humans are still fighting with each other for those things. It is idiotic for modern humans to compete for food and material items because we are now producing such excessive amounts of them that an enormous amount is wasted. To make the situation more absurd, most people are becoming overweight, and their homes are becoming cluttered with unnecessary items. An example of the absurd fighting for wealth are the cities that compete with each other for tourists, and to sell their particular agricultural products. Also, by competing for material items, rather than sharing them, we create the ridiculous situation in which some people become extremely wealthy, and a lot of other people waste their life and talent designing, manufacturing, and maintaining private jets, mansions, yachts, and other absurd luxuries for those wealthy people, rather than do something useful for everybody.
•	We form arrogant groups. Animals have a strong craving to form a group, and to regard all other creatures as potential dangers, and inferior. All human cultures are still encouraging us to form groups, and to regard other people as inferior. This crude culture encourages arrogance and idiotic fights and competitions, rather than friendship and cooperation. It also prevents us from learning from one another. Some examples of this crude behavior are the schools encourage their students to believe that they are superior to the students of other schools; the employees of businesses are encouraged to believe that they are superior to the employees of competing businesses; the nations that encourage their citizens to believe that they are superior to the people in the other nations; and the religions that encourage their members to believe that they are superior to all of the other religions and the atheists.
•	We become submissive to our leaders. Animals become submissive to whichever male animal gets into the top position in their hierarchy, and with no regard to his leadership abilities or how he treats the other animals. As of 2024, every human culture is still promoting the crude attitude that we should be submissive to whoever gets into a leadership position, and with no concern for whether he is senile, a member of a crime network, mentally ill, or abusive.

Our ancestors followed their emotional cravings, just like other animals, which resulted in their culture adapting to their emotions. This gives us a culture that we enjoy, but it does not give us the culture that is the most beneficial to us. I've given many examples of this in other documents, such as how we enjoy punishing criminals according to how angry we become at them, but that policy does nothing to reduce crime or improve our lives. For other examples of how we are behaving like animals:

•	We avoid fights with intimidation Animals try to avoid fights by intimidating their opponents with glares, displays of their teeth, or growling. Likewise, for thousands of years men have believed that they can protect themselves and their families by the human equivalent of that behavior, such as yelling, showing weapons, and swearing. We also use intimidation to avoid wars between nations. For example, we try to intimidate Russia and China with our mutual assured destruction policy. The American people also believe that we can prevent other nations from getting into war with each other by providing them with advanced weapons so that they become equally intimidating. However, the theory that no nation will start a war when all nations are equally dangerous is as idiotic as assuming that wild dogs that are equal to each other in physical strength will avoid getting into a fight with each other. Our attempts to stop crime and wars through intimidation has failed continuously, but we have a strong attraction to that concept because we inherited an animal's desire to intimidate other animals. Animals are so stupid that the only method they can use to avoid fights is to intimidate their opponents, but modern humans need to experiment with a more effective method.
•	We cheat for food, wealth, and status The animals are constantly fighting each other for status, food, water, and a place to sleep. The males also fight for females. However, animals have no concept of cheating or fairness, and this results in them competing in any manner they can think of, such as biting, grabbing things from one another, and trying to rape the females. Humans developed an ability to recognize when we are cheating somebody, but many people do not have the self-control to refrain from cheating. Some people go even further and join crime networks. Other people are cheating by marrying people with money, becoming friends with people that they think they can benefit from, and by promoting inheritances. When we look for a spouse, most people cannot resist cheating by deceiving their potential spouse about their true qualities, hiding their unpleasant characteristics, and pretending that they are better than they really are.
•	Our recreational activities tend to be fights Animals evolved for a deadly battle for life, and so they practice fighting while they are young. We assume that animals are "playing" with each other, but they are preparing for endless violent and deadly battles. We evolved for a deadly battle for life, and this causes us to create violent sports with extreme emphasis on winning. Humans also evolved for a deadly battle for life, and this causes us to create recreational activities that are a fight rather than a relaxed, casual, social affair. We put tremendous effort into winning the competition because we regard the competitions as a life or death battle, not as a pleasant recreational event to provide us with exercise, or to enjoy nature and other people. Some people get so carried away with the craving to win a recreational activity that they are willing to hurt their competitors, and many are willing to push themselves to such an extreme that they risk hurting themselves. Our desire to fight for our lives is so strong that when we see two groups of people competing in a recreational activity, we have a desire to support one group, rather than merely observe them. This results in us becoming emotionally involved with the competition, and many people yell, applaud, scream, or have tantrums.

Our culture has evolved to fit our animal cravings, rather than be beneficial and sensible. To make our situation worse, during the past few thousand years, we have allowed our culture to be modified to fit the selfish desires of businesses, religions, crime networks, feminists, angry immigrants, Zionist organizations, and governments.

We are even tolerating people and organizations that try to change the words in our language, the names of military bases, and the statues in the city parks.

Everybody wants the freedom to live his life as he pleases, and we oppose the concept of a government that makes decisions for us about our clothing, hairstyle, meals, recreational activities, and other culture. However, modern life is so complex that all of us would benefit from guidance in choosing our path in life.

Our social environment has become so complicated that we don't benefit from much freedom. Freedom is of use only if we have the ability to use it in a beneficial manner. A freedom is dangerous if a person cannot use it properly.

For example, people in every nation have the freedom to select their government officials, but very few people can use that freedom sensibly. They are instead repeatedly electing incompetent and dishonest officials.

Furthermore, no social animal wants much freedom. Instead, we want to follow other people. For example:

•	We have the freedom to choose our clothing, but all of us choose clothing according to what we think our peer group will approve of.
•	We have the freedom to learn from other cultures, but most people boast about their culture and insult other culture.
•	We have the freedom to learn any of the information that the human race has developed, but most people look only at the information that they find emotionally pleasing, and ignore or insult the rest.

Our world today is so complex that providing people with freedom is as idiotic as providing children with freedom. Most people cannot handle our modern era, and even the people who are best able to deal with it would benefit from a group of scientists who study human behavior and provide intelligent advice.

Every culture holds people accountable for their foods and medicines. A business or individual who provides us with contaminated food or medicine will have his operation shut down. We do not tolerate people who provide us with dangerous foods or medicines.

However, nobody is held accountable for the culture they create. The Zionist groups, for example, are not arrested for contaminating our school books and news reports with lies about the 9/11 attack or the world wars.

This constitution gives the Social Division the authority to control culture, and this makes it easier to hold people accountable for cultural changes. Citizens and organizations can make suggestions about what to change, but the Social Division officials are the only people with the authority to make changes to culture.

Many people oppose the concept of a government that passes judgment on our clothing, meals, recreational activities, and other culture, but whether it is beneficial or detrimental depends upon whether we can provide ourselves with considerate, intelligent, and responsible government officials.

Military leaders, business executives, and parents have tremendous control over the culture in their organization, but only certain people are suffering from that. For example, Joseph Fritzl's children suffered tremendously, but that does not justify a fear of parents. There have also been some business owners who were abusive with their customers and employees; doctors who have been raped children who were under anesthesia; police officers who were involved with crime networks; and military leaders who were abusive.

We cannot use abusive leaders to justify a fear of authority. When we encounter an abusive leader, we should analyze the situation and look for ways of reducing the problem in the future. We should not react with fear and hysteria.

Everybody in every society is already being abused and exploited on a routine basis by people in influential positions, and sometimes by their friends, relatives, and family members. Instead of frightening ourselves with fantasies of abusive, dystopian governments, we should discuss such issues as:

Which is more sensible:

a) Give every person and organization the freedom to alter culture in any manner they please, and without any accountability. b) Give a government agency the authority to control culture, and hold them accountable for what they do.

We have a strong desire to follow our peer group, and to be suspicious of people who are different from us. However, a person who is different is not necessarily dangerous or inferior.

For example, for those of us who live in California, when one of our family members die, the California state laws require most employees to be given up to five days time off from work for "Bereavement Leave" to allow them to recover from the emotional trauma.

The "Bereavement Leave" law was created because the majority of people react to the death of a family member by spending many days pouting and crying, and in a emotional state that causes them to have trouble functioning properly at their job.

It is interesting to note that the law does not require a person to take the five days off immediately after the death, or to take five consecutive days. Instead, a person has three months to take those five days. He can also take two of the five days at one point in time, and then weeks later he could take the remaining three days.

Whoever created the bereavement law believes that people are capable of postponing and planning their pouting, but not refraining from doing it.

The men who remain calm when their mother dies or when their wife has a miscarriage, and who continue working at their job, and have no desire to take bereavement leave, would be insulted by some people for being unemotional, robotic, or coldhearted.

By comparison, a man would be praised as "loving and caring" if he reacted by crying, and by requesting bereavement leave in order to recuperate from the emotional stress.

This attitude that the emotional people are superior to the unemotional people is idiotic, and it interferes with the US legal system because it causes the people in the jury to assume that the defendants who remain calm are most likely to be guilty.

Lawyers exploit this attitude by encouraging emotional displays during a trial. The lawyers are supposed to discuss evidence of the crime, not manipulate the jurors with irrational emotional displays. However, most people believe that emotional displays are part of normal human behavior, so the defendants are encouraged to behave in emotional manners. For example, this article in a magazine for lawyers claims that: "Emotions are what make us human."

That lawyer is promoting a false but very common belief. Specifically, he is boasting that our emotions are wonderful, and they make us better than the animals. In reality, our emotions do not make us "human". Rather, they make us behave like monkeys.

It is our intelligence that makes us better than the animals, not our emotions. The people who are the "most emotional" are those who are behaving most like a monkey. They are not the best behaved people. Rather, they are inferior to those of us with more self-control because we are more likely to react to problems in an intelligent manner.

The author made a more accurate remark when he admitted that most of the decisions that people make are emotional, and that we try to justify those decisions with intelligent reasoning:


That remark is accurate. An example of how people make emotional decisions and then try to justify it with intelligent reasoning is when people become angry at a murderer and request that he be put in jail for the rest of his life rather than executed. Instead of admitting that they want to torture the criminal for decades, they claim that they want to "serve justice".

A person who admitted that he wants to torture criminals would be considered a bad person, but in reality he might be a superior person because he might have a better understanding of himself, and the ability to be honest about himself.

Most people have “ordinary” self-control

Every culture believes that the majority of people are "normal", but that is not a useful way to judge human behavior. The majority of people are "typical" or "average", but we should not use a typical person as the standard of what a person should be.

For example, during the past century, people have becoming increasingly overweight, and this is causing most people to continuously change their concept of what a normal weight is. This poll shows that from 1991 to 2012 the Americans have revised their concept of ideal weight from 149 pounds to 162 pounds. If this trend continues, then Americans might eventually consider a normal weight to be 300 pounds.

For another example, most Americans have more material items than they need or use. The unused items are cluttering closets, attics, garages, and basements. Many homes are also cluttered with children's toys, and many Americans cannot get their automobile into their garage because the garage is so full of unnecessary things.

However, having excessive amounts of material items is considered to be "normal" rather than a symptom of an emotional problem. Actually, the situation is worse than that because every culture admires the people who become extremely wealthy.

That attitude encourages people to fantasize about having giant houses, hundreds of shoes, walk-in closets, and lots of toys for their children.

Most people have “low” self-control

The majority of people in a prehistoric tribe were well adapted to that environment, so it would make sense to describe the majority of prehistoric people as "normal". Today, however, most people cannot cope with our modern environment. Therefore, the majority of people would be more accurately described as "misfits" in our modern era, or as "abnormal", or "inferior".

The majority of people are typical or ordinary, but being ordinary is no longer acceptable. People today need higher levels of intelligence, and much better self-control than the typical person.

Every culture criticizes people who are obese for not having enough self-control, but this Constitution also regards the extremely wealthy people as lacking self-control, and the people who are frequently giving us lectures as lacking in self-control. This constitution requires everybody to exert self-control over all emotional cravings. For example, this constitution does not see any significant difference between:

a) The anesthesiologist (photo to the right) who was caught using anesthetized women for sexual gratification, in a similar manner as this monkey used a frog. b) A business executive who produces worthless or deceptive products in order to become wealthy. In both cases, a person is abusing other people in order to satisfy his particular emotional cravings.

The only difference between them is that the anesthesiologist is exploiting women to titillate his sexual cravings, whereas the business executive is exploiting people to titillate his cravings for status and wealth.

Every society considers the anesthesiologist to be committing a crime, (he was arrested) but if a business executive can exploit enough people to become wealthy, he will be admired, and his business will be described as profitable, lucrative, or clever rather than disgusting, criminal, or unacceptable.

Every culture encourages people to have the emotional reactions of the typical person, but this constitution encourages people to react in a more intelligent manner than the typical person.

Furthermore, this constitution reverses some of the bell graphs so that the "best" people become the "worst" people. For example, every culture considers the people who are extremely wealthy or famous to be the best people with the most talent and initiative, but this constitution reverses that attitude and regards them as being analogous to the obese people and hoarders.

This constitution regards a person to have a low quality mind if he is below-average in controlling his emotional cravings, regardless of which emotion he is having trouble controlling. The leadership positions must be restricted to people who have above-average self control.

Our "culture" is just some intangible information in our minds, but it is more important for us to have high quality information in our mind than to have lots of material items, a giant mansion, or lots of trophies. Our culture determines whether we behave like a prehistoric savage, a medieval peasant, a modern human, or the people 10,000 years in the future.

Our lives will not improve by gathering more material items, having more sex, eating more food, or becoming more famous, but we can improve our lives tremendously if we improve our culture.

However, improving our culture requires a person have the ability to look critically at the information in his mind, and to experiment with that information.

The information in our mind has a tremendous effect on what we believe, how we treat other people, and what our goals are. During the past few decades, the Internet has exposed billions of people to a lot of information, and that information has resulted in many of us making significant changes to our beliefs and goals.

As we learn more information, our beliefs and goals will continue to change. If we could get access to the information that will be available to people thousands of years in the future, we would change even more, and we would regard those of us who are alive today as ignorant savages who are following a lot of false, deceptive, dishonest, and inaccurate information.

In order to improve our world, we need to improve the information in our minds. This requires raising standards for the information that we allow people to provide to us. The standards must be raised high enough to prevent such problems as:

	•	The propaganda, deception, lies, and distorted historical facts that every society is currently receiving from businesses, advertising agencies, crime networks, Zionist organizations, government officials, religious fanatics, and feminists.
	•	The travel pornography, hero pornography, material wealth pornography, and other types of pornography that stimulate unrealistic desires and goals.
	•	The nonsensical philosophies, such as religion, feminism, and Freudian psychology.
	•	The nonsensical and slanderous accusations, such as sexism, white privilege, racism, anti-Semitism, Holocaust denial, and climate change denial.

Information is useful only if it is realistic. Providing a person with religion or Zionist propaganda is as detrimental and unacceptable as putting small amounts of arsenic in his meals.

In order for us to get access to more accurate information, we must put restrictions on everybody's freedoms, such as the freedom to become missionaries, to create private schools, and to create such organizations as the ADL.

Businesses no longer have the freedom to create any type of food or medicine that they please, and we must apply that concept to information. We must demand that the information that people provide to us is meeting high standards. We cannot allow people to give us, and especially our children, whatever information they please.

Nobody has the ability to figure out the best culture. The only way to improve culture is to experiment with our culture, which means experimenting with our lives.

Engineers can conduct experiments with refrigerators, computers, and bicycles in a laboratory without interfering with the lives of other people, but we cannot conduct experiments with culture in a laboratory. Therefore, in order for a society to improve its culture, the people must be willing and able to conduct cultural experiments on themselves.

To complicate the issue, we must expect people to disagree on which of the changes to culture are an "improvement", and which are idiotic or irritating.

This concept also applies to material items. An engineer cannot figure out how to improve a refrigerator, robot, or airplane. The only way to improve an item is to conduct experiments with it. To complicate the issue, we disagree on which changes are an "improvement" to a material item. Engineers resolve those disagreements by producing variations of a product, and letting consumers pick the variation that they liked the best. Software developers solve this problem by letting each of us customize their software.

Unfortunately, we cannot allow people to choose the culture that they like the best, or customize their culture. In order for an organization to function properly, everybody must follow the same culture. A nation cannot function if its members are following different languages, monetary systems, economic systems, government systems, school systems, and traffic laws.

Everybody within a society must follow the same culture, but we must expect everybody to occasionally dislike some aspect of their culture.

This concept is true of all organizations, not just the nation. For example, we cannot expect every employee in a business to always be satisfied with all aspects of the business, and we cannot expect every member of a family to always be satisfied with all aspects of the family. We must expect people to occasionally dislike something about the organization.

If we promote the Marquis de Sade attitude that we are suffering when we cannot get what we want, then the people who are dissatisfied with something will torment themselves by convincing themselves that they are suffering. They can also cause trouble for other people if they become angry and rebellious, or whine about being oppressed or mistreated.

We need a more sensible attitude towards life and happiness. We need to realize that suffering is not necessarily bad. When a person is suffering, we need to analyze the situation to determine whether he is truly suffering, or whether his suffering should be considered beneficial. This was discussed here.

This constitution believes that a "society" is just an "organization" or "team" of people, and that a society follows the same concepts and rules that apply to businesses, militaries, families, and other organizations.

This constitution is based on the principles that have been successful for other organizations. It creates a social environment, economic system, and government system that is radically different compared to nations, but is very similar to what businesses, militaries, and families have been using all throughout history.