This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Do We Need Politicians, Or Can We Cut Out the Middleman?
American Politicians Are Bought and Paid For
Virtually all independent economists and financial experts agree that the economy cannot stabilize or recover unless the giant, insolvent banks are broken up (and here and here). And the very size of the big banks is also warping our entire political system.
Politicians are wholly bought and paid for. As famed trend forecaster Gerald Celente writes in the current Trends Journal:
Politics today is little more than legalized prostitution. While a streetwalker gets busted for selling her body to a john, politicians get rewarded with campaign contributions for selling their souls to a corporation or lobbyist. With all of the whoring going on – the money exchanged and the pleasures lavished – the only one actually getting screwed was John Q. Public.
But the chairman of the Department of Economics at George Mason University (Donald J. Boudreaux) says that calling politicians prostitutes is inaccurate – because it is being too nice. Specifically, Boudreaux says that it is more correct to call politicians “pimps”, since they are pimping out the American people to the financial giants.
So the state of banking and politics in America is grim, indeed. But do we really even need banks or politicians? Or can we cut out the middle man?
This post looks at whether we can use Direct Democracy to cut out the corrupt political middleman. In a separate essay, we look at whether we can use alternative financial arrangements to cut out the big banks as financial middleman.
Do We Need Politicians … Or Can We Cut Out the Corrupt Middleman?Gerald Celente writes in this month’s Trends Journal:
For some years we’ve been seeing the promising stirrings of a global Renaissance; a “new order” that would reject the gross materialism, excessive consumerism and glorified militarism that has dominated contemporary western societies. But each initiative undertaken to retrofit and change the failing system has had its momentum blocked or sabotaged by the entrenched agents of “no change.”
***
Therefore, I’ve come to the conclusion that the only solution is to take that control from the handful of “them” – the power possessors and power brokers – and put the power into the hands of the people. But how?
***
I propose … of Direct Democracy – a potentially globe-changing movement that would replace today’s “representative democracy.” Positive change will not and cannot occur until power is taken away from the power obsessed.
While, in 2011, no one would dream of reinstituting the divine right of kings, what is passed off today as “Democracy” is little more than a structure to clandestinely
support an ersatz nobility that perpetuates that very divine right practice.
The Direct Democracy solution I propose will not only transfer power to the public (for better or for worse!), it will make “we the people” fully responsible for creating the future. The choice is stark. Either we take action to create our destiny, or others will continue to create it for us … and judging by past performance, we’re not
going to like what they create.
***
Regardless of who is elected – Republican or Democrat – the only solution I can see at this time that could save America (and be applied worldwide) is to take the power out of the hands of politicians and put it into the hands of the people.
In Switzerland, where this is practiced, it is called “Direct Democracy.” The people vote on major issues that affect them locally and globally, and the elected officials (whether they agree or not) perform their duties as “public servants,” carrying out the will of the people.
The US and other nations that call themselves “democratic” have “representative democracy.” In theory, elected officials pledged to carry out (represent) the will of the people. But, in practice, at least in modern memory, most elected officials carry out the will of special interests whose “campaign contributions” (a.k.a. bribes and payoffs) assure their subservience. While most everybody knows this, it’s both tolerated and accepted as political business as usual.
***
Given today’s dire socioeconomic and geopolitical conditions and our forecast for them to dramatically deteriorate, I believe that changing from a faux-representative democracy to Direct Democracy would be a giant step in the right direction. If the Swiss can do it successfully, why can’t anyone else?
***
WHERE TO START Understanding the tremendous power that social networking played in galvanizing the revolutions of the “Arab Spring” and the uprisings and protests raging through Europe, I propose using the same model to bring about a Direct Democracy revolution.
***
It should never be forgotten that no law is immutable. Laws are made only to be superseded by new laws. No clearer example can be given than the wholesale raping of the Constitution by the Supreme Court and successive presidents. What better time to write a new one? If the Founding Fathers could pull it off with horses, sheer will and quill pens, surely 21st century revolutionaries can make Direct Democracy a reality with the strokes of a keyboard. Not only can the Internet serve as the galvanizing force
to bring about Direct Democracy, it can also be used as the 21st century ballot box.
“Voting online could be subject to hacking and fraud,” the entrenched parties will argue. But casting a vote online is no more susceptible to “irregularities” than casting a vote at the polling place … be it stuffing the ballot boxes or rigging the voting machines.
In fact, voting online, with full transparency, would prove more secure than any polling place run by party operatives. I say, “If you can bank online, buy online, gamble on line, you can vote online!” Going to vote should be easier than going to the ATM. And if you don’t have your own computer, there’s always the polling place.
It is due time Thomas Jefferson’s vision that “… in due time the voice of the people will be heard and their latent wisdom will prevail,” prevails.
***
Publisher’s Note: “Representative Democracy,” the form of government we adhere to in the West, is no more than a cruel sham, a bone thrown to the proles following the overthrow of the aristocracies of the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries. The restive public was gulled into believing that, by voting for members of political parties pledged to represent their interests, their voices would be heard.
While attractive in principle, in practice, political parties come to represent the same very rich and very powerful interests that have ruled throughout history. Only the names and ranks have changed. No longer called Kings, Queens, Czars, Dukes and Barons, the new aristocracy is called the “too big to fail.”
***
Thinking people everywhere are recognizing that Direct Democracy can provide a blueprint for revolution in the New Millennium. Non-violent, intellectually and philosophically sound, emotionally empowering, and potentially inexorable … the greatest obstacle to Direct Democracy is to do nothing.
Celente also includes in his latest newsletter an article on direct democracy from Thomas H. Naylor. Naylor is Professor Emeritus of Economics at Duke University. For thirty years, he taught economics, management science, and computer science at Duke. As an international management consultant specializing in strategic management, Dr. Naylor has advised major corporations and governments in over thirty countries.
Naylor writes:
Taking note of the unsustainable, unfixable, gridlock nature of the US government and its inability to fix the American economy, Gerald Celente has proposed that the United States turn to Swiss-style Direct Democracy as an alternative way to resolve such divisive issues as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the magnitude of the government’s budget deficit, how to finance health care, the size of the defense budget, and national immigration policy. He envisions this being carried out on the Internet.
***
Over the past 700 or so years Switzerland has developed a unique social and political structure, with a strong emphasis on federalism and Direct Democracy….
Switzerland has a coalition government with a rotating presidency, in which the president serves for only one year. Many Swiss do not know who of the seven Federal Councillors in the government is the president at any given time, since he or she is first among equals. In Switzerland a petition signed by 100,000 voters can force a nationwide vote on a proposed constitutional change and the signatures of only 50,000 voters can force a national referendum on any federal law passed by Parliament.
Among the high profile issues that have been resolved by Swiss national referendums are women’s voting rights, abortion rights, creation of a new canton, abolition of the army, and Swiss membership in the League of Nations, United Nations, World Bank, IMF, and the European Union.
***
Most political scientists agree that the Swiss have taken the concept of democracy to levels heretofore unattainable any place else in the world. In his excellent book Direct Democracy in Switzerland (Transaction Publishers, 2002), Gregory Fossedal describes Switzerland as “a Direct Democracy, in which, to an extent, the people pass their own laws, judge the constitutionality of statutes, and even have written, in effect, their own constitution.” That’s a lot!
All of this is in stark contrast to the United States in which our government is owned, operated, and controlled by Wall Street, Corporate America, the Pentagon, and domestic and foreign lobbies. Whereas the primary role of Swiss Direct Democracy is to protect the Swiss people from the Swiss government, the US government is more concerned with protecting its powerful clients from the will of the American people. In Switzerland the people own their government. In the
United States the government owns us.
[Given how much larger the U.S. is than Switzerland, and our different politicial system, it would be challenging to institute Direct Democracy in the U.S.]
But the alternative is a nation whose government has lost its moral authority and is tightly controlled by a self-serving military/industrial/congressional complex accountable only to itself – a nation that has become unsustainable economically, militarily, socially, environmentally, and politically. The United States is so large that it may no longer be governable and has possibly become unfixable.
If there is a way out of our nation’s death spiral, Direct Democracy just might be one of our last remaining viable options. We could do a lot worse than emulate the Swiss.
If American politicians have become so corrupt that they are beyond redemption, maybe we should use Direct Democracy to cut out the middleman.
And see this analysis by Yves Smith of how the direct democracy-like process involved in the Wall Street protests is one of its greatest strengths.
Wouldn’t Direct Democracy Lead to Mob Rule?Some have expressed concern that direct democracy would lead to “mob rule”. In response to such fears, Gerald Celente responds:
Mob Rule? That’s precisely what we have now. The Wall Street Mob Rules. The Republican and Democrats? They’re nothing more than the White Shoe Boyz version of the Gambino’s and Bonnano’s.
Mob rule? “We the People” are too stupid to think for ourselves? What self respecting individual would look up to a House of Weiners to make life and death decisions for them? A Congressional Gang of 535 controlling the lives of 312 million … that’s mob rule!
We’re too stupid? We should bend over and suck up to The Gang of 535 … the DC Drama Queens and the Beltway Circle Jerks that put on a summer long Debt Ceiling Soap Opera … the inept and incompetents whose public spectacle was cited by Standard & Poor’s as a reason for the downgrading of US debt?
Those opposed to “Let the People Vote” are either party operatives, entrenched interests or little minds that can’t think … or are afraid to think … for themselves.
»
- advertisements -
if it was my son, he would not have been so nice.....he would have been strapped and have a krinkov hanging across his chest......and when that yid tried to hit his sign she would have tasted shoe leather for starters......you want to act like a man then you get treated like a man............hey its the hpd tradition.............
ok , its just a joke everybody , relax............:)
file:///var/folders/-j/-jIjU9sA2Ri3PE+8ZNoNG++++TM/-Tmp-/com.apple.mail....
Bachman / Palin 2012, baby! Double Trouble Ticket! Followed by their photo op in Playboy, a really bad porn movie called "Double Dykes Do Washington Doggie Dildo Style", with a crescendo when they finish their term with the Fuck America - REAL GOOD! tour, followed by all expense paid trips to the FEMA camp of your choice! But wait - there's more - free meds and indoctrination into the Mama Grizzly Tribe! Fuck, yeah! Good Times!
Ass to ass baby, requiem for a dream with fiat polito-junkies! It's like watching the US of A, but the goverment is the dildo, and GS is cheering us on, bit by bit, just a little bit more. Anyone who votes against me is just salty that they aren't getting the same treatment. If you look closely, you can see Blankfein in the background bringing more lube.
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/1275561/jennifer_connelly/
We need an ignore button.
America after less than three years of hope and change; is broke, is downgraded, is in 6 wars, cheated GM bondholders, nationalized healthcare, and much much more.
Obama is Goldman and the Street's bitch. They paid high-end retail and they got high-end retail treatment. Biggest TARP money = Goldman; Solyndra loans = Goldman.
Why are you folks having buyer's remorse?
Bush=TARP, I think we're fucked both sides of the coin, so we would be sorry either way. Rape or gangfuck, what's the difference in the great gaper caper?
All hail Donkey Show!
Exactly. Neither side will help, they will only keep hurting us more.
The only problem is that 95+% of Americans are not smart enough to even comprehend what they would have to do in this circumstance. Instead of banning representative government, we should be outlawing corporate giving to politicians, providing funding for underpriveledged citizens who want to run for office (because in this day and age, you need to be independently wealthy to run for political office. We need to de-aristocrize the system of elections in this country and allow for citizens of all walks of life to equally and fairly run for office. It costs multiple millions of dollars to run for president, and I am sure that similar studies will show that it at least costs multiple hundreds-of-thousands of dollars to run for senate and maybe slightly less for the House. The point is that the real Joe the Plumber, not a fake one who republicans use to try to win an election but the real one, can not feasibly run for office for he will run himself broke in doing so. In short, politics is just another means for the wealthy to waste money and needs to be made accessible to all classes.
That is a valid fix for now. The problem is any fixes that we do now will be forgotten over time, and the evil will come back unless we add another check and balance against it, and that check and balance is direct democracy.
If you look at Switzerland you will see it is direct democracy added as one facet of a republic. It is not 100% direct democracy. If we added it like this to our system, our system would work much the same as now except that we could fix some of these big problems that the politicians won't fix because they are puppets. The most important part of Switzerland's direct democracy is the referendum. That allows the citizens to veto laws. That is the part they use most. It keeps the politicians in line and not pandering to lobbyists.
Ya had to throw in your lefty bullshit, didn't you?
Hellfish, you dishonor Abe Simpson, Monty Burns, and the rest of the Fighing Hellfish with your half baked 20th century right vs. left agenda. Wake up and see that left and right don't matter.
All kneel before Donkey Show!
What the hell is wrong with you supposed "well-meaning" intellectuals? Can't you understand THE most basic fundamentals? You must reject the notion that ANY entity have "power" over individuals. It is NO BETTER for "the majority" to have unlimited power over individuals than "a congress" or a "king" or "emporer" or "president".
Can you not understand the most basic and fundamental facts of reality and history? The predators of this world will ALWAYS gain control of ANY and EVERY mechanism of theft, control, manipulation and enslavement. ALWAYS. ALWAYS. ALWAYS.
This part [some/many of] the founders understood. That's why their central principle was the inherent, unchangable individual rights that every human has, and NO individual or collective entity could legitimately transgress any individual - PERIOD. Any no justification could supersede this primary principle.
To even talk about "what individual or collective entity should have power over individuals" is to be a mortal enemy of honesty, ethics, productivity and mankind. To all you "well-meaning" fools who simply advocate shifting power to a new egregious entity, we say GO TO HELL... and stay there.
Bang on the button Honestann. We would simply replace one institutionalised monopoly (Govt) with another institution (Direct Demcoracy) which is also a monopoly authority in society.
I am a big fan of Gerald Celente but his stupidity on this topic proves once again we should hero worship nobody as we all have our human failings. Saying people should have the power, and then passing that power to an institution, is truly dumb. Why not everybody just keeps their power Mr Celente and passes it to nobody?
What needed role does a public institution provide that a private competitive free market cannot do massively better?
A free market also provides 100 of different choices to thousands of different people, while Mr Celente proposes we all accept one voted decision/service/product representing some majority opinion. Why reduce multiple choices to one which is no choice at all?
If that stupidity is not enough there's 2 more glaring errors with his monopoly system. First deciding by committee or democratic majority is one of the dumbest methods ever devised. The majority represent consensus, they do not represent what is best or bravest or smartest or most effective or most efficient or most productive. Majority voting is an averaging system producing average (ie. 2nd or 3rd rate) results. Welcome to crap
Secondly society is led from every angle by individual acts of brilliance. Be it music (Led Zep), science (Einstein), industry (Caterpillar, JCB, BMW), design (Versace, Habitat), technology (Apple) etc etc we are led by risk takers and envelope breakers and then society (the herd) follows. Man was never meant to be led by consensus amongst the herd. The herd decides amongst a choice of risk-takers which ones they wish to follow
Finally if anyone would like to actually visit Switzerland they will see the same dross and crapology of Big Govt there as they do everywhere else. I find roads are a very accurate proxy for the state of a nations freedom and the stupidity of its Govt. Switzerlands speed-camera and speed restricted roads, dumber than mud traffic lights causing congestion and anti-car culture is as big, bad and stupid as anywhere else on the planet.
Like the 'collectivist dumb' of Wikipedia the Swiss have made Law any pedestrian hit by a car is always without question legally the car drivers fault. This is stupidity par excellence (systemic stupidity). I accept if a car mounts a pavement and hits a pedestrian on the pavement it's the car drivers fault. But if a pedestrian walks off the pavement onto the road in front of an oncoming car it most definitely the pedestrians fault.
There are vast areas of stupidity on Swiss roads (traffic lights, speed limits, cameras, parking zones/times, yellow lines, white lines, trams, buses, bus lanes etc etc etc etc etc) that the Swiss have shown the exact same 'big dumb' as every other Govt system. The Swiss system has zero higher IQ and has zero less peanut-brained 'dumb' than any other
Freedom is best left in the hands of the people Mr Celente. Leave it there with no system in place to take it away, or to take our choices away. One 'choice' handed down from an institution is no choice (freedom) at all. It is a dictat.
We do not need a system to represent a majority to oppress a minority. Nor a system that blunts the brilliance of individuals to out-think the majority. Zero Govt to be precise, true democracy (a free society) no dumb-fuk system required
Good contribution. Thanks.
Consider this very strange fact, which I point out to people from time to time when no other logic works.
Let's say I deem myself king or emporer of the USA... or the world. That's evil, right? I mean, even I tend to react to that with revulsion. But let's consider for a moment.
What if the only actions I took were to establish "programs" that were entirely funded by voluntary subscription by those who wanted the service. What if the only actions I took were to help individuals defend themselves against predators? In other words, what if the only actions I took were to defend the individual rights of individuals who wanted my assistance? Hmmmm. Interesting, no? Even though my claim that I am "emporer" or "king" is obviously bogus, I have taken no action that is unethical or violates individual rights.
Interesting, no? How can it be that such an entity is not guilty of some crime, of some abuse, of some violation of ethics? All I would be guilty of is... being afflicted with delusions of grandeur.
How can we make sense of this?
Simple. If no human violates the individual rights of any other human, they can babble all they wish. They can claim any lame-ass title they wish. They can dress up like some wacko royalty and live in a castle if they want. They can travel in limos with personal guards if they want. And nobody has any right to harm them because... they have not harmed anyone.
Which points to the real issue - that ANY system that involves ZERO violation of individual rights BY ANYONE, EVER... is perfectly ethical and legitimate... even if laughable in the extreme.
This is what people need to understand - the one crucial, fundamental point. NOBODY may be permitted to harm or control anyone, ever, for any reason. To assign special powers to control, constrain, force or harm to one or more "officials" is inherently corrupt, no matter WHAT pile of verbiage is attached.
The fact is, all organizations are fictions, including "society", "government", "corporation", "central bank", etc. They must have no status whatsoever, because anyone who assigns status to non-existents is literally, clinically and massively insane. Unfortunately, at least 99.9999% of human beings are quite indeed fundamentally and massively insane. And that's a big problem.
"NOBODY may be permitted to harm or control anyone, ever, for any reason. To assign special powers to control, constrain, force or harm to one or more "officials" is inherently corrupt, no matter WHAT pile of verbiage is attached."
it is impossible to have a working human system that does not 'do no harm'. Freedom (of society and markets) still harms because the only system that works is competition.
Both a free society and free markets works (to progress) through the competition mechanism
Competition by nature, like nature, requires a constant state of progress/innovation, change/flux and attrition/damage for its success. We are built to take damage from the attrition of life, that's why our skins like our brains are built to self repair... we know it's coming and we're tough enough cookies to pick ourselves up and carry on
Competition works by an individual (Woznak) or a small cutting-edge team (Woznak and Jobs) coming up with something better (more productive, efficient, faster etc) than the existing competition in the market and consumers loving it. So the natural order of the market is the rise of better competition replacing the old order of companies who either have to catch up (at some cost) or lose their jobs (being temporarily harmed/wageless to find new work)
Through this process of attrition the best brains/companies emerge and the consumers get the best services/products
The monopoly system of Government or a private monopoly like Microsoft serves nobody but itself because it has all the power and just dictates choice (same as Mr Celentes new fangled monopoly institution). The end result of a closed loop monopoly system is it does not have to improve because it can dictate rather than having to compete. It can also raise prices rather than having to be ever more efficient or productive. So instead of providing productivity it provides wealth destruction (harm).
Both monopoly and competition systems are attritional (causes some harm) but one eats its host and in the end causes systemic suicide (impoverishment) while competition still causes fall-out but delivers constant productivity (wealth creation) that outweighs the costs many times over. No system is harmless, amongst men, nature or the Universe. All energy has exhaust or waste by-products. But it's not the cost that matters but the benefits the system delivers
99.9999% of people are not insane otherwise there'd be nothing (productive) left of mans world. But we do have a 'democratic majority' voting to bring man to Depressionary poverty levels for the 100th time in history via the destructive force of that monopoly institution called Govt. The sooner we rid ourselves of the stupidity of majority voting (like committees, institutions and Wikipedia) the better
To produce a higher-quality and/or less-expensive product does not and cannot constitute "harm". In fact, if you make a better product than me, and sell that product to customers, that entire process has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with me. YOU produced the product and OTHERS purchased your product. I was not involved. To claim that you "harmed" me is a stunningly gross distortion of the notion of "harm".
You really need to think more carefully about the appropriate meaning of your terms. When ALL interactions are voluntary (on the part of everyone involved in the interactions) "harm" is not possible. Otherwise (for example), a doctor who performs surgery on you to save your life would be guilty of an extraordinarily gross and viscious act of assault - cutting deep into your body and removing YOUR body parts.
I believe you have good intent, but are wrongly formulating and manipulating your concepts.
At least we completely agree that "totalitarianism by democracy" is no more legitimate than any other form of totalitarianism.
There is a place in Hyde Prk London called Speaker's corner. I was always fascinated when I was ten by those who got up and spoke. At sixteen, when I returned to London, it was less impressive the rants. At eighteen I found it laughable. I guess I had grown up to the real world. Zero Govt and HonestStann do honour to that Speaker's corner tradition. Pity I'm not ten anymore...
It's a pity that you IQ remains near ten.
This flow of drivel would not have passed the test in the 1850s.
Maybe US citizens should start to apply their own principles to themselves to produce much better propaganda...
Are there any folks besides trolls on this thread?
Just sayin.
Why?
Are you thinking of posting something really stupid and hoping no one will notice?
I agree... and mutually-supporting trolls. Wonder who's paying them.
Big difference between a politician and a statesman.
1. A statesman is nothing but a dead politician.
2. We need more statesmen and fewer politicians.
When you think of AL, JFK, RFK, MLK you feel there is some truth in it, and it makes you cringe for the land of the 2nd Amendment.
Do we need bankers to own our currency and extract value as parasites with a debt money system?!
While I think that's a rhetorical question, the answer is "of course not." In almost every way we'd be better off without them.
But... TV tells and the masses believe.
Well I think that our original system was one that worked until it was cast aside. A republic. Where the sovereignty rests with the people. The people are the highest authority.
when they had the convention, didn't they send those people in there to tidy up the articles of confederation? instead they came out with this thing called the federal constitution. was there something neferious afoot even then?
It was so broken that they couldn't make anything happen. So they started in from scratch, hammer and tongs, and argued their case in front of the entire country. Note: argued. Didn't "pass the bill so we can find out what is in it."
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?sts=t&tn=federalist+papers...
but easier on the eyes is:
http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?an=beck&sts=t&tn=original+...
spend the money on the second is my thought; you'll get through it all and have the essence.
YES, there were many nefarious approaches afoot-->the Constitution is the result of Free Men decising wisely.
- Ned
by the way meat, the so-called civil war started when some southern states tried to utilize what they thought was their consitutional rights of secession due to the us government not living up to its agreements concerning taxation of goods etc. the southern states were getting royally screwed. they went to congress about it. they found out they had zero ability to redress grievances. so they decided to take off thinking that it was their constitutional right. the communist lincoln taught them differently. what was it george bush was quoted as saying one time. the us constitution is just a god damn piece of paper? perhaps it always was just a piece of paper, not really meaning anything. just some big joke and that joke was on us. it was a big game of pretend and always was. we thought we had laws here and we always thought that but we never really did , did we? it was all just one big lie from the start.........and to think. so many young people go to law school.......man what a joke. law school........what is law and what does it really and truely mean? not one damn thing to any of us , that is for sure. the law is there until you need it and then they either change it or ignore it. the only way things ever go is in the way of the state......to me, in my way of thinking, i wonder ......what would it be like to really honestly live in a nation that abided by the common law ? what would it be like to be really and truely be free? who knows. we have never lived it nor have we ever known it......to me, the goal is simple. as the motto of the state of new hampshire states.......live free or die.............
you are truly free when you end up dead. Upto then its uphill for most of humanity. So dream on...
HPD, yes, I've mentioned here before that it took me (literally) several decades before I understood my friends' (especially from the exclusive boys school in SC) comments on the "War of Northern Aggression."
Law school is an overproducing organization feeding an overserved market.
Peak Lawyers anyone?
- Ned
no sir, the constitution was the result of men wanting a strong central government at the expense of state rights. this is what the bankers wanted so they could eventually bring in their central banking scheme. too much power spread out over the states would cause them problems, would it not, since these states could and did for a time issue their own currencies etc.......now we sure can't have that sort of thing going on could we? jefferson felt so bad about it, that he made them include the bill of rights so that it would at least give us some kind of fighting chance........freedom and liberty had nothing to do with it........nothing at all....any freedoms we have enjoyed or whatever, were unwanted byproducts that the bankers had to put up with , while they were conducting their business here , that is the fleecing of the amerikan sheep..........now ........what freedoms we had, are slowly being taken away. the goal always was to steal every dime in the world and concentrate it in one small group.........that will be the new world order............because satan willed it and this is what he wants....total control in his false thousand year reign...........and his boys are working hard now to bring it together.........they are close now.......and that my friends is the rest of the story.........
The South supported states rights? Since when? Ah, yes, it was the case in the US citizen fabled past.
For the others, well ... Well, they are not US citizens so it helps.
Dead on pods.
There is nothing wrong with the country that a little fascist house cleaning can't take care of.
Whether its indicting someone who forces someone to buy a product or service from a private corporation or tearing apart a clearly dysfuntional regulatory system or endless bailouts to the ones who should be declared bankrupt and thrown on the ash heep of history.
There is nothing wrong with the country that a little fascist house cleaning can't take care of.
Not sure I agree, but I'm sympathetic. But even if I agreed fully, who would do this cleaning? They are ALL in on the skim.
at this stage, i am not sure. some are talking about a military coupe. to me, it would be walking a really, really serious tight rope......
I'm not sure that the electric car guys nor the hybrid guys will go along with the military coupe. Maybe a roadster, certainly something to keep from walking.
But a military coupe just doesn't have the power or the cornering to work almost anywhere.
We'll have to keep an eye out, though. ;-)
- Ned
rats, what happened to the edit button?
It disappears once somebody replies.
That is the beauty. All the power that you need is already there. Sitting idle in the common law, while we waste away in statutes and codes.
The only thing that might have to be achieved through force is money of the people to be freely agreed upon. Whether that be gold, silver, seashells or petrified dinosaur dung.
The power is there, but the road is narrow and there are pitfalls along the way.
I agree with you and nmewn about the need, but would not have that kind of concentrated power to be wielded, as it will always attract those least fit to hold it.
pods
"but would not have that kind of concentrated power to be wielded, as it will always attract those least fit to hold it."
Excellent point.
I don't think there is one among us who has not thought about how long we could hold out against what would come at us.
The "look kid" this is the way its always been done. Then the threats, the attempted blackmail, the offered bribe...then finally they will find the weak spot, we all have them somewhere.
Human nature being what it is.
The number of skeletons that would come rolling out of my closet precludes me from ever seeking office.
And I am quite fine with that.
:)
pods
I've calculated my odds of holding them off at only two years...but the absolute mayhem I could cause ;-)
It will take people of integrity...of honor.
I have never lost my faith that they are still among us. They may not be the most handsome/pretty or the best at doing a real stem winder campaign speech...but they are there.
And they're all pissed.
We need to understand what we are witnessing is, truely defined as fascism. We cannot allow laws to be passed to force anyone to buy a product or service. And we most certainly cannot pass laws that shield both corporate & government from the acts that they colluded on before.
Spot on, Pods.
Constitutional Republic - no politicians but representatives of the people - has been withered away. It is the Great Shame underlying most if not all of the country's ills. Now the politicians practice misdirection and obfuscation to prevent any return to such an ideal.
the only thing I'm certain of is this:
the number of police, lawyers, judges and politicians killed in America every year...is grossly insufficient.
well i am not going to comment on this comment, but ...........these people all go along to get along. does that make them traitors.? in my eyes. yes. they are willing conspirators........you watch. one day, this subject will come up when these people are standing near the gallows...........waiting for judgment.........( i hope).....