Presidents may be obsolete in the near future... also kings, etc (the sooner the better)

[East Sun]

We, as a people, are dependent on the decisions of the people who were selected to represent us. What's wrong with this picture?

Actually we did not select them, as much as we like to think we did. They were chosen for us to vote for them, either one or the other---some choice.

We, as things stand, do not have a realistic choice. That's a problem.

They, the controllers, know that very well and perpetrate the status quo as much as they can.

We need a system, where we the people, can vote in a fair process where every one's vote counts and votes are counted BY HAND and supervised thoroughly, for it to be fair.

It won't be so, as long as people like the Bushes and Clintons rule the roost.

The hardest thing IMO is to show the majority of us here in the USA, Canada and the UK
and anyone interested, that this is the reality of our situation.

So, here we go again, the problem of showing a majority of the populations what may be in their best interest.

In an ideal society it would be so

Will we ever be in such a society?

It is up to us.........

[dynamo]

Posted by East Sun (here)
...The hardest thing IMO is to show the majority of us here in the USA, Canada and the UK
and anyone interested, that this is the reality of our situation....

No need to convince me, or many on this forum, of that fact.
Still, we see many people discussing (arguing about?) right/left, democrat/republican etc...
Hard to convince people that are being paid by the elite (a.k.a.shysters) that their employers are bottom-feeding maggots (and yes, I am being nice with the description of the elite, IMO of course )...

[Foxie Loxie]

At least this "Q" thing has some people talking & thinking about many things they might not have otherwise! The Elite Bastards have been in control for so many centuries it will take a big Yank(pun intended!) to start getting this Rat's Nest unraveled!

[justntime2learn]

Posted by Foxie Loxie (here)
At least this "Q" thing has some people talking & thinking about many things they might not have otherwise! The Elite Bastards have been in control for so many centuries it will take a big Yank(pun intended!) to start getting this Rat's Nest unraveled!

Great post East Sun!

Funny, I was just talking about this yesterday with friends asking questions and their thoughts.

Completely agree with Dynamo!

Agreed, the elite bastards have been in control for a long time Foxie. Hopefully affording them so many opportunities in the past will be their Achilles heel?

I want to believe in Q as much as everyone else and a big 10-4 on the big yank!

[Satori]

There are reasons why "... the Elite Bastards have been in control for so many centuries..." Until those reasons are finally and fully addressed and resolved, nothing will change. But, there will always be Elite Bastards in one form or another and to one degree or another. That's the nature of things. I'm not being defeatist or pessimistic; just stating what is obvious.

[Foxie Loxie]

In the U.S. I think what contributed to our slide downhill is that so many "good" people did not get involved in politics....that is what is so encouraging at this point; there are many Citizen Journalists who ARE getting involved & want to see a change. Can the Rule of Law be restored? That's what I wonder!

[dynamo]

Posted by Foxie Loxie (here)
In the U.S. I think what contributed to our slide downhill is that so many "good" people did not get involved in politics....that is what is so encouraging at this point; there are many Citizen Journalists who ARE getting involved & want to see a change. Can the Rule of Law be restored? That's what I wonder!

Agreed, but the elite carefully vet the ones they let into politics.
Even if the aspiring politicians go in with good intentions, they are then coerced, blackmailed, threatened (or even killed) to toe the party line.

[A Voice from the Mountains]

As Thomas Jefferson's 275th birthday, this is a good opportunity to reflect upon the Jeffersonian model of republican democracy which has guided the United States for most of its history:

Legal scholar David Mayer effectively summarized Jefferson’s strict federalism: “constitutions primarily [served] as devices by which governmental power would be limited and checked, to prevent its abuse through encroachments on individual rights…” Jefferson despised the corruptions of kings, standing armies, banks, and cities, which he identified with the Roman and British empires.

http://dailycaller.com/2018/04/13/ce...united-states/


The usurpation of power by our federal government has been accomplished in relatively small increments over most of our history. Our original federal government was extremely limited. The Bill of Rights didn't originally apply to the state, but only the federal government. So, for example, some New England states had official churches which were unified with their civil governments. And while I can already imagine people groaning at the very idea of that, also keep in mind that those same states separated church and state by the will of their own people well before the US Constitution was interpreted to also limit the rights of state governments.

In short, if we still followed the Jeffersonian model, which is what real US conservatism has always been based upon, the US president would be largely irrelevant except in matters of foreign diplomacy, in which case you NEED a single figurehead to deal with, because trying to do international relations with an unruly mob of 300+ million people is just asking for chaos. We can rule ourselves from the local government on up, and that's the original model for our sovereignty at home.

[Justplain]

I think that being in the real world, the only way to get back to a meaningfully democratic government would be to eliminate the influence of wealth in the political process, such as how much can be contributed to a candidate (and no corporate donations) and how much could be spent on a campaign.

Voting would need to be manually done. Of course, all this would need to be scrutinized by honest third parties.

When it comes to governance, lobby groups would need to be banned, or atleast some process established which permitted all interested parties to have their voice heard. And, legislation could not be prepared by special interest groups, such as corporations or unions. All proposed rule changes should have to be published well before legislative votes for public scrutiny.

These points are just a start, but could improve the culture of government right from the get go.

[Cardillac]

I've posted following before and I'll post it again:

"It is only when the last monarch is strangled by the entrails of the last priest will we finally have peace on earth"- attributed to Denis Diderot

why do people falsly believe the monarchs (like start with all royal houses) on this planet have no power anymore?- if they had no power anymore they would've been done away with long ago and they wouldn't continue to get richer yet let alone still exist-

Larry

[East Sun]

Posted by Justplain (here)
I think that being in the real world, the only way to get back to a meaningfully democratic government would be to eliminate the influence of wealth in the political process, such as how much can be contributed to a candidate (and no corporate donations) and how much could be spent on a campaign.

Voting would need to be manually done. Of course, all this would need to be scrutinized by honest third parties.

When it comes to governance, lobby groups would need to be banned, or atleast some process established which permitted all interested parties to have their voice heard. And, legislation could not be prepared by special interest groups, such as corporations or unions. All proposed rule changes should have to be published well before legislative votes for public scrutiny.

These points are just a start, but could improve the culture of government right from the get go.

I agree with you especially about lobbying groups, corporations and unions in fact everything you said.

[Cardillac]

for more info about how presidents are selected and not elected do read Don Fotheringham's "The President Makers" + his interview on RedIceCreations.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4BXpByNxbg

Larry

[section9]

War is the Health of the State.

Banking is the Handmaiden of Warfare, and I should add, of Welfare.

Jefferson was wise to be suspicious of the rise of centralized state power, and wanted a decentralized Federalism. Unfortunately, the early Republic was born with slavery to go along with its Bill of Rights, so the internal contradictions of the Founding would eventually lead to a war and tremendous concentration of power in the Executive.

However, it was not to be until the rise of Progressivism in both parties, encouraged by business interests, that we get the expansion of what Caroll Quigley termed “Money Power” and the permanent triumph of Finance Capital in our affairs. Wilson’s election brought the establishment of the Fed, the Income Tax, and our intervention into the First War, each in its own way catastrophic attacks on limited government and the Constitution.

We gave away the Republic, like the Romans and Athenians before us.