Printable View
.
Quote:
Posted by Antagenet
Whoa!! lol. Look a little more closely, my friend,Quote:
Posted by rgray222
I said
MOST OF THE CONTROL.
(Not every damn problem on earth!!!)
I would add, it only applies to certain Jews (like, for example, some Zionist Jews...) -- not all Jews. Nobody likes to be painted with a broad brush.
Quote:
Posted by Pris.
Quote:
Posted by shaberon
I found this. Seems that someone from China explains "separation of powers" quite well...
Sure. It was mainly designed by Montesquieu, and applied, for example, by the Tsarina.
I would suggest it may be why forms of government don't scale too well.
For example, old Gaelic nations were not states. As individuals they owned farms and lands and pasture, but otherwise there was no kind of political boundary marking an area that was a "state". The boundary was your mouth and word. Twenty or thirty families would send their head to a meeting, where one guy was in charge and made all the decisions, he was the Judge and the Executive who would determine if the group needed to attack or defend. The Law was a few ideas he might have gotten from the previous guy, and it was just whatever they said.
You go along with it or you get thrown out.
For one thing, all those people had a whole lot in common.
Past a certain level of population, that kind of thing doesn't seem to work out too well.
The point about the Constitution is that it consolidates power in the Federal Government, at the expense of the states. The State already has a Constitution, the States are the original sovereigns, and so the dispute is far less about the theories and proportions that divide up federal operations, it is about the vampiric relation towards the sovereign States.
That is essentially the main argument from 1787-1865; that is what the War Between the States was about.
During that time the Hamiltonian Wall Street Party became Anti-Masonic, then Whig, then Republican ---> John Birch and Truman mentality.
Although we could say the Democratic party once opposed this, at a certain point it becomes compromised as well, more along the lines of Atlanticism or internationalism --> CFR and WEF mentality.
The U. S. was founded around several caveats to "alter or abolish" the government, actually I think Jefferson may have said a revolution per generation might be normal.
The war we did have was not "Civil", because the Confederacy was not trying to gain control of the Constitutional government. It was not trying to revolutionize, that is, to alter or abolish it either. It tried to make its own less-consolidated government, or, rather, it did, but it was defeated.
It seems that democracy, like fiat currency, is an ideal that can never be 'real'. It relies on perception alone. That is, the reality of a fiat currency is an illusion but for the perception of value that we all agree to. Like now, for example, when the value of the fiat currency is going down, yet we all perceive the same value as before - a dollar is a dollar (even though that dollar today is only worth 94 cents. Tomorrow it will be worth 89 cents, and so on).
Democracy is like that. It is merely a perception that we have agreed to yet, in fact, its value has been decreasing since the first law was enacted. Every law is an abrogation of someone's rights. At best, democracy is a mini tyranny of limited duration. More to the point, democracies tend toward dictatorships over time.
Democracy works only to the extent that there is individual integrity prevalent within its citizenry. It is only individuals with high moral standards that can set a true course of freedom because only they know what that looks like, and what its true price is.
In the past, such standards were expected. Today, not so much.
The first rule of a true civilization is the rule of civility.
I think I now understand more why Wade maintains that integrity is a scarce resource in the modern world.
And that perhaps humanity is not yet sentient...
Here is a revolution--in this case, the removal of a constitutional government:
General Abdourahmane Tchiani has been declared Niger’s new head of state, Colonel Amadou Abdramane, a spokesman for the rebels who have seized power in the country, said in a televised address on Friday.
However, in his words, the constitution of the country remains suspended.
While at the same time, there could be the birth of another constitution:
"For example, the East African Community (EAC) is in the process of becoming a political federation," Ndayishimiye pointed out.
According to the EAC:
The Political Federation is the ultimate goal of the EAC Regional Integration, the fourth step after the Customs Union, Common Market and Monetary Union.
That process is very slow, starting perhaps prior to 2004. It is, in a sense, similar to the United States, because most of those places are formed by colonists drawing up state lines out of their empires. The U. S. made a much faster union, because it entered hostilities with the colonizer, instead of waiting until 1960 for a decision.
Its current stage is treaties:
Signing of the Treaty of Accession of the Democratic Republic of Congo to the Treaty for the Establishment of the East Africa Community 2022
Enlarging it to this area:
https://www.eac.int/images/New_EAC_Map_2022.png
https://www.eac.int/images/images/New_EAC_map.png
Followed by:
EAC officially launches the Verification Mission to assess Somalia's readiness to join the Community
And, they happen to use this buzz word, a lot:
East African Community attaches great importance to nurturing democracy
The Head of the EAC Election Observer Mission (EOM) to Rwanda, former Kenyan Vice President Moody Awori, said that no country could expect to attain economic growth, peace and security without the stamp of legitimacy from its citizens.
“This is why we as a Community are keen on free, fair and transparent elections in all the six Partner States,” said Mr. Awori.
What does it mean? Are they buying an -ism? Doing a cookie cutter of Anglo-American law? It only means whatever they decide to say it means:
Quote:
During debate, Hon. Dora Byamukama said there was need to make key follow-up on what the Partner States do on the very day. “We need to take the issue of democracy very seriously”, she said. “Perhaps Africa needs its own definition taking into account the fact that we need to take to enhance civic education”, she added.
Hon. Mukasa Mbidde said it was necessary for the rule of law and democracy to be adhered to. The motion is anchored on Article 6 (d) and 7 (2) and all Protocols that African States are party to. “It is on this day that we need to tell the Partner States to carry out, and implement what it takes to ensure access to justice is realized”, he said.
The Partner States should also ensure the access and deposit of the declarations required under Article 34 (6) of the Protocol of the African Court and Human Rights. So far only, the United Republic of Tanzania and the Republic of Rwanda have deposited the said Protocol.
On 29th January, 2015, EALA passed a Resolution urging the EAC Partner States to adopt the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance.
Hon. Mbidde further mentioned that the jurisdiction of the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) needs to be extended to cover the crimes against humanity. At the moment, only the ICC can try perpetrators of human rights violation, Hon. Mbidde said.
The youth are majority and deserve their space in terms of planning and decision making”, he added. They must be part of a constructive agenda and not destructive’, he said, adding, that the Assembly should observe the day by among other things having discussions of intellect on the democratic practices.
This mainly consists of Swahili countries, which Ethiopia is not, nor has it been colonized, most of its trade is north and over the Red Sea, and it has very little connection to these places. So although it looks like a neighbor, it has not signed on to the Currency arrangement or any of the other groundwork that leads to membership. It, possibly, could, but, we might say that Swahili Democracy is just beginning...just not of a kind that has been planted there by someone else. That, to me, at least, is the important thing, it is not "Liberal Democracy" scarfing territory for venture capitalists, it is their own internal affair.
Here is what happens when you implement martial law:
Burkina Faso and Mali will consider any military intervention in Niger as a declaration of war against them.
It announced it was suspending the export of uranium to France with immediate effect. Niger is the world’s seventh-largest producer of Uranium and France, which relies on nuclear energy for 75 per cent of its power, is a significant importer.
Because Mali, having recently washed its hands of France:
There are already widespread allegations of direct French military intervention being imminent...
France has asserted it will only recognize the only legitimate authority as Bazoum, whose precise whereabouts remain unknown...
Colonel Amadou Abdramane, who is among the coup leaders and a spokesman, has alleged that Niger’s foreign minister had signed a legal order which authorizes external French military intervention to restore political stability.
Complicating matters, and adding to the geopolitical pressures and tensions, is the fact that Niger has long been a major operating hub for French special forces, with some 1,500 French troops in the country, who regularly conducted joint operations with the prior government.
The ‘anti-imperialist’ nature of coup supporters in the streets has been demonstrated by their waving Russian flags. Alarmingly, while both French and American troops are in the region, the Russian mercenary group Wagner is just next door in Mali. Wagner chief Yevgeny Prigozhin, who days ago popped back up in Russia for the first time since the June 23 mutiny events, in a rare message positively celebrated the coup and blasted past French and Western colonialism in Africa:
In a long message posted to social media, Prigozhin blamed the situation in Niger on the legacy of colonialism and alleged, without evidence, that Western nations were sponsoring terrorist groups in the country. Niger was once a French colony and, before this week’s putsch, it had been one of the few democracies in the region.
Meanwhile, Russian flag-bearing protesters have attacked the French embassy in Niamey…
https://s2.cdnstatic.space/wp-conten...coupniger1.jpg
All of this has prompted a fresh response from President Emmanuel Macron, who said his government “will not tolerate any attack on France and its interests” in Niger. He blasted the coup d’état as “perfectly illegitimate” (ironic given this implies he believes he can bestow some coups with legitimacy but not others).
Tensions are also building along the borders, after coup leaders claimed neighboring allies of the West are plotting against them. West African leaders held an emergency meeting on Sunday in Nigeria over the coup and crisis.
The 15-nation regional bloc Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) called for Bazoum’s immediate restoration to office, saying it will “all measures” to restore democratic government and the constitution. The biggest warning from ECOWAS was seen in the following statement:
“Such measures may include the use of force for this effect,” it said in a statement.
The White House in a weekend statement said it is “closely monitoring” the coup and events inside the country, while staying in communication with military leaders.
“We remain deeply concerned about the unfolding developments … the United States condemns in the strongest terms, any effort to seize power by force,” NSC spokesman John Kirby said. “A military takeover may cause the United States to cease security and other cooperation with the government of Niger, jeopardizing existing security and non security partnerships.”
But as The Intercept highlights, this is yet another problem and change of government that’s at least in part of Washington’s own making… that is, another African coup leader who was trained by US special forces. According to The Intercept:
BRIG. GEN. MOUSSA SALAOU BARMOU, the chief of Niger’s Special Operations Forces and one of the leaders of the unfolding coup in Niger, was trained by the U.S. military, The Intercept has confirmed. U.S.-trained military officers have taken part in 11 coups in West Africa since 2008.
“We have had a very long relationship with the United States,” Barmousaid in 2021. “Being able to work together in this capacity is very good for Niger.” Just last month, Barmou met with Lt. Gen. Jonathan Braga, the head of U.S. Army Special Operations Command, at Air Base 201, a drone base in the Nigerian city of Agadez that serves as the lynchpin of an archipelago of U.S. outposts in West Africa.
On Wednesday, Barmou, who trained at Fort Benning, Georgia, and the National Defense University in Washington, joined a junta that ousted Mohamed Bazoum, Niger’s democratically elected president, according to Nigerien sources and a U.S. government official who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
Ft. Benning = School of the Americas, i. e., in general, CIA type training for, you know, overthrows and stuff like that. Guess he is putting the lesson to the test!
Wild:
https://s2.cdnstatic.space/wp-conten.../coupniger.png
ECOWAS is the Treaty of Lagos 1975, including Burkina Faso and Mali. It has three suspended members, including Niger, meaning that even if it has a NATO-type defense pact, it does not apply.
The news article for their ouster has expired; instead, it gives me:
Homeless Camps Are Being Cleared in California. What Happens Next?
Democratic leaders who previously tolerated homeless camps have lost their patience for the tent villages and blocks of trailers that proliferated during the pandemic.
In general, there are really only three different kinds of government. Quoting Book 1, Section 3 of the Law of Nations:
The key function in any system is where the right to command is. Do you, as a mere citizen, have the right to command your society? To do your part in managing its affairs as you see fit? No? Then you do not live in a democracy and never have.Quote:
If the body of the nation keeps in its own hands the empire or the right to command, it is a popular government, a democracy; if it entrusts it to a certain number of citizens, to a senate, it establishes an aristocratic republic; finally, if it confides the government to a single person, the state becomes a monarchy.
What are called "representative democracies" are actually aristocratic republics in their function. Elected representatives are only a subset of the population, and it has been proven time and again that there is neither contractual agreement nor duty for them to consider your interests. The only agreement that exists by vote is that you agreed that they get to make the decisions and not you. If they be an idiot or a traitor, well, that's allowed by the system and what happens happens because it is allowed to happen.
From a functional systems perspective, existing so-called democratic systems are actually very simple in their design and I see many gaps in their functionality. They were designed by people who did not have systems programming experience (excusable because the field didn't exist in their time) and operated under the assumption that people always had good character. They do not. In a numbers game, bad characters can overpower good characters. We also saw that voting, as a function in a system, is error-prone and should not be relied upon as much as it is.
Democracy requires that people exercise self-government in order for it to function, and self-government requires that people develop in themselves a strong character. Democracy also has the feature of the right to command or manage the society being spread widely in the population without representatives in the way. It does not mean rule by mob -- that is an outcome that occurs with poor system design and it is an error because it is possible for an entire mob to be wrong -- and as an optimizing function, a society ought to avoid going down wrong paths because they are inefficient uses of resources. It is possible to implement a democratic system, where the right to command is entrusted widely, but which does not rely upon numbers to steer its direction.
Correlation does not mean causation, but there is definitely a Jewish hand in the things you mentioned. Not to mention the ruling class talking about how Israel is our greatest ally and how Israel is fiercely anti-immigration while people from there actively advocate for mass immigration into countries.Quote:
Posted by rgray222
Correlation does not mean causation......................... This is precisely why I made the comment in the first place.Quote:
Posted by abcCorrelation does not mean causation, but there is definitely a Jewish hand in the things you mentioned. Not to mention the ruling class talking about how Israel is our greatest ally and how Israel is fiercely anti-immigration while people from there actively advocate for mass immigration into countries.Quote:
Posted by rgray222
I firmly stand by my post. The original post did not say that Jews had a "hand in things" It clearly and emphatically stated (see link https://gtvflyers.com/) that Jews were responsible for every aspect of:I have no problem with someone making a case against Zionism but one does not need to be related to Einstein to see that this post has all the hallmarks of hate.
- COVID
- Slavery
- Abortion
- Guns
- Satanism
- Pornography
- Penis Sucking (not joking, see below)
- LBGTQ Movement
- Biden Administration
- Trump Campaign Funding
- Mass Immigration
- Ukraine
- 911
- Federal Reserve
- Communism
- Child Murdering Pedophiles
- Feminism
I am not going to comment any further on this subject.
Quote:
Posted by Tiyaira
That is not entirely so.
There are various kinds of "constitutional monarchies" and so forth, and various ways of electing kings.
Once the powers of a king are distributed, then he is more or less a chief executive, practically indistinguishable from a president. That is why there was about a 30% minority which would have elected G. Washington king after the American Revolution.
Why is the term "dictator" bandied about? Is Niger currently under the control of one person who is not a king?
Most Tyrants have been installed by popular support, mainly for Debt Jubilee that the "legitimate government" ceased observing.
Either a minority or majority of "bad characters" is able to spread badness through some form of government. I would suggest the form matters less than the character.
The U. S. Confederacy only had a Senate, which led to most of the arguments over the Constitution, in people thinking there should be a "lower house" like in Britain, which is a monarchy with a separate legislature, which led to most of the problems that the Americans revolted against. In that sense, they mainly revolted against the Parliament.
Some of us have known Democrazy is a farce for a long time.Quote:
Posted by Bill Ryan
This is a snippet from the idea of the End of Europe:
The macroscopic data that explains what is happening in France after February 2022 is that relating to food consumption. That suffered an unprecedented drop of 17% compared to 2021.
which is just some dry data that speaks volumes on its own.
But right now, my question is, if the following could even possibly be happening:
Quote:
Turning the death of Europe into a metaphysical tragedy is Spain with its jumble of political parties that fail to find a majority, general election after general election.
The country under the leadership of the socialist Sanchez is facing these difficult economic times in relative tranquility. The country’s GDP is supported by the post-Covid recovery of tourism and the revitalization of the real estate sector. While awaiting the next speculative bubble and the formation of yet another national minority government, Spanish politics is the best geopolitical laboratory of the new American way of life based on false rights, the erasure of culture and political correctness. In the general silence of international public opinion, Madrid has reformed the school curriculum, eliminating history and philosophy from the school curriculum. Instead of those two subjects, now considered outdated, Spanish children will be taught disciplines such as ecofeminism, democratic memory, ethics of care and LGBT rights. We are on the verge of the abyss: that reform, at best, should be considered as the most idiotic distillation of cancel culture. In the background, there remain the secessionist tensions of some regions that can no longer bear the link with Madrid: Catalonia in the lead.
This is the strongest uncensored rant I've ever heard from Chris Martenson. The video was recorded on 21 December for his Peak Prosperity members (safe behind his paywall!), but has only just been uploaded to YouTube — where there are at least half a dozen reasons why it might not stay for long. (I've downloaded it already.)
I could also have posted it on all or any of these other threads:
Martenson opens by praising Argentina's new President Milei, but this was recorded before Milei pulled Argentina out of joining BRICS. I posted earlier that Milei was bad news, and I still hold to that. While I take the points that Martenson makes about him, it'd be interesting to know what he thinks now.
- The planned takedown of America: now in full swing
- David Rogers Webb's new book "The Great Taking"
- Donald Trump arrested and charged
- God Save Canada
- Turmoil in Argentina.
Witnessing Democracy's Decline: My Reflections and Fears
https://youtube.com/watch?v=eJ7bzFDVM4w
I had the privilege of meeting G. Edward Griffin on several occasions, once in Australia and once in America. He is one of our guiding lights, still active at age 92.Quote:
Posted by Bill Ryan
Quote:
Posted by DNA
I don't think it's that people don't care necessarily. Some are too weak and weary to fight it all, and some are just cowards.
The average person - who is being bludgeoned by countless stressors on a daily basis - simply has no more emotional/mental capacity for controversy. They're all maxed out...mentally, emotionally, spiritually, financially...
They understand intuitively that they're not prepared on any level to accept what you have to tell them. So, with their very sanity hanging in the balance, they will fight you tooth and nail on this stuff. Or they'll simply dismiss you...which gives the impression of not caring but is really something else entirely (deep denial).
They know something is off, but they'd rather live with the cognitive dissonance if it means things will remain relatively stable. They understand that to fight will result in instability, and they no longer have the strength or bravery to endure it. Plus some are just justifiably afraid, which is understandable. But sadly they're not afraid of the right things!
And it's because most people don't have any grasp on history at all...even relatively recent history. I didn't either really, I'm embarrassed to say, until recently. Most haven't the slightest clue where collectivism leads to, or even what it is really. It's a pretty simple concept that gets lost in language (deliberately). The crap they promote goes by many different names - equity, social justice, critical social justice, woke, collectivism etc. But it's all just repackaged Marxism/communism/socialism.
Is that (bolded text) what they call a Freudian Slip? Do you really champion FEAR, as long as it’s the right ones? IMO, fear is, like sadness, a symptom of lack of love.Quote:
Posted by Mike
Quote:
Posted by JohnnycomelatelyIs that (bolded text) what they call a Freudian Slip? Do you really champion FEAR, as long as it’s the right ones? IMO, fear is, like sadness, a symptom of lack of love.Quote:
Posted by Mike
The point I was making there is that people who are afraid of taking action now should be far more afraid of what will eventually happen if they don't.
Fear can be useful if it makes you act to prevent disaster. It's not useful when you allow it to frighten you into inaction.
DEMOCRACY has always been a vile form, where a majority can legally persecute a minority or tax the snot out of them.
I prefer the republican form, where all men are created equal (before the law - none HIGHER) with Creator endowed rights that governments were instituted to secure - not tax, regulate nor trespass. Absent consent of the governed, these servant governments are limited to adjudicating disputes, prosecuting criminals, and defending against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Of course, once you consent, shut up, sit down, pay and obey.
(a REPUBLICAN FORM is not synonymous with a REPUBLIC. The Peoples Republic of China is a republic but NOT a republican form. Nor can any constitution create a republican form, ergo it's not a "constitutional republic.")
Bumping this thread, which I'd suggest is an important one, with a new report from Kim Iverson, also withNebojsa Malic, a columnist for Antiwar.com and RT America, now based in Belgrade, Serbia. Here's her opening:I think deep down, whether we want to vocalize it or not, most people in this country feel that it's over for democracy.From Ukraine to Epstein: How American Democracy has already Crossed the Rubicon
https://youtube.com/watch?v=MEHWOyv19-4