A vote every five years or so to elect a political party - that, on the main issues, is not that much different from any other major political party standing - and then having absolutely no say whatsoever in what that ‘elected’ party does while in office does not a ‘democracy’ make! THAT Is the problem with ‘democracy’ in the west is that it is all ‘fake performative politics’ and a ‘fake democracy’. It is just a dictatorship that falsely claims the ‘blessing of the voters’.
Yes, and in addition there is good reason to believe that many if not most elections are stolen. So that too reduces the legitimacy of so-called democracies.
I disagree with the premise of this essay. I maintain that we have never had a "democracy" therefore democracy did not fail. Just because the corporate actors we call leaders and oligarch-owned media tell us that our form of govt is a democracy, does not make it so. You cannot separate political power from economic power. We have a concentration of wealth among a tiny few even the monarchs did not enjoy. The conception of democracy we have is a sham, not a failure. This essay amounts to ruling class propaganda, wittingly or not.
This is a fine essay that touches on so many of the flaws that we have come to accept, perhaps unconsciously, as American citizens.
I must bring up a rather lame point at this time, however, and hope the author doesn’t mind me, inserting it in the comments here. I have grown utterly frustrated with communicating via email with my congressman and my US senators. Once upon a time you could simply open up your email and type in the representatives email address and then hit send. You then had a copy of what you wrote and could keep a thread going on a particular issue. But the politicians decided to make their lives easier and ours more difficult in this process.
In order to give input into the system one must fill out a lengthy form and then type your message in a box that doesn’t save a copy for yourself. Yes, I can copy paste and save it somewhere myself. But the whole thing strikes me as being rather convenient for them and inconvenient for us, not to mention the fact that none of the actual replies are written by the member himself. It’s all a big joke.
And we never will. All the people cannot vote, so 50%+1 of the voters will never be an actual majority of the people. Besides that, even a majority of the people does not have the right to abuse a minority of the people, not even a minority of one. Democracy, even if it could work, is inherently unjust because it's a tyranny, a tyranny of the 'majority' (which is mathematically always actually a minority).
Hoppe is right that no form of government can be just. Each of us are sovereign and cant be anything but sovereign, and no form of government can tolerate sovereigns it has no authority over. The claim to govern is the claim to superior authority, which cannot exist over a sovereign, which is what each of us actually are, whether we like it or not.
Agree in principle but I think the more accurate argument is that democracy has indeed succeeded in doing exactly what it was designed to do.
The development of democracy occurred simultaneously with the growth of private property and a class-based society. Rather than a step toward equality, this shift saw the old communal bonds break down with the state becoming the vehicle for managing these new class conflicts and protecting property.
This democracy was only "democratic" for its male citizens and was built upon, systems of slavery and exclusion that were not present in the earlier, communal gens system. The early democratic states operated as oligarchies where any meaningful civic participation was determined by wealth and elite status- same as it is today.
While not new, this argument that "democracy has failed" I have been seeing a lot in the last few years. I think it is being "seeded." Anybody paying attention knows that Western "Liberal Democracy" TM has an ongoing legitimacy crisis. In the US, with the experience of the Covid authoritarianism, we know that the ruling class would like to dispense with all the illusion of democracy. Occasionally, the ruling class has to do things in a much more roundabout way to maintain some illusion of democratic rule. If you had a fascist dictatorship, you could dispense with having to buy off politicians, coax states in to behaving like the subject class they are. It would be much more efficient for parasite class to rule us.
There has never been any "democracy". It is one of the more successful hoaxes and psyops that the freemasonic controllers and ruling bloodline class has implemented. Politicians are actors and elections are theater. Like pro wrestling matches, it's a prescripted illusion of reality. DeMOCKracy is a better term for it - since that is what they are doing - mocking us. And they do it rather well.
Very interesting comments, following this fine essay. We know the founding fathers detested the form of government known as democracy. Yet, the American system is often referred to as a democratic, constitutional, republic. We agree that the original formation was a republic and not a democracy. So when we talk about “democratic “what are we actually referring to? In my mind, democratic only refers to a procedural mechanisms that allows for the rule of law to take place. In other words, due process in all matters. Unfortunately, there is this thing called lawyers and lawyers can figure out how to redefine anything.
Democracy can only result in a minority attaining to political power, because only about half the population can vote in the first place. Kids can't vote, and a lot of other people, for various reasons, can't either. Democracy is actually a scam, because we aren't taught the real world math that makes it almost impossible for more than ~25% of the population to be considered the 'majority' in any democratic election. Democratic elections always result in a minority imposing their policies on the majority.
Government, as Hoppe points out, cannot be just, no matter what kind of government you want to discuss, from democracies to monarchies, Communist, Socialist, or Capitalist, governments all depend on a claim to higher authority over individuals than the people themselves have, which is ridiculous. Whomever a government agent is, they put their pants on one leg at a time too, and have no just claim to higher authority over themselves and others than anyone else does.
The truth is that we are all sovereign, born that way, and will die that way, whether we want to be or not. Each of us alone can will our heavy hand to rise to our weary brow and wipe away the dripping sweat of our hard labors, and no one nor nothing can will us to act. We cannot be property because property can be disposed of by the will of the owner, and we can't even transfer our will over ourselves to another if we wanted to. We are inherently, absolutely sovereign.
That makes claims of higher authority over us all false, no matter whom nor what makes such claims. All governments are crimes against humanity, incapable of being just because government is the claim to rule people that rule themselves and can't not rule themselves.
While I agree that is true, it is true because the 'ruling class' don't even trust the minority that is a majority of voters to vote the way they want them to.
Don't trust? They want control to further their personal agenda which is to rape the lower and middle class off all the money they can! Fuck this minority 1% scumbag parasite elites! This is exactly 💯 why we are where we are! Wake the fuck up!
Not sure how you misinterpreted my comment. Given your antipathy towards the 'ruling class' don't you agree they don't trust you to vote the way they want you to? Does stating that truth somehow align me with those I am telling the truth about in your mind? I completely despise the 'ruling class' right along with you. However, I know that they rig elections so they can continue to rob us without mercy. I know that voting is useless because elections are rigged.
Therefore I spend my time doing useful things to increase my autonomy and ability to defend my property against them, rather than attending to campaign rhetoric. That's also what I recommend you do. Do you think they'd let you vote if it could take away their power?
You know they would not, and so you also know voting against them is useless. Do something useful, like make stuff you need.
I believe it has failed. US founders knew it could fail. By "failing" we mean that the majority can and does get it wrong at times. Look at what happened during covid! The majority demanded that everyone get the poison injections.
Fortunately for us, the founders foresaw this possibility and wrote the Bill of Rights into the Constitution in order to give the individual some protection when the mob (democracy) gets it wrong and comes after them.
That is a great point but those are pharma fascists not democracy in action. Yes, thank God for the bill of rights unfortunately it took too long to come to justice during convid plandemic
yes, but the pharma fascists had convinced the majority that the only way out of the Plandemic was the poison injection. for everyone! Everyone must take it!
And that is an even bigger danger of democracy: The majority can be duped like that!
We could also say that the Bill of Rights failed in this case because Biden was able to implement his mandate that you must get the injection or lose your job. But actually the Bill of Rights as they were written didn't fail. The Bill of Rights should have included the right of bodily autonomy, but the founders didn't foresee a time when medical procedures would be forced onto the individual without his consent.
I was lucky to be laid off in 2019 and so I was aware of how they were calling it an emergency use experimental jab. I read up on the effects and history of mRNA on other drugs in trial that killed off the test animals. I had a suspicion it was being pushed much too hard and it stunk. There was in my mind no fucking way myself or my immediate family would allow them to inject that poisonous garbage in us. Unfortunately my warning to my siblings and their kids went unheard. Varying side effects and deaths happened. But still, these people wouldn't accept the government would allow such a thing to happen. Now we know and will the next poisonings happen to these people....hopefully not. But maybe that's their psychology 🤔 and it will.
I too was lucky in the sense that I had been into other medical systems than Western allopathic medicine (TCM and Ayurveda for example) for quite some time. I was also lucky that back in the 1980's I stumbled across a book about DMSO in the local public library. That book and the referenced research about DMSO convinced me that it was safe and it also convinced me that the FDA does not work for you and me, the FDA is not concerned about our health, the FDA is a corrupt organization and works for Pharma. Add to that the fact that they suppressed and ridiculed covid treatments like IVM, and I had a lot a reasons to be suspicious of what they were doing with covid. When I found out how the "vaccine" was going to work, that it was going to trick my own cells into producing trillions of copies of the most toxic part of the virus, my initial reaction was, these people have lost their minds, can you spell autoimmune disease. So no way was I going to submit to these injections. Turns out that causing autoimmune diseases is bad enough, but that "side effect" was one of the least problematic. The more serious ones are heart attack, stroked, turbo cancers and death!
I too tried to convince the people around me to not take the injections, but they wouldn't listen. My sister had a horrible reaction, heart and blood pressure damage, she will probably never be the same. Brother also has heart damage. Nephew has peripheral neuropathy. Sister of close friend died in her sleep after second Moderna shot. I could go on and on.
The ones who suffered "side effects" from this injection will likely not take the next one. But there are still millions of sheep who will.
People can't handle the information overload and would rather listen to a stranger psycopath like fauci for medical advice. It's a form of mass medical retardation psychosis. You and I will always now filter the stupidity.
You might want to read Lysander Spooner, whom pointed out the fact that the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, had failed long before the Civil War. The truth is that scribbles on paper don't secure rights. Free men do, and nothing else ever has.
But if it is so prone to being hijacked, how can you call that system anything but a failure? It's not like it's working well in most of the world and a few places have gone off the rails. It is working poorly in most jurisdictions.
There obviously has to be people in place that follow the guidelines and laws. If you've stacked the system(George Soros judiciary and Marxists banksters AIPAC politicians, CIA, FBI, police heads) with people who are corrupted and don't follow the laws then it doesn't matter what system you have it will fail. What do you suggest? I know whatcI suggest is follow the law and start a mass roundup. But first you have to have a non puppet Bondi in place. It's not the system, it's immoral people with no moral code of conduct.
I have been beating the drum for decentralization for more than a decade, since I first hear of 'fab labs' in the 1990s. Decentralization of the means of production has been the cutting edge of technological advance increasingly since then, and the trend continues to accelerate. This creates economic decentralization in terms of real wealth (not counterfeit fiat) because when you grow a potato, you keep it. All of it. There's no profit to a bank, vendor, or taxable event. You keep 100% of your production of the goods and services you depend on to provide to you the blessings of civilization.
While the Brrrr! of the fiat printing continues to devalue fiat, actual wealth continues to accrue in the accounts of them that merit it by making it. The 'ruling class' are obligate parasites, pinching pennies from the pockets of the public, and when you pick enough pockets you attain to lots of fiat. But when people make what they need they are keeping their hands on their wallets. As people adopt modern means of production, such as 3D printers, laser cutters, aquaponics, and mesh networked packet radios, parasites are cut off from that increasing hoard of wealth, and the economic playing field begins to level out.
We see very obviously how decentralization is impacting war, as cheap drones are defeating carrier battle groups, and now <$100 manpads are going to do the same thing to $50k drones. Decentralization so immensely impacts economic parity that very rapidly small communities and even ambitious individuals are going to become immune to standing armies. Clearly, this means war, because overlords aren't giving up their precious power without a fight.
This is why we see increasing tyranny, such as defining bodily autonomy and dissent as 'terrorism' like the UK and the entire West increasingly do, why insane levels of propaganda and silencing the truth with burgeoning censorship - as always precedes war - are devouring the liberal West at an ever faster rate. Catastrophes are always evolutionary events, as them competent to survive exigent circumstances are the gene pool left after, and them incapable of gaining rational understanding in the sea of disinformation we swim in today will not be breeding in their graves after they have succumbed to their fates they could not foresee.
Dependence on masters is slavery. Independent means is freedom, and the best definition of wealth. I have never heard of Hans-Hermann Hoppe before now, but he has well laid out what I have been gaining understanding of for the last several decades, and I very much appreciate the heads up.
Short and sweet, it's called elimination of the Rothschilds bankster fiat currency and going to a US gold backed currency. Ask JFK, Lincoln, Kadafi, Iran, Iraq how that went....
I'm all for it. We need some mobs with pitchforks and torches. In the meantime, while I'm awaiting mobs, I'm growing in a greenhouse I intend to convert to aquaponics, getting materials to build a wood gas producer so I can run the generator, and my pickup, even when gasoline shoots up to $80/gallon, and collecting stock for my 3D printer. I've got some solar panels and 400ah of batteries that are mounted in my truck so I can run power tools even if there's no shore power.
So, when supply lines are cut because banks aren't loaning businesses after the banksters have been lynched, I'll still be fine.
Decentralization YES! I have been saying for a while now that we have government upside down and backwards. Local rule should be at the top of the hierarchy of government. That is, when locals (city or county) make a decision to do this or not do that, their decision should not be able to be overruled by state or federal governments. That is the ideal. But instead, we have it set up so that the Federal government can tell the States what to do AND the Feds can tell the locals what to do AND the States can tell the locals what to do. How can you even claim you have democracy when your local area votes for one thing, but the State or the Federal government overrules your democratic decision? That is not democracy. It's tyranny.
Terminology is faulty. Democracy is mob rule. The 50+1% can impose it's will by force (tyranny) if necessary on the 50-1% and the difference between the two groups is one person. This is an extreme, but if we are talking about theory, then this is theoretically possible. However, Hoppe is correct in that no republican form of government throughout history has survived for eons. The Greeks and then the Romans had republican forms of government and both devolved into chaos or authoritarian rule after the dissolution by popular revolt against the governing body (in Rome, interestingly enough called the Senate).
Moreover, in Rome, anyway, you can buy your right to run for the Senate by paying the equivalent of $1M to the Roman Treasury. Cicero borrowed the money from his wife and with the fame of being a Senator, he paid her back and made a fortune himself. The system was corrupt from the beginning. Sounds like our system today.
In the Bible, the Hebrews had an interesting form of government, similar to what Hoppe proposed: Judges, like Samuel, Deborah (yes, even women could participate), and the most famous one, Samson. Each tribe was independent from another tribe descended from another brother, and each had their own judge (or judges - the Bible is unclear about this). The purpose of the 'head judge', like Samuel was to arbitrate disputes between tribes and to recruit men to defend common interests- and this is important- a tribe could opt out but they forfeit the spoils of the conflict.
Money was silver although barter was more likely because not everyone had silver coins lying around. They could barter crops, weapons, beasts of burden, like oxen, cattle or even slaves. I know that term is offensive in modern day language, but in the Old Testament, people could sell themselves into servitude if they were too poor to purchase land for crops. There was a time limit, I believe seven years for such servitude and manumission could include some form of compensation, usually by contract. The Romans had a similar system and the term was ten years. So while it is true that the Africans or Irish brought to this country were forced, the Africans were usually spoils of war from a neighboring tribe, not all forms of slavery were involuntary.
Each tribe formed an independent sovereign unit with a local economy and its own rules regarding the poor, anti-social behavior (crime) and compensation for the judge(s). Such a unit can work in modern days, if the unit is small enough so each person matters. A city or in rural areas a county can function as an independent unit capable of engaging in commerce within the unit or with other neighboring units. While a judge can work, councils may work better because a council can handle bigger groups of units (an 'alliance' or 'trading partners'). And these councils can negotiate disputes within the unit or with an outside group of units.
While we all got used to the nanny state, on display for everyone to see is the end result of the nanny state. We can blame illegals for all these problems, but we also allowed it to happen. I am of the opinion that had we had a more Biblical version of a social unit the nanny state would not have gotten out of control. It is fine to help the less fortunate from public funds, but the governing unit which has the power of the purse is too far removed. Property taxes may be a big deal, but what if we in the community have 100% control over such revenue? No mandates from the state or federal government over whom to hire, zoning requirements that are irrelevant to the community's existence. People who feel like they have a say in their destiny will be more generous, especially if the community is aligned with a divine source, that we call God.
The Old Testament is religious propaganda written by the Jews for the Jews. All non-Jews are Goyim {cattle} which is demonstrated by the treatment of the Palestinians by the Asiatic Turkic Mongol Khazar Jews who occupy Palestine. Find the following in the Old Testament:"Hear the word of the Lord O children of Israel, for the Lord has a case against the people of that land:"There is no truth, no loving devotion and no knowledge of God in the land! Cursing and lying, murder and stealing and adultery are rampant; one act of bloodshed follows another." So much for the Jews being God's Chosen People.
So-called democracy only serves those that control currency flow. It is an entirely fraudulent premise that unfortunately fools most who believe that registration to vote means they can make a difference.
There are no votes for the citizen is property of the author and publishers they control elections and who appears to speak or lead.
Do you honestly believe voting means change! … please wake up.
This is a very basic argument … one that democracy brings in all the wrong incentives for government to act with a view to only present time gain, not long term stability or development.
It goes against everything we have been taught, that democracy brings progress and safety for the populace. Something to absorb and meditate about.
It also brings to mind the work of Michel Bauwens and the P2P Foundation, proposing a decentralised future, where government loses much of its predominance in favour of individual responsibility and a society based on direct P2P interaction.
Democracy was never intended to empower the people. It's history dates back to the Greeks and its founding principles were to create elite and quite controlled social and political arrangements.
The understanding of the "State" as growing directly out of the "Police" and the army, and intended for no other purpose than to enforce property dates back much, much farther. The original organization of Athens is based on military districts which not only yield a fixed quota of troops but also revenues to fund mounted archers who are slaves - the first police force. The rule of the
demos, i.e. "democracy", grows directly from this.
The innovation here, is not the "fairness" of the Athenian democracy. In fact it is a huge step backward from the Greek Tribes which were based on consensus and one vote for each adult. In place of that, the "Democracy" recognizes only one out of every 32 people as citizens. It's key is
not its incorporation of the people (except for those formally so defined), but in its organization of the state, and through it, the guarantee of personal property, most importantly in slaves.
This is yet another example of a thing we see through a thick fog, whereas those who came before us had a much clearer view.
Twenty five hundred years after inception of democracy, we still do not understand that we were ruled by Pentacosiomedimni, Solon's aristocracy who could generate 500 bushels of goods annually. Nothing has changed in the meantime, even the measure of wealth remains the
But, it has. Automation has arisen, and modern means of production advance technologically fastest and furthest in decentralization. This is a massive change in the ability to generate goods, and economic power.
So maybe we get a NWO with Gates or muskrat as the new monarch (or human God). Maybe A/i becomes the new king. No doubt that democratic government is no better than enslavement for the citizen.
Money is not government money, it is private money issued by the private central banks which are largely Rothschild controlled. The money in England is made of plastic, except the coinage.
The other failure was one of a spiritual and moral nature. People cannot handle freedom if there are no guard rails. Those guard rails come in one of two forms: internal (self control and self restraint) or external (force). Social structures can’t exceed the moral and spiritual center of mass of the society they purpose to structure.
Your claptrap here about spirituality and mortality has no place in any meaningful political discussion. You are making a quasi-religious argument and additionally are using one of the most insidious tropes that the ruling class tries to shove down everyone's throats- "people can't handle freedom" or "people are too evil" or "people are too dumb" or whatever garbage you want to insert there.
You also get it absolutely backwards on how social structures are formed- and developed.
I'm saying it is working consistently with why and how it was developed which is quite different then people's understanding of its history. Democracy was always "rule by the elites."
But here I was actually addressing the multiple absurdities in your comment.
Feminism is the biggest psy op of all time. It wouldn’t have deceived so very many if the many had been more wise/awake/enlightened/moral. The constitution can only work for, and was designed, for a moral people.
A vote every five years or so to elect a political party - that, on the main issues, is not that much different from any other major political party standing - and then having absolutely no say whatsoever in what that ‘elected’ party does while in office does not a ‘democracy’ make! THAT Is the problem with ‘democracy’ in the west is that it is all ‘fake performative politics’ and a ‘fake democracy’. It is just a dictatorship that falsely claims the ‘blessing of the voters’.
Yes, and in addition there is good reason to believe that many if not most elections are stolen. So that too reduces the legitimacy of so-called democracies.
I’m inclined to agree with that. One, the Independence Referendum in Scotland in 2014 and also, more recently, the Hungarian election.
I disagree with the premise of this essay. I maintain that we have never had a "democracy" therefore democracy did not fail. Just because the corporate actors we call leaders and oligarch-owned media tell us that our form of govt is a democracy, does not make it so. You cannot separate political power from economic power. We have a concentration of wealth among a tiny few even the monarchs did not enjoy. The conception of democracy we have is a sham, not a failure. This essay amounts to ruling class propaganda, wittingly or not.
This is a fine essay that touches on so many of the flaws that we have come to accept, perhaps unconsciously, as American citizens.
I must bring up a rather lame point at this time, however, and hope the author doesn’t mind me, inserting it in the comments here. I have grown utterly frustrated with communicating via email with my congressman and my US senators. Once upon a time you could simply open up your email and type in the representatives email address and then hit send. You then had a copy of what you wrote and could keep a thread going on a particular issue. But the politicians decided to make their lives easier and ours more difficult in this process.
In order to give input into the system one must fill out a lengthy form and then type your message in a box that doesn’t save a copy for yourself. Yes, I can copy paste and save it somewhere myself. But the whole thing strikes me as being rather convenient for them and inconvenient for us, not to mention the fact that none of the actual replies are written by the member himself. It’s all a big joke.
"...we have never had a "democracy"..."
And we never will. All the people cannot vote, so 50%+1 of the voters will never be an actual majority of the people. Besides that, even a majority of the people does not have the right to abuse a minority of the people, not even a minority of one. Democracy, even if it could work, is inherently unjust because it's a tyranny, a tyranny of the 'majority' (which is mathematically always actually a minority).
Hoppe is right that no form of government can be just. Each of us are sovereign and cant be anything but sovereign, and no form of government can tolerate sovereigns it has no authority over. The claim to govern is the claim to superior authority, which cannot exist over a sovereign, which is what each of us actually are, whether we like it or not.
Agree in principle but I think the more accurate argument is that democracy has indeed succeeded in doing exactly what it was designed to do.
The development of democracy occurred simultaneously with the growth of private property and a class-based society. Rather than a step toward equality, this shift saw the old communal bonds break down with the state becoming the vehicle for managing these new class conflicts and protecting property.
This democracy was only "democratic" for its male citizens and was built upon, systems of slavery and exclusion that were not present in the earlier, communal gens system. The early democratic states operated as oligarchies where any meaningful civic participation was determined by wealth and elite status- same as it is today.
See my post above.
Then the misrepresentation is that that the demos represents the entire adult population. It only represents a tiny fraction, less than 1%.
While not new, this argument that "democracy has failed" I have been seeing a lot in the last few years. I think it is being "seeded." Anybody paying attention knows that Western "Liberal Democracy" TM has an ongoing legitimacy crisis. In the US, with the experience of the Covid authoritarianism, we know that the ruling class would like to dispense with all the illusion of democracy. Occasionally, the ruling class has to do things in a much more roundabout way to maintain some illusion of democratic rule. If you had a fascist dictatorship, you could dispense with having to buy off politicians, coax states in to behaving like the subject class they are. It would be much more efficient for parasite class to rule us.
Thank you for summarizing a key theory by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels.
There has never been any "democracy". It is one of the more successful hoaxes and psyops that the freemasonic controllers and ruling bloodline class has implemented. Politicians are actors and elections are theater. Like pro wrestling matches, it's a prescripted illusion of reality. DeMOCKracy is a better term for it - since that is what they are doing - mocking us. And they do it rather well.
Very interesting comments, following this fine essay. We know the founding fathers detested the form of government known as democracy. Yet, the American system is often referred to as a democratic, constitutional, republic. We agree that the original formation was a republic and not a democracy. So when we talk about “democratic “what are we actually referring to? In my mind, democratic only refers to a procedural mechanisms that allows for the rule of law to take place. In other words, due process in all matters. Unfortunately, there is this thing called lawyers and lawyers can figure out how to redefine anything.
Democracy hasn't failed. Those so called elites scumbags high jacked it , manipulated it for their benefit and enrichment to enslave the peons.
Democracy can only result in a minority attaining to political power, because only about half the population can vote in the first place. Kids can't vote, and a lot of other people, for various reasons, can't either. Democracy is actually a scam, because we aren't taught the real world math that makes it almost impossible for more than ~25% of the population to be considered the 'majority' in any democratic election. Democratic elections always result in a minority imposing their policies on the majority.
Government, as Hoppe points out, cannot be just, no matter what kind of government you want to discuss, from democracies to monarchies, Communist, Socialist, or Capitalist, governments all depend on a claim to higher authority over individuals than the people themselves have, which is ridiculous. Whomever a government agent is, they put their pants on one leg at a time too, and have no just claim to higher authority over themselves and others than anyone else does.
The truth is that we are all sovereign, born that way, and will die that way, whether we want to be or not. Each of us alone can will our heavy hand to rise to our weary brow and wipe away the dripping sweat of our hard labors, and no one nor nothing can will us to act. We cannot be property because property can be disposed of by the will of the owner, and we can't even transfer our will over ourselves to another if we wanted to. We are inherently, absolutely sovereign.
That makes claims of higher authority over us all false, no matter whom nor what makes such claims. All governments are crimes against humanity, incapable of being just because government is the claim to rule people that rule themselves and can't not rule themselves.
Problem with this semidemocracy is the leaders are pre choosen before you or I get to vote.
While I agree that is true, it is true because the 'ruling class' don't even trust the minority that is a majority of voters to vote the way they want them to.
https://youtu.be/g_asWt49ByY?si=IBRwq_x97G3zbNpK
Don't trust? They want control to further their personal agenda which is to rape the lower and middle class off all the money they can! Fuck this minority 1% scumbag parasite elites! This is exactly 💯 why we are where we are! Wake the fuck up!
Not sure how you misinterpreted my comment. Given your antipathy towards the 'ruling class' don't you agree they don't trust you to vote the way they want you to? Does stating that truth somehow align me with those I am telling the truth about in your mind? I completely despise the 'ruling class' right along with you. However, I know that they rig elections so they can continue to rob us without mercy. I know that voting is useless because elections are rigged.
Therefore I spend my time doing useful things to increase my autonomy and ability to defend my property against them, rather than attending to campaign rhetoric. That's also what I recommend you do. Do you think they'd let you vote if it could take away their power?
You know they would not, and so you also know voting against them is useless. Do something useful, like make stuff you need.
Fuck them and their parasitic lives. https://youtu.be/l00jrRayyzY?si=wbf7d8YUmh34TPPA
I believe it has failed. US founders knew it could fail. By "failing" we mean that the majority can and does get it wrong at times. Look at what happened during covid! The majority demanded that everyone get the poison injections.
Fortunately for us, the founders foresaw this possibility and wrote the Bill of Rights into the Constitution in order to give the individual some protection when the mob (democracy) gets it wrong and comes after them.
That is a great point but those are pharma fascists not democracy in action. Yes, thank God for the bill of rights unfortunately it took too long to come to justice during convid plandemic
yes, but the pharma fascists had convinced the majority that the only way out of the Plandemic was the poison injection. for everyone! Everyone must take it!
And that is an even bigger danger of democracy: The majority can be duped like that!
We could also say that the Bill of Rights failed in this case because Biden was able to implement his mandate that you must get the injection or lose your job. But actually the Bill of Rights as they were written didn't fail. The Bill of Rights should have included the right of bodily autonomy, but the founders didn't foresee a time when medical procedures would be forced onto the individual without his consent.
I was lucky to be laid off in 2019 and so I was aware of how they were calling it an emergency use experimental jab. I read up on the effects and history of mRNA on other drugs in trial that killed off the test animals. I had a suspicion it was being pushed much too hard and it stunk. There was in my mind no fucking way myself or my immediate family would allow them to inject that poisonous garbage in us. Unfortunately my warning to my siblings and their kids went unheard. Varying side effects and deaths happened. But still, these people wouldn't accept the government would allow such a thing to happen. Now we know and will the next poisonings happen to these people....hopefully not. But maybe that's their psychology 🤔 and it will.
I too was lucky in the sense that I had been into other medical systems than Western allopathic medicine (TCM and Ayurveda for example) for quite some time. I was also lucky that back in the 1980's I stumbled across a book about DMSO in the local public library. That book and the referenced research about DMSO convinced me that it was safe and it also convinced me that the FDA does not work for you and me, the FDA is not concerned about our health, the FDA is a corrupt organization and works for Pharma. Add to that the fact that they suppressed and ridiculed covid treatments like IVM, and I had a lot a reasons to be suspicious of what they were doing with covid. When I found out how the "vaccine" was going to work, that it was going to trick my own cells into producing trillions of copies of the most toxic part of the virus, my initial reaction was, these people have lost their minds, can you spell autoimmune disease. So no way was I going to submit to these injections. Turns out that causing autoimmune diseases is bad enough, but that "side effect" was one of the least problematic. The more serious ones are heart attack, stroked, turbo cancers and death!
I too tried to convince the people around me to not take the injections, but they wouldn't listen. My sister had a horrible reaction, heart and blood pressure damage, she will probably never be the same. Brother also has heart damage. Nephew has peripheral neuropathy. Sister of close friend died in her sleep after second Moderna shot. I could go on and on.
The ones who suffered "side effects" from this injection will likely not take the next one. But there are still millions of sheep who will.
People can't handle the information overload and would rather listen to a stranger psycopath like fauci for medical advice. It's a form of mass medical retardation psychosis. You and I will always now filter the stupidity.
You might want to read Lysander Spooner, whom pointed out the fact that the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights, had failed long before the Civil War. The truth is that scribbles on paper don't secure rights. Free men do, and nothing else ever has.
But if it is so prone to being hijacked, how can you call that system anything but a failure? It's not like it's working well in most of the world and a few places have gone off the rails. It is working poorly in most jurisdictions.
The justice system and politicians were the failures because they were/are compromised individuals who are paid off puppets or framed .
True, but aren't the justice system and politicians part and parcel of the democratic system? I don't see how you can really separate them.
https://youtu.be/g_asWt49ByY?si=IBRwq_x97G3zbNpK
There obviously has to be people in place that follow the guidelines and laws. If you've stacked the system(George Soros judiciary and Marxists banksters AIPAC politicians, CIA, FBI, police heads) with people who are corrupted and don't follow the laws then it doesn't matter what system you have it will fail. What do you suggest? I know whatcI suggest is follow the law and start a mass roundup. But first you have to have a non puppet Bondi in place. It's not the system, it's immoral people with no moral code of conduct.
I have been beating the drum for decentralization for more than a decade, since I first hear of 'fab labs' in the 1990s. Decentralization of the means of production has been the cutting edge of technological advance increasingly since then, and the trend continues to accelerate. This creates economic decentralization in terms of real wealth (not counterfeit fiat) because when you grow a potato, you keep it. All of it. There's no profit to a bank, vendor, or taxable event. You keep 100% of your production of the goods and services you depend on to provide to you the blessings of civilization.
While the Brrrr! of the fiat printing continues to devalue fiat, actual wealth continues to accrue in the accounts of them that merit it by making it. The 'ruling class' are obligate parasites, pinching pennies from the pockets of the public, and when you pick enough pockets you attain to lots of fiat. But when people make what they need they are keeping their hands on their wallets. As people adopt modern means of production, such as 3D printers, laser cutters, aquaponics, and mesh networked packet radios, parasites are cut off from that increasing hoard of wealth, and the economic playing field begins to level out.
We see very obviously how decentralization is impacting war, as cheap drones are defeating carrier battle groups, and now <$100 manpads are going to do the same thing to $50k drones. Decentralization so immensely impacts economic parity that very rapidly small communities and even ambitious individuals are going to become immune to standing armies. Clearly, this means war, because overlords aren't giving up their precious power without a fight.
This is why we see increasing tyranny, such as defining bodily autonomy and dissent as 'terrorism' like the UK and the entire West increasingly do, why insane levels of propaganda and silencing the truth with burgeoning censorship - as always precedes war - are devouring the liberal West at an ever faster rate. Catastrophes are always evolutionary events, as them competent to survive exigent circumstances are the gene pool left after, and them incapable of gaining rational understanding in the sea of disinformation we swim in today will not be breeding in their graves after they have succumbed to their fates they could not foresee.
Dependence on masters is slavery. Independent means is freedom, and the best definition of wealth. I have never heard of Hans-Hermann Hoppe before now, but he has well laid out what I have been gaining understanding of for the last several decades, and I very much appreciate the heads up.
Thanks!
Short and sweet, it's called elimination of the Rothschilds bankster fiat currency and going to a US gold backed currency. Ask JFK, Lincoln, Kadafi, Iran, Iraq how that went....
I'm all for it. We need some mobs with pitchforks and torches. In the meantime, while I'm awaiting mobs, I'm growing in a greenhouse I intend to convert to aquaponics, getting materials to build a wood gas producer so I can run the generator, and my pickup, even when gasoline shoots up to $80/gallon, and collecting stock for my 3D printer. I've got some solar panels and 400ah of batteries that are mounted in my truck so I can run power tools even if there's no shore power.
So, when supply lines are cut because banks aren't loaning businesses after the banksters have been lynched, I'll still be fine.
😎
Decentralization YES! I have been saying for a while now that we have government upside down and backwards. Local rule should be at the top of the hierarchy of government. That is, when locals (city or county) make a decision to do this or not do that, their decision should not be able to be overruled by state or federal governments. That is the ideal. But instead, we have it set up so that the Federal government can tell the States what to do AND the Feds can tell the locals what to do AND the States can tell the locals what to do. How can you even claim you have democracy when your local area votes for one thing, but the State or the Federal government overrules your democratic decision? That is not democracy. It's tyranny.
Terminology is faulty. Democracy is mob rule. The 50+1% can impose it's will by force (tyranny) if necessary on the 50-1% and the difference between the two groups is one person. This is an extreme, but if we are talking about theory, then this is theoretically possible. However, Hoppe is correct in that no republican form of government throughout history has survived for eons. The Greeks and then the Romans had republican forms of government and both devolved into chaos or authoritarian rule after the dissolution by popular revolt against the governing body (in Rome, interestingly enough called the Senate).
Moreover, in Rome, anyway, you can buy your right to run for the Senate by paying the equivalent of $1M to the Roman Treasury. Cicero borrowed the money from his wife and with the fame of being a Senator, he paid her back and made a fortune himself. The system was corrupt from the beginning. Sounds like our system today.
In the Bible, the Hebrews had an interesting form of government, similar to what Hoppe proposed: Judges, like Samuel, Deborah (yes, even women could participate), and the most famous one, Samson. Each tribe was independent from another tribe descended from another brother, and each had their own judge (or judges - the Bible is unclear about this). The purpose of the 'head judge', like Samuel was to arbitrate disputes between tribes and to recruit men to defend common interests- and this is important- a tribe could opt out but they forfeit the spoils of the conflict.
Money was silver although barter was more likely because not everyone had silver coins lying around. They could barter crops, weapons, beasts of burden, like oxen, cattle or even slaves. I know that term is offensive in modern day language, but in the Old Testament, people could sell themselves into servitude if they were too poor to purchase land for crops. There was a time limit, I believe seven years for such servitude and manumission could include some form of compensation, usually by contract. The Romans had a similar system and the term was ten years. So while it is true that the Africans or Irish brought to this country were forced, the Africans were usually spoils of war from a neighboring tribe, not all forms of slavery were involuntary.
Each tribe formed an independent sovereign unit with a local economy and its own rules regarding the poor, anti-social behavior (crime) and compensation for the judge(s). Such a unit can work in modern days, if the unit is small enough so each person matters. A city or in rural areas a county can function as an independent unit capable of engaging in commerce within the unit or with other neighboring units. While a judge can work, councils may work better because a council can handle bigger groups of units (an 'alliance' or 'trading partners'). And these councils can negotiate disputes within the unit or with an outside group of units.
While we all got used to the nanny state, on display for everyone to see is the end result of the nanny state. We can blame illegals for all these problems, but we also allowed it to happen. I am of the opinion that had we had a more Biblical version of a social unit the nanny state would not have gotten out of control. It is fine to help the less fortunate from public funds, but the governing unit which has the power of the purse is too far removed. Property taxes may be a big deal, but what if we in the community have 100% control over such revenue? No mandates from the state or federal government over whom to hire, zoning requirements that are irrelevant to the community's existence. People who feel like they have a say in their destiny will be more generous, especially if the community is aligned with a divine source, that we call God.
The Old Testament is religious propaganda written by the Jews for the Jews. All non-Jews are Goyim {cattle} which is demonstrated by the treatment of the Palestinians by the Asiatic Turkic Mongol Khazar Jews who occupy Palestine. Find the following in the Old Testament:"Hear the word of the Lord O children of Israel, for the Lord has a case against the people of that land:"There is no truth, no loving devotion and no knowledge of God in the land! Cursing and lying, murder and stealing and adultery are rampant; one act of bloodshed follows another." So much for the Jews being God's Chosen People.
So-called democracy only serves those that control currency flow. It is an entirely fraudulent premise that unfortunately fools most who believe that registration to vote means they can make a difference.
There are no votes for the citizen is property of the author and publishers they control elections and who appears to speak or lead.
Do you honestly believe voting means change! … please wake up.
This is a very basic argument … one that democracy brings in all the wrong incentives for government to act with a view to only present time gain, not long term stability or development.
It goes against everything we have been taught, that democracy brings progress and safety for the populace. Something to absorb and meditate about.
It also brings to mind the work of Michel Bauwens and the P2P Foundation, proposing a decentralised future, where government loses much of its predominance in favour of individual responsibility and a society based on direct P2P interaction.
Democracy was never intended to empower the people. It's history dates back to the Greeks and its founding principles were to create elite and quite controlled social and political arrangements.
The understanding of the "State" as growing directly out of the "Police" and the army, and intended for no other purpose than to enforce property dates back much, much farther. The original organization of Athens is based on military districts which not only yield a fixed quota of troops but also revenues to fund mounted archers who are slaves - the first police force. The rule of the
demos, i.e. "democracy", grows directly from this.
The innovation here, is not the "fairness" of the Athenian democracy. In fact it is a huge step backward from the Greek Tribes which were based on consensus and one vote for each adult. In place of that, the "Democracy" recognizes only one out of every 32 people as citizens. It's key is
not its incorporation of the people (except for those formally so defined), but in its organization of the state, and through it, the guarantee of personal property, most importantly in slaves.
This is yet another example of a thing we see through a thick fog, whereas those who came before us had a much clearer view.
Twenty five hundred years after inception of democracy, we still do not understand that we were ruled by Pentacosiomedimni, Solon's aristocracy who could generate 500 bushels of goods annually. Nothing has changed in the meantime, even the measure of wealth remains the
same: bushels and barrels.
"...Nothing has changed..."
But, it has. Automation has arisen, and modern means of production advance technologically fastest and furthest in decentralization. This is a massive change in the ability to generate goods, and economic power.
You are correct.
Just wondering... how does the all-powerful City of London fit into the theory of small city states? Is it the epitome of the successful city state?
Let not forget about usury.
So maybe we get a NWO with Gates or muskrat as the new monarch (or human God). Maybe A/i becomes the new king. No doubt that democratic government is no better than enslavement for the citizen.
Money is not government money, it is private money issued by the private central banks which are largely Rothschild controlled. The money in England is made of plastic, except the coinage.
The other failure was one of a spiritual and moral nature. People cannot handle freedom if there are no guard rails. Those guard rails come in one of two forms: internal (self control and self restraint) or external (force). Social structures can’t exceed the moral and spiritual center of mass of the society they purpose to structure.
The constitution can’t work if there is no moral consensus of a people. Period.
Nonsense.
Your claptrap here about spirituality and mortality has no place in any meaningful political discussion. You are making a quasi-religious argument and additionally are using one of the most insidious tropes that the ruling class tries to shove down everyone's throats- "people can't handle freedom" or "people are too evil" or "people are too dumb" or whatever garbage you want to insert there.
You also get it absolutely backwards on how social structures are formed- and developed.
So you’re saying it’s working great so far?
See my above post.
I'm saying it is working consistently with why and how it was developed which is quite different then people's understanding of its history. Democracy was always "rule by the elites."
But here I was actually addressing the multiple absurdities in your comment.
Feminism is the biggest psy op of all time. It wouldn’t have deceived so very many if the many had been more wise/awake/enlightened/moral. The constitution can only work for, and was designed, for a moral people.
So you think that everything will work out fine if everyone engages in unpleasant, antisocial behavior such as you exhibit?
Your reading comprehension and analytical skills are atrocious. Your history is worse.
Adios.
Are you having an emotional reaction or disputing the facts? Ad hominem attacks aren’t facts. Stick to the facts.