I still need to get back into the groove of continuing to read the rest of your book, but this was a phenomenal way to start. I wasn't sure what to expect going in, but I wasn't counting on my understanding of the historical progression of human liberty to be outright shattered. Which revealed to me how little I ever really questioned it. I'm still processing what I've learned reading so far, and trying to integrate my new understanding is taking time.
Regarding the questions:
All-else-being-equal I would argue the form of government matters a great deal more than the size, it's really easy to nit-pick size when the goal is to micro-manage society. If good models can scale well, great! If they can't well why not still use them where they're best?
"Is the US a capitocracy? How does money determine power?"
I definitely don't understand the higher levels of finance. The more I peer into how the "upper levels" of power operate, the more clear it is that money "is no object" at those levels. What's confusing is that it does seem to still matter at that level in ways I can't quite figure out.
It's taken me some time to absorb the concept of money itself being a tool to legitimize and institutionalize oppression. I used to believe this was exclusively an attribute of debt-based currencies, but I see your arguments that these weapons of financial manipulation can create profound imbalances in power.
Later in the book you outline how even "hard" currencies were manipulated in US history, and the competing economic models that existed in those times. It has certainly raised a lot of questions in my mind about if there is a way to properly separate currency from slavery, which I deduce is covered more in later sections.
It's fascinating to me, because I had often wondered if the real failing of the "p2p digital currency" space was failing to automate mutual credit, instead of "minting" digital assets. Your model as I understand it, goes further by backing said system with tangible assets...
I think there's a lot more to what you bring up than what someone would take at face value. I recognize that it's difficult for me to incorporate the radical paradigm updates which very much seems to be in the way of almost any interesting or novel endeavor.
I really look forward to further reading, and hopefully soon finishing your book!
I am, as always, grateful for your insight and perception, Gabe. "I wasn't counting on my understanding of the historical progression of human liberty to be outright shattered." Yay! Mission accomplished!
I see your point about form mattering more than size, but I'd been thinking along different lines. I could see a neighborhood deciding they wanted a socialist form of government, particularly in food distribution, perhaps. A commonwealth might want a strict accounting of exchange, capitalist perhaps. A third might insist on direct democracy, where they vote on every decision. A fourth could have representative democracy. And a fifth and sixth might be savvy enough to give fascism and national socialism a whirl--rescuing them from the propaganda and going back to their principles. At this level, it's very fluid and if one doesn't work out, you can try another. The larger levels seem too big to fail, meaning they will.
However, after I originally posed that question in my book, I've decided that it's better to steer clear of any type of government and keep it clear that this is 'only' an economy. By setting the rules that the distribution has to be equal, it protects it from being need-based or salaries--from which it could never return once dedicated that way. And there is no larger static bodies of governance because each commonwealth and village is unique to the hamlet, being the hamlet and all its surrounding hamlets, or the village and all its surrounding villages. So there's no way to seize control from above. Although these are the questions I look forward to hashing out with a like-purposed group.
You ask the key question of my book, about a way to separate currency from slavery. I don't think that's a question anyone else is asking. I'll put that into my Bitcoin vs. the Caret episode.
With a p2p digital currency or any trade currency, you start out with the problem of the initial distribution. If you start out with only some people owning the currency, it's not trade but another form of extraction. For trade, everyone needs to start with an equal amount. So it only works within a small enough community that they're dealing with the same cost of living. The distribution parallels that cost of living because it's initiated by the mortgages.
This gets a little complicated but what reinforces that starting point is the equal distribution as bank capital of the Social Security Trust Fund, at approximately $9000 per person. Banks can issue 10X their capital reserves and 10X their deposits (both must be met) in loans. So it sets a limit on lending, giving parity. A place like my Appalachian home that has little money in circulation doesn't want to lend more than can be repaid, so a 20% downpayment would make sure the value of the home isn't underwater of the mortgage. I'd also set the same for Santa Cruz refi's. But a high cost of living place like SC will build up its reserves and deposits faster, enabling it to lend over the standard $90K per person while bringing the cost of housing down.
Thanks for engaging, Gabe! It's such a pleasure to talk with someone math-minded who's interesting in the details!
This all reminds me that the greatest tool we have to assist us in sovereignty from outside rule is when we decide (realize) we don't require outside rule.
There are no victims or perpetrators other than those who choose it.
I woke this morning thinking that the three big lies are: 1) democracy is self-governance 2) money is trade and 3) the god of the bible is good. These three lies, once we accept them into our minds, put us on the side of the empire. It's all the oligarchs need to do to control us. And while we can't change the power structures of politics, economics and religion, we each own our minds. We have complete power to change them. It's the first thing we need to do and maybe the only thing.
Well you may notice that you are the first comment I was able to 'like' so far. I find that undoing and challenging these lies requires a lot of patience and compassion. For me, it's taken 20 years of 30 hrs of research and writing a week to get where I am. I'm sure that if I tried to explain to Tucker how he's fallen for these lies, his response would be "NO! SHUT UP!" Last I looked, he still was a believer in democracy, money and the bible.
So I welcome the opportunity to engage, as long as it's on ideas and not trading insults--something of course, that isn't in either of our natures.
Re: Tucker - I think he is representative of a whole group of people alive today that have gotten the message... they just aren't quite sure how to translate it yet.
Many of them resort to going backwards into fundamentalism, such as him.
I think if we can softly direct them through example, they will come along.
They know what they're feeling. They just aren't sure what to do with it yet.
This is why we don't want to alienate the ones who are reverting back to religion of sorts. It's all they know that can explain their feelings. And it's the closest thing to a spiritual awakening that their constructs will allow them.
Tucker is what I refer to as a "Leader Personality." However, the label is misleading as they aren't really leading. They must be gently led to discover the truth themselves. That's where we come in.
'Leader Personality' is like calling one person the Christ. It deprives all the rest of us from that empowerment. I think the Christ is one who sees the Christ in others. If I were to say people are stupid for their beliefs, I'd be contradicting that. Yet if I don't point out where I think they're mistaken, I'm disrespecting them--because I secretly think they're too stupid to see it--along with those who are demeaned by that belief.
The ideas of leaders need to be challenged most of all because otherwise we're being led by a charismatic personality. I don't follow Tucker and I certainly applaud him talking with Putin, for instance. The most attention I paid to him was during the Project Veritas fiasco, which I described as:
"Pfizer-goes-on-a-first-date. The science presented by Project Veritas is nonsense, requiring zoos full of monkeys to be infected and pass around viruses until they mutate naturally. No one with any sense, much less a background in virology, would fall for it. And even if you did, the caricature of a woke post-pubescent Pfizer VP and the Three Stooges fight scene over the computer should have tipped you off. So it’s the flim-flam scam of psy-op tricks like this." https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/phony-maloney-and-wikispooks.
In another I write, "The Project Veritas 'gotcha' combined scientific nonsense with journalistic playacting and anti-woke dog whistles, while casting Robert Malone as the spokesperson for the dissent. ... Robert Malone and Steve Kirsch [are first] on a conference video talking about the PV video and what a great job it did in exposing what goes on with the revolving door between pharma and regulatory agencies. They see this as a turning point and Kirsch is starting a superPAC to elect Robert F. Kennedy for President. But Malone has to go to his next interview with Tucker Carlson. There he talks about how this Pfizer exec has no morals and this is the kind of person in high level positions responding to a virus that has killed millions. Not remdesevir. Not ventilators and lack of early treatment. Not lockdowns. The Virus.
"Tucker then shows the second video where the second PV reporter comes out of the back holding the computer with the only copy of the incriminating interview and confronts ‘Jordan,’ who says he was who says he was just trying to impress his date. He calls the police saying “There are too many white people around, I don’t feel safe.” A skirmish ensues where they wrestle over the computer, which scuttles from one person to another, and ‘Jordan,’ in the last scene, hurls himself in front of vans that might have the goods.
"That’s how most undercover operations go, right, where you do the big ‘gotcha’ at the end to see what the reaction is? It works well with the Mafia. And let us count the anti-woke dog whistles: 1) he’s gay, 2) he’s a person of color who clearly did not get his position on his qualifications and professionalism, and 3) ‘there’s too many white people, I don’t feel safe’? REALLY? This is a ham-handed script and at this point, we know beyond a doubt that it’s all staged and PV is in on it, along with Malone. For Kirsch and Tucker, they’re either gullible or part of the con, you choose." https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/is-malone-the-zelensky-of-the-covid.
This all got swept under the rug when it didn't go as planned, but Tucker is front and center in this psyop. That makes me take him with a shaker of salt.
You're misinterpreting what I mean by the term "leader personality." I left a link below that explains better than me. I'm not using it in the traditional sense.
I never paid any attention to Tucker until he left Fox. That said, even 2 or 3 years ago is a long time ago by today's standards.
I don't think we forget what we know or have seen, but I've seen real change in less time in people. I'm not defending him. But I think I'm a pretty good judge of what I hear now from someone.
He's a nut - but has his hand on something big, he just doesn't know what it is yet. It's that neuro-divergence that is his saving grace.
Things are moving quickly. We don't want to get in our own way by holding to the past. Caution is called for. But not conclusion. Not that you are.
And once they get on board, there is no stopping that train. That's why we are seeing such an influx of neo-diverse voices like him and Elon moving into the landscape.
I am enjoying these chapters. I look forward to a near future ( it is hoped) when some people would enthusiastically try out your model in a local decentralized economy. I say enthusiastically not because all experimenters are fully on board from the start but because they have the wisdom to see it's potential as a foundation even if some modifications were necessary.
Your contributions are important. I am glad there are people here who see this. Thank you for your world service.
Thank you, Chris. I see the next five years as a time of planning and modeling, and there are some fun projects in the works along those lines. My focus is on system change, so it's not a plan that can be implemented piecemeal. The power to create money out of thin air has to be withdrawn from the private banks, otherwise they own the houses for free and we all work for them. But I do think it's a change that could happen quickly if we know what we want. The next five years to their Agenda 2030 will be key.
It makes me happy that you're enjoying them. Thanks for letting me know!
I am finding that depending on how much change someone is willing to accept (and most don't seem to even explore that within themselves ) determines the kind of support or resistance one will get when offering a new way forward.
Some that appear to be on board for change begin to push back at a certain point:
>some want everyone on board because in a 'war' the truth and deep discussion are less important than short term momentum in toppling over the 'opposition' (discussion as a tactical maneuver instead of for clarity and long term social cohesion- social conservatives did this first, coming more from their survival brains and now it pervades all sides and all media...importantly, this social media 'winning the battle ' has taken over much of the progressive sphere as well to our collective detriment)
>others not in war/winner-take-all -mode value the connection and clarity as being more important
>some think everyone is on the same page about systemic change until they realize it also involves systemic collapse....and just how far does that go? (I reassure people here that we are fortunate to have basic infrastructure and so we don't have to revert to tin roofs, open sewers and out houses.)
>the point being people claim to be arguing over a particular detail of a new idea or system but are unconsciously (except for the tens of thousands online whose actual job it is to sustain social fragmentation) afraid of change that crosses whatever internal lines they have vis a vis safety and stability. They'll say "you are crazy!" or "wrong" or "naive" but really they don't want too much change and believe smaller changes would suffice. To them, these smaller changes are big so they think we are talking the same language about big changes.
I like that you ask to clarify terms when discussing and are reasonably thick skinned. Most people, including apparent allies, are often not deeply aware of what they are doing/saying so it's best to let go quickly and stay on course with where you are pointing.
I take thick-skinned as a compliment, thank you for noticing! Yes, someone has to intend to offend me before I take offense, and often I still don't get it ;-)
I start with measurable, tangible goals: increasing the self-reliance of a community, increasing home ownership, small local businesses, small local landlords, families living close by, people living where they work and working where they live. If someone can accomplish those goals without changing who creates the money and owns the houses, I'm all ears.
I don't know if it would require system collapse. I think it could be triggered by a bank failure where they do a 'haircut' and take a percent of all deposits. That would let people know that your money isn't being stored by the banks, you've bought 'shares' that can never go up but only down.
The transfer to CBDC could do it. Or a decline in the dollar. But perhaps the most predictable would be revoking Social Security, after everyone had paid in. That would unify Repubs & Dems. And preserving Soc Sec is the cornerstone of my plan, which can only be done by taking back the issuing of mortgages from private bankers.
You're right that the primary objection to my plan has been 'they'd never let us get away with it. Start small.' But of course they wouldn't let us get away with anything that actually changed things. So do they want to keep spinning their wheels on things that won't?
Even after reading it, it’s so nice to hear you say it out loud. It’s a dense book, not gonna lie, with a limited understanding of the subject, a few elements go over my head. This helps me grok it on a deeper level, especially for the later chapters.
Btw, the aesthetic with the metallic paint and the flowers and the ensemble is *chef’s kiss*!
Tereza, I must get your book! Btw, there is a green card category called Alien with Extraordinary Abilities which inspired me to create my extraterrestrial alter ego, Micropixie, Alien with Extra ]ORDINARY[ Abilities. (ie. MPX has a lot of ordinary abilities — anyone can do what she does — but she has an extra set of ‘em 👽✨)
Off topic but continuing with a central theme - I knew you would like this snippet ...
At 1:34:24 – Duane Hayes – “And I would say that that’s the trick they’ve done with progressivism too – that the misdefinitions of things … Defining our terms is extremely important because terms have more than one meaning […] before we get involved in any emotional back and forth right and wrong we must define our terms.”
• Bavarian Pretzel or Bulletproof Pub: Demystifying History – Daniel Kristos - Ba'al Busters
[1:18:58] “So you get into these multilayers of lies – that if you’re going to try to wake up a normie person, you have to first start – you almost have to walk them through the wake up process that WE went through. First you have to understand it by THIS definition, then you have to understand it by THIS [other] definition .. “
You have a limited historical perception. You should read Imperium by Francis Parker Yockey and Oswald Spengler. Your essay deals with only the Classical Period and the Western European period. The Classical Period ended the same way this period will end, a victim of Enlightenment thinking. It has happened to every high culture in history, 8 or 9. Culture arises in a landscape, among a particular group and based on that groups insular distance, it achieves success and ultimately expands due to biological imperative (population growth) until it is forced to deal with outer groups, which are subdued and incorporated into the society as peers or subjects depending on the outer group’s ability to be incorporated into the body of the culture or are incompatible with that society for racial or cultural differences.
To find the place where we disagree, Dojun, let me start with the basic point that this chapter is looking to prove: at the invention of democracy, Greece was a slaveowning society, an empire with colonies. Do you disagree with that? Those people were excluded, along with all women. Inclusion required wealth that was produced by those who were excluded. So the word democracy, as rule by the common people, is a psyop. The common people were doing the work, and had no say or vote in governance. The lords of the land, who held people hostage to their stomachs, were required to increase the archon's capacity for violence as the price of entry to the assembly.
Tell me where I'm wrong about this particular slice of history, the origin of democracy. And the rhetorical trick of 'read this to see why you're wrong' is what I call throwing the book at it. You've read Imperium. Tell me the evidence it cites that contradicts the above.
Democracy, enlightenment thinking, happened in all previous cultures that grew out of their boundaries and became civilizations. Meaning they started incorporating people unlike themselves. After ruling over them, they did, in fact, democratize. To a certain extent you are correct that it is a pretense, INITIALLY, but the pretense is fulfilled in reality by the common people and the civilization self-immolates. Only a vanguard of cultural custodians is capable of building up a society and maintaining it. Once those custodians are replaced, eclipsed, bred out of existence by submerging themselves with the “other”, the outsider, heathen, etc., the society must collapse as its progenitors no longer exist. This is a fact. There is no more Spartan/Athens, Rome from the Classical, there is no Spain, France or Britain of the West. The United States worked with Communist Russia to destroy Europe and the West along with it. This was because most of the West, as well as nihilist Russia, were under the control of cultural outsiders, in fact, the same outsiders that destroyed the Biblical period. People we now refer to as Jews, who claim to be Israelites but are clearly not if one actually studies Scripture. There is a golden thread that runs through history going back 5000-6000 years. Your historical perspective is, alas, myopic.
Another way of saying myopic is focused. Rather than spouting generalities with no actual citations or new information, I'm presenting one particular point in time. You haven't contradicted a single point I made above. Really, you'd call it a pretense when the ruling class tricks the population into fighting with each other instead of rebelling, and the same trick is still working 3500 yrs later? I'd have a stronger word for that.
I don't disagree (I think) with the overall point you're making about the infiltration and usurping of cultures by a group I'd call Hyksos or the Royal Scythes or the Black Nobility. Back then they organized nomadic tribes like the Habiru or Hebrew to do their dirty work. I've written a lot about that. But I don't see the relevance of that to the question: is empire compatible with democracy? If so, how? If not, which was ancient Greece?
The answer seems clear in our examples of today, with the Enslavement of States and all our ancestors by the Freemasons and powerful Jews linked to the Private City of London and connected banking-investment that controlled British Empire in secrete and immunity by actively debt-enslaving the powerful in the Empire.
The same procedure was used in the once States and instigated an unJust genocidal war and enslaved all States and peoples under the Federal Gov which was so immune to the wants and needs of the population that it stopped being anything not best handed from a tree to protect us and all the world, as we see it now, Poison-Death spewing GreatSatan Empire directed from Hell.
Similar enslavement in Europe and used debt-enslavement mostly, possible because those in control had murdered so many virtuous white Christian men in WWI, WWII, Holodomor, and more in those close enough to influence like the Armenian Genocide, while mind-raping us - especially Western womanhood into a functional destructive Machine serving Hell and Witch directed that was turned against Fatherhood, family, unborn, themselves, and Love, Joy, Truth, Justice, Order, .., goodness and sanity.
Not only is Empire never democratic, like Federal Gov and EU we all would be free and safer if it destroyed and every person and the adults in their families removed so completely that dog would piss on where they are, like that their plan for us has been for centuries ..
.. after all, we are all Palestinians now and have been.
Steven, my policy is that all ideas are welcome to challenge but I don't allow insults to people, as individuals or groups. Like "[turning] Western womanhood into a functional destructive Machine serving Hell and Witch directed that was turned against Fatherhood, family, unborn, themselves ..." or "GreatSatan Empire directed from Hell".
When you write "virtuous white Christian men" are you talking about the 'Holy' Roman Empire, that wreaked more destruction on the world and caused more suffering than any other institution? And with the Church as the greatest global empire, would you be okay with someone else saying that we would be free and safer if every adult Christian was removed from every family so dogs would piss where they were?
If you continue to attack people rather than challenging ideas with logic and facts, I will need to ban you. I would do the same if someone insulted you.
Thank you for the warning to not express to much truth in my warning, personal experience, and clarity, I truly expected no different, only hoped beyond reason - it still springs eternal.
Assumption of bad-faith in others is a poison. Beware.
If by 'truth' you mean your innate moral superiority and god-given right to rule over others--judging and condemning them--you're welcome to express that here, but expect it to be challenged.
From my previous work, it seems you did expect 'no different.' I'm glad that my consistency led you to that and you don't take it personally.
Odd that you would say "Assumption of bad-faith in others is a poison." My dogma that I'm no better than anyone else means giving everyone the benefit of the doubt for their good intentions. That's exactly what I'm critiquing in you, when you say Western womanhood serves Hell and is directed by witches, and mothers of trans and all adult Jews should be killed. Is that not assuming that they have acted in bad faith?
Greek Democracy was articulated by writers who had studied how the Greek farmers had organized themselves for decision making. The Greek guy who writes about this is Evaggelos Vallianatos. Perhaps similarly, Thomas Jefferson envisioned a yeoman small farmer decentralized democracy. After the Civil War the big question was what to do with the land of the former slaveowners, hence the idea of "40 acres and a mule" championed by Thaddeus Stevens and others. Some land had already been distributed to the freed men as well as to poor whites. Alas, northern factory owners were concerned that this idea of "free land" might catch on in the north in which case they would lose their "wage slaves." Land reform is still the undiscovered revolution in American politics which is why the movements that I engage with are working for tax shift off of labor and production and onto the commons rent, a decentralized land value based form of property tax.
Hmmm ... that seems like it contradicts this account, Alanna. Solon is the inventor of what he termed democracy. He was an archon, a member of the ruling class, and a merchant. If by farmer you mean those who did the work of farming, they couldn't participate in democracy because they were producing those thousands of bushels of barley for those who did.
My purpose is to establish a foundation for the book by reaching agreement on one point on which to build. In the next chapter, I get into coinage and taxation--which was on the land. But here I'm looking to establish that the origin of 'democracy' was for slaveowners and lords of the land, using other people's labor. No matter what happened later, that was how it started.
Evaggelos Vallianotos is a Greek (American) author who writes about the origin of democracy with the then INDEPENDENT Greek farmers. This would have been before Solon took credit for the ideas and distorted them to favor aristocrats. Taxation on land would have been because there was not much else to tax at the time and would surely have been disproportionate falling more heavily on small landowners who were relatively disempowered. (PS: I work for land value taxation which is different than land taxation as it captures the unearned income, the commons rent, (highly concentrated in urban areas) for the benefit of everyone while removing taxes on labor and needed productive activities).
A good place to look for the corruption of democracy would be the Roman empire with its goal of dominium which is pretty much the same as our "full spectrum dominance." The corruption of Christianity was under Constantine (note Council of Nicea 325 AD) who defied the Christian economic principles of the land as "koina" (commons) for the "autarcheia" - the self-sufficiency of all. Augustine then came up with Just War Theory as reasoning behind why pacifist (thou shalt not kill) Christians should participate in wars (now called "Responsibility to Protect" - R2P) You can deep dive into this with Charles Avila's book Ownership: Early Christian Teachings" and a bit with my E.F. Schumacher Lecture Democracy, Earth Rights and the Next Economy here:
where I also talk about the Crack in the Liberty Bell which is the lack of democratic rights to the earth as a birthright leading to gross wealth and power inequality.
1. Pray MAGA: Make America God’s again. Pray “Thy Kingdom come”. Make the world His Kingdom of love. “God is love”.
John Dickinson, Chairman of the Committee for the Declaration of Independence (1776): “Our liberties do not come from charters; for these are only the declaration of pre-existing rights. They do not depend on parchments or seals; but come from the King of Kings and the Lord of all the earth”
The US national motto is “in God we trust”1, the Oath of Allegiance sums up in “so help me God”2, and the Pledge of Allegiance is “I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”
“Under God”, not only means under God’s protection/providence, but also under God's will/authority and Commandments.
America fist should mean God first as in the first Commandment!
Separation of church and State doesn’t mean banning God from civil life, but only "freedom of conscience", i.e. that a Government should not impose any particular religion. It doesn't mean that public officials can't show and live their faith in public, and it means that the State must always put all actions "under God", definitely not “under Satan” or over God ’s Will. Lincoln: “the nation shall, under God, have a new birth of freedom.” 3
Freemasonry is one of the “churches” of Satan: in their documents worship Lucifer as their “Great Architect”. “Separation of church and State” requires eliminating the demono-cracy over Government.
Theocracy comes from “theo”, God, “cratos”, power, but this has nothing to do with God, but Satan and his demons, so it’s a demono-cracy by the SSS (Satanic Secret Societies).
Get the murderers out of government: force masons to self-identify by law under severe penalty (their oath doesn't forbid self-identification, also, evil oaths are void).
1st Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of (the masonic) religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof (of other religions, like they did with lockdowns); or abridging the freedom of speech (like the massive masonic censorship of the conspiracy evidence, especially since 2020), or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble (lockdowns), and to petition the government for a redress of grievances” (like the wrongful COVID response and compensation to the victims, especially those fired for refusing getting poison in their veins and those disabled by them).
----------------
2. This will never stop unless we stop using those UNBACKED colored worthless papers that we call money, masons keep counterfeiting in trillions of dollars per year to buy, corrupt (Epstein-style) and bribe EVERYTHING for sale, starting with consciences.
MAGA (Make Assets Great Again): money should be 100% backed with gold and real assets. This makes masonic counterfeiting harder. They are buying everything with trillions of fake money: listed corporations, media, medical system, political parties, prosti-ticians, universities… !
Satanic secret societies like the masons are increasing the financial supply through:
- Forging dollars using the Federal Reserve they fully control
- Money creation through bank loans without reserves
- Financial “wealth” creation out of thin air through financial instruments such as derivatives
- Government debt
It's what I call finflation: inflation of financial instruments
The way out of this financial nightmare:
1. Create an easy system for “real money”: private currencies/warrants/tokens based on real assets, goods, services, etc. (gold, corn, flour, oil, distance/volume/weight transportation, labor human hour/minute, etc.)
2. Ban:
a) Legal tender (free markets decide which “real money” they prefer to trade with)
b) Paper-backed debt, including:
- Currencies (even foreign)
- Government debt: allowing a government to get indebted is like giving credit to a drug-addict.
- Fractional reserve loaning: all financial loans should be 100% backed by deposits (so banks don't create money based on air), and therefore, there's no need for a Central Bank, because there would be no risk of bank-runs since all their loans are fully backed. Kill Central Banks.
3. Make usury illegal again! It’s a sin in the Bible!
Force all social networks and media to kill algorithmic moderation (shadow banning, etc.) and reinstate all closed accounts. Only messages selling things can be blocked IF it comes from outside one's network. Let people decide who's in their social network and that's it.
Replace the internet with a new peer to peer protocol, not government controlled, not centralized.
Get out of the UN organizations (including WHO), get out of the IMF, WorldBank, OAS, IADB, etc. All have been weaponized. Create alternative cooperative organizations, never legally binding.
------------------
3. Start your local parallel economy: organics coop.
Start by giving free talks on the benefits of going organic. Form a conscious community first!
The full plan exposed and 16 laws we need to exit Extermination Planet
Government spends 2x per student in public schools with respect to private ones and 3x at university level, with worse outcomes in all levels of education.
Time for a 100% voucher system, where parents can choose schools or earn the voucher money themselves if they homeschool (and their kids pass the exams), or through grand/parent/teacher coops.
This would allow many mothers to leave a work they hate, double their income, and stay home with their babies and children, especially in the most important years of childhood until 6 years old. It would have a deep impact on society and recover fertility replacement rate!
How to save the life from the COVID vaxxed in 10 easy fast steps?
Appeal to authority (that’s the only thing they listen to):
1. Show that, while it is still given in the USA, all countries in Northern Europe banned Moderna due to the severe after-effects (let’s not call them side effects, but deliberate effects).
2. Show them Florida’s declaration not recommending COVID vaccines to most of the population.
3. Show Texas and 4 other states suing Pfizer for lying about vaccine efficacy (couldn’t sue the rest because of special DoD protection).
4. Show Health Canada’ statement about finding DNA plasmids in mRNA shots, proving they hacked the cell nucleus. Show the Swedish study proving that the cell nucleus is hacked by mRNA vaccines. Show that 30% of the proteins produced by the hacked cells have nothing to do with COVID.
5. Show that Health Canada also says that Pfizer inserted a sequence of the SV40 monkey virus. Show the studies proving that SV40 is carcinogenic.
6. Show that the Republican Party declared COVID “vaccines” a “biological and technical bioweapon” and instructed the authorities to seize vials and run a forensic analysis.
Appeal to science:
7. Show the studies proving that the injected are still producing spike protein and other unknown ones.
8. Show the studies proving that the spike protein was engineered to kill in Wuhan by adding HIV sequence and a Moderna cancer-related patent.
9. Convince them to labtest the amount of spike protein in their blood, which is still produced by their hacked cells and if they can’t afford it:
10. Convince them to lower the spike protein in blood by trying any of the spike detox protocols based mostly on cheap medicines. They have nothing to lose, by trying it for a week, if their health improves, then they know that the bio-weapon caused their health problems:
When looking at the true meaning of a word when it was coined, I think that etymology is telling. It shows how we're being limited in our thinking by the language itself. The quote that Julius had cited, which got me started looking it up, was this in full:
"One of the important central concepts in Ivan Ilyin's thinking is the definition of freedom. The word ‘freedom’ in the West has been butchered to the point where it now almost means the opposite of what it originally was meant to be. The word that we should use I think that would make better sense is ‘autonomy’ rather than freedom. In the West there's a tendency to believe that freedom refers to the ability to do whatever you want, that there is a lack of external restraint and so it comes down to being able to act arbitrarily, having no reason to act the way you do, because there can be no causality-[…] it's freedom to do whatever you want, and that's somehow a good thing.”
Matthew Raphael Johnson on discussing Russian Nationalist Philosopher Ivan Ilyin (at 21:23):
I tend to agree with Ilyin that autonomy or self-reliance or community autarky is a more meaningful term, none of which is possible without land. If someone drops you in the forest or in a war zone or a ghetto and says, "There, now you're free!" what does that mean? To have self-determination we need other people. Freedom means nothing as an individual, imo.
Well said! Freedom cannot be enjoyed without the ability to satisfy basic needs, and this necessarily involves community autonomy , self-reliance and autarky which defends those basic rights.
There’s a real case where a whole family was suddenly deported by the Russian Stalin-communists to Siberia and dropped at a train station in the middle of the night in the woods, -20 C°. They were free to go… nowhere! The 1-year old baby died of hypothermia, others lost fingers.
Thank God they believed in Divine Justice. Otherwise, anyone would go mad in such desperate situation.
It’s like a thermostatic self-regulated system: when evil increases, goodness over-compensates and win. Sooner or later evil burns itself to ashes. Genealogies prove that no evil man has more than 4 generations: Henry VIII, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, Pol Pot, etc.
Next generations will be able to track the Biblical curse on the COVID scum behind the COVID scam: Tedros, Schwab, Gates, Fauci, Collins, Biden, Trudeau and the long list of villains.
@Fred Nazar: I like the idea of the school vouchers and the home schooling, that's a great one.
In regards to the ending of usury, I don't feel that's rational. Banks require employees, operating costs, cost for collections, advertising, etc. You can't expect anyone to run a business that won't make a profit, outside of socialism. What would be their incentive for offering loans, and when people inevitably don't pay loans back, who is going to eat the cost of the loss? Especially since the loaned money would be based on 100% backed money, no fiat lending, and it is without a doubt that some won't pay the loans back, if nothing else because they die off, or can't work, then the bank would be operating at a loss. So then there would be no banks, and of which then, there would be people who needed to borrow money in order to gain skills training, buy into infrastructure for living, such as a mortgage, etc and couldn't find the funds, unless they had relatives who could help. That would mean that those who had family and friends with money would have an advantage and those who didn't, who always be poor and require to always be renting and wouldn't be able to go to school. Without usury, you would definitely need to have socialism or a hybrid socialist/capitalist system. What are your thoughts on this? How would you keep banks open without usury?
About your objection to ending usury, at over 60 yo I remember my grandmother trying to guide her daughter (my mother) against getting a car loan, by saying that when they and her ancestors wanted or needed something the saved and suffered, did without.
Unfortunately my mother's generation as with mine and all since disrespect the old wisdoms, and my grandmother might have been more effective in speaking of usury enslavement like the recent generation is under with student loans and that our now President Biden when a senator pushed one of this Satanic directed laws that exclude those loans from normal bankruptcy, Biden did it because he sold his soul to Satan as a young man seeking power and look at him now and the State of the Presidency and our nation in the world and in the endless death, suffering, horror and evil most of us and the world see it is - he would have been wiser (in not deal, of course) but to seek power over a hot-dog stand, it would be impossible to get near the hideous Evil murderous soul-destroying tool of Hell that this GreatSatan Empire is now.
And she and those before her understood Suffering was a big and valuable part of every life, and delayed gratification was rewarded in many ways.
Of course, back when I was a Child and my grandmother was alive, such Truth was not clear to her or few, and so we suffer the daily murdering of our souls, poverty of slime Grace, ignorance, Pride, Godlessness, Sin and Hell, with hopes and joys that otherwise would be Loving Healthy Life aborted before their first breath, much like the 60, the average number of babies tortured to death in every State every day.
I'm not objecting to ending usury. I just can't see how it could be done, other than ending financial lending institutions altogether. If one plays the game right of course, one can easily navigate the world of debts and come out on top, by doing it strategically, borrowing for what will give one an advantage in life, such as a vehicle or tools for running a business. Then with the ability to broaden ones ability to bring in income, one pays the debt off quickly and one benefits from the loan. The fed should not be able to print money, based on credit, and what they do is this: the government sells bonds, etc which are bought by private buyers who then immediately turn around and sell most of them to the fed, which then can print the money based on the bonds and other instruments. The banks that run the federal reserve can't fiat lend if they buy the bonds, etc directly from the government, but they CAN if they buy them from private sellers (middlemen who take a profit off of the exchange, who are also associated with the same families who own the federal reserve banks). Now they can fiat lend that money. The money comes out of thin air. It makes no real sense, but neither does lending someone money without interest, because inflation will keep happening with this system, and so when someone pays back a loan down the line after inflation had occurred, they are actually paying the lender less money, so the whole system needs to be scrapped. If the system stays the same, then usury makes sense. No one is going to lend anyone money and accept the money back later if its been devalued by inflation. Thats silly. Its rotten to the core. Babylonian black money magic as they say. I've never ever heard of a sensible cure for the problem though. Everyone complains at how it is but none of the complainers, to my knowledge, has a better system in mind. Now, okay, let's say you do the thing where you don't borrow at scrimp and save, be patient. That simply won't work in every situation, if you are already poor. Let's say you live in the country, and there is no public transportation. Maybe there is nowhere nearby to get a job, absolutely nowhere. You need a vehicle, you are a kid who just graduated from high school, maybe your parents are poor, and there is only one car and it's already in use. You maybe have to borrow then, or maybe you are trying to go to college, and none of your relatives have money to help out. So you have to borrow. As I said, it's easy to say that the system sucks, but pragmatically speaking, in lieu of a replacement system, and I use the serenity prayer for this one, who is going to change it? It is what it is. To change it would be so enormously complex and require something akin to complete regime change not only nationally-wide, but internationally as well, since this is the system almost everyone uses. I HIGHLY doubt that will ever happen, not in this lifetime, so why bother complaining. Wisdom to know the difference when things cannot be changed. Then instead of devoting energy to complaining about what will not be changing soon, one should instead focus on what can be done within the system that is. The only possible option I can think of, which probably wouldn't work anyways, is to form a government within a government, based on whatever value system you have, maybe such as the Amish do, and interact as little as possible within the outer government. I haven't researched this, but I doubt the Amish lend eachother money with interest. That type of community is not possible within a heterogeneous population though. It takes people invested in the same level of ethical and moral principles, that you know won't take advantage of eachother for one, to make a system like that work. We have to deal with the lowest common denominator though in terms of what will work in regards to heterogeneous populations and that appears to be mainly capitalism and usury based lending. There is too much inequality and people (like 40% of the world population or MORE) who live by getting over on everyone else, scamming, cheating, lying, etc. If everyone always paid debts back and no one scammed and lied, cheated, etc. yeah you could probably come up with an usury free system, but good luck with that. The real world is not conducive to it. That's axiomatic.
In essence, my system does what you're describing, Songtsan, as "a government within a government, based on whatever value system you have," although mine is an economy within an economy. I don't try to change the government or nat'l/ global economy at all, other than ONLY allowing local community-owned banks to issue mortgages on the properties within their borders, and issue the credit to repay them as an equal monthly distribution.
I'll be interested in your response when I get to chapters like Banking is Governance. From my research, it works differently than your statements but I'll leave that for when we get there.
Interests should never be above GDP/capita growth, or population growth (if GDP is proportionate).
Interests are forbidden in certain Islamic nations. Instead, Banks charge admin costs and get part of the stock or profits. Insurance solves collection problems.
Also, there's peer to peer lending and coop finance.
If your neighbor asks for a cup of sugar, would you require a spoonful as interest? Why not? Why can't we build something like: I lend you now, I get x points, so when in need I could use those points for a community loan?
The same could work for a friends and family based blood donation bank!
One book that I have on my shelf is Islam and the Moral Economy by Charles Tripp. How it says that Islam defines usury is more than twice the amount borrowed in repayment. This is what I adopt in my plan when the community-issued mortgage can't exceed 5.3% over 30 yrs. It would also resolve student debt, which goes far beyond that. And national debts should always be denominated in the borrower's currency, so they're like an IOU against future production, and can't be used to extract land, real estate, natural resources, corporations or assets of the borrower.
They also can't exceed 30 yrs, which is one generation--who's debts can't be passed on to the next creating debt in perpetuity like Haiti, among others. And an analysis of predatory or extractive debt should determine if anything is owed, or if the lender actually owes the borrower.
If all housing needs to be bought outright, it seems like it would monopolize ownership in the hands of those who already have money. The rest would be crowding their parents' house until they died, then fighting over who gets it. My plan allows for flexibility along with taking responsibility for previous and next generations as a whole. It doesn't leave that up to good faith, but builds it in as an economy of reciprocity.
But we're getting far ahead of ourselves. I'll look forward to comparing our plans in the final section of the book. For the first three sections, I'm looking to establish a deep understanding of the problem, and how far it goes back. Thanks for engaging, Fred!
If it would be possible to calculate the real value of a loan exactly, inclusive of devaluation due to inflation, REAL costs of administration, and REAL percentage of infrastructure involved in maintaining the lenders business, dialed in to a T, I think that would be fair, but I'm thinking of this as nonprofit, meaning only covering actual costs, and not for-profit. Also, you should, as what I am basically describing is something like a credit union, equally share the costs of those members who end up not paying the loans back for whatever reason. I think a community owned bank, perhaps the same as a credit union, is the way to go, but this brings up other points of interest, such as, shouldn't everyone share in the ownership of land equally? How can someone be born into this world owning no share of the land? At one point, there was no real land ownership. We are stuck now in this day and age, looking up to the ones who had ancestors who basically just went out and claimed land, "first come, first taken, first owned," and newcomers now own nothing. When population was small anyone could go out and find land. If we as humans went to a system of land ownership which was fairly split among all members of the human collective, then one would come into this world owning a % of land, and one could then borrow off of it as collateral. If they don't pay the loan back and lose their land share, that's their problem. Then individuals could have collateral for use in using credit from a lender. This would also help defray the tendency of the have nots to hate the haves, which leads to people hating from births the haves, in which case they borrow and don't pay back, and steal, and so on, because there is a deeply felt sense of having been shafted. I think any perfect economical system must take into account the fact that many come into the world (especially with ever increasing population) owning nothing. I think that since there is something like 5 acres of land per person in the world, that public lands, even those upon which things are already built, should be collectively owned and everyone should, immediately upon being born, deserve a share in this collective land.
There is no inflation under my plan, and even reverse inflation--which should always be called dilution because it dilutes the value of money relative to the asset that backs it, in this case housing. https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/inflation-colonization
Under my plan, everyone IS born with an equal share of the land of their commonwealth, distributed as an equal share of the collective mortgages. But in order to use it for their own mortgage or rent, they need to earn it from their neighbors while at the same time using their own share to pay their neighbors for food, wellcare, education and home improvements.
Your statement earlier was that we can't change the system, hence the serenity prayer. Now you're talking about a forced redistribution of land, perhaps the most extreme system change. My book uses three sections to show that nothing but system change can work, and then asks what the simplest change would be to make the most difference for the most people. Since you want to skip the sections I'm reading aloud to understand the problem and go right to comparing solutions against measurable criteria, may I suggest you buy my book? It would be easier than me trying to fit the whole thing in a comment box.
Money is not a tangible asset though, it's mutable. The cup of sugar stays the same. A cup is a cup. Inflation in 2023 was ~4 % or whatever. Therefore to borrow money and pay it back later after it's inflated means you are paying less back. It's funny how the fed seems to lend money to the banks at less interest % than Inflation rate much of the time, but anyways, interest should at least be at the level of the rate of Inflation that occurred over the life of the loan, calculated exactly. However, I believe it would be better if we got rid of banks and we all just borrowed directly from the government, which is ideally the people. At the same rate the banks get to borrow at. If the government sold debt bonds to itself and cut out all the middle men, then it would be the people selling debt to themselves, and paying themselves back. The money is fake and everyone knows it. Silver and gold really have not much value other than use in electronics and jewelry. Since they still store it in the form of gold bars all over the world it's obviously not that much in demand. The whole problem is valuing a currency on something else. The value of things fluctuates. Therefore the value of money fluctuates. Therefore loans will lose out as things fluctuate. Things lose their value, unless the market is artificially manipulated to expand perceived value. Did you ever read Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars? The system itself is so easily manipulation prone, that a complete replacement of the system is the only thing that will suffice. I don't know how we could do that with the "momentum" it has, from thousands of years of "investment" - my assumption of course, that it needs to be replaced.
Borrowing directly from the government has already been tried in many countries turning into a complete disaster: a huge debt no one pays back, or with fake bankruptcies while people flee away with the money.
The solution is real money: bills backed by real goods and services such as 1 oz of flour, 1 gallon of gasoline, one tonne of soya beens, 1 human hour/minute of labor. The latter provides credit even to the most poor.
Wow, Prof. Fred. There is little here I would change.
But perhaps simplify - like revert corporate law back to the earlier version where they did not have personhood legal rights and those that own or direct are no immune to the evils and mass destruction they are used for now, as well as the 'Money is Speach' which turned them into Satanic Dragons with super-personhood and many more powerful in wealth and resources today then entire countries, and the loss of immunity to the dead, horror, destruction and other Stanic purposes they are now put to would be gone, that no owner, part owner, or executive would ever allow the size (number of people employed) to grow beyond their personal ability to manage well, at risk of ripping away every resource of theirs and often their families and anywhere they may use to hide it.
Traditional Catholic Theology and Doctrines on governance is relevant and the writings available which lays-out the reasons from first principles like Natural Law and Common Law brings a level of Clarity that I find brings Clarity and Right Order to this topic and so many others.
There can be know true Freedom without Truth, Justice and good Oder shaped society and family, Darkened Intellect and other mind-crippling that this mind-raping Hell has done to us for generation of forced acceptance as sane and reasonable; mothers torturing to death our babies on whim, destroy Fatherhood & families and cripple for life all children, and all lovingly close or dependent, sexually mutilating and sterilizing our children, mind-raping them with life-shortening unending failure confusion .. and unending suffering till early death and suicides, allowing lying to go uncorrected, unLovingly and with hateful Sickening of womanhood and harm to all that would or do love them by immunity to all Just and Loving punishments and hyper-empowering them and filling with insanities and hate-fear of their benefactors and forces for good, .. and .. and .. such insanity we all forced from crib has weaken and so damaged our intellect, judgement, prudence, humility, ... all virtues and Loving proper Fear of God.
As implied - public correction of all lies and other socially destructive behaviors (10 Commandments and related) from age 15 with 13-14-year-olds required to be there and able to watch no less then 3 times each year, and public pain&shame used as default first level of corrections of those others judged to be proper regarding the crime and the damage and related. In the week of judgement - say Saturdays - each is taken to a public park or some other public place and videos streamed with relating information and they secured and a collar around the neck and tasered the length of time directed - with expected soiling and scream seen by all.
.. what a better world if would be and better us if we lived in it, with this Loving addition in it. Think of all the powerful and often all the adults in the families in recent memory that lied and manipulated us and our resources into wars that killed millions, how Just this would be as well as their public execution in the ways of men and other died from their lies, the pouring of White phosphorus over them, or them trapped in a burning tank screaming with others in their vile poisonous sick families.
We could replace courts with a few - up to 12 - fathers and grandfather that have raised children into decent adults that are a Blessing to community. And allow for ability for interpersonal corrections backed by loss of civil abilities if they refuse to properly respond to a Call for Justice, in what form accepted by the damaged person, with Taser-duel as the standard, that is both write up their side of the issue for public access, and in a place designed for this function - police station or room in court house.
There would be two chairs and each sits and someone would buckle both down and attach neck collars and the slow increasing taser pain would start when both of the two button (each has one) is pushed, and does not end until both are released - and had such existed there have been women and some men that I would suffer till unconscious with them screaming and piss themselves to Thank Them for the Hell the caused me and to help them remember not to do it again - for the simple reason they and all watching on video stream or recording, they might f-with another man like me that would kill us both if needed to stop their vile evil, and to protect any future targets they might find.
There are so many simple ways to turn this Hell-Train around and to keep us all going in the Just and Loving direction - that those simple effective options are now impossible because of baby-murdering twisted putrefied-souled powerful Vag-nazis and Satanic Gov are always near and directed by those in power that clearly hate us and want us all and all we love suffering till dead, as we should be able to see by now - we are all Palestinians now and have always been to them.
So many possible solutions and related perspective that your excellent comment has inspired me to write, but Alas, Babylon!, beside simply suggesting worldwide Nuke war might be best, the spirit is willing, but the body has been up all night, and I have other priorities. Thank you again for this comment.
love the free dom part, lots of mixing can be done and the two definition together makes atrocity: like love-doom, or take a wife as a statute right, free her by owning her. democracy as asked in further question is for me a capitalocracy. AS then in greece as now in america. money gave power, and what gabe says down there is true too. at a higher stage no need for money. but it still relates cause the no need for money is possible cause they all owned the money. what we got is lended nothing more. the house, the car the cash, what we think we own they provided to keep that veil of liberty in everyone face( guess not only musulman woman lol) if we look at it metaphoricly.
if i can point something else, you mentionned gnostic definition of archon. what perplexes me often is how everyone claim gnostic are the source of satanism and freemasonery at one point. And in other moment they can use their wise view of the world to validate their belief. its either they evil liars or good man who didnt want to be part of the society we all trying to decypher.
i was wondering whats your take on gnostic? i have a view sided findeing the second definition more accurate. Maybe thats why they call me an heretic sometimes. hehe who knows=)
i'll keep reading, and i'm back at ya when i know the caret system ;)
I studied the gnostics pretty intensely for awhile, especially the gospel of Philip. I started writing a book called Revolutionary Mystics and How to Become ONE. Here are the first couple chapters of it:
The literal meaning of gnostic is anyone who believes God is knowable, the inverse of agnostic who says "we'll never know God. Why try?"
It's over 200 different texts from different authors, different schools of thought. I don't think we should lump them all together.
The Sethian gnostics believed in the demiurge, and that's where I think a lot of the Satanism comes in. I think they were the proto-Genesis, the mythology that preceded the story of Eden and Adam and Eve begetting Seth, who's also the destructive god Set aka Yahweh. They just can't be lumped together as if everything that isn't Biblical Christianity is the same.
The book sounds interesting, and recall that the end of the debt-Jubilees was the end to freeing of so so many enslaved directly or through usury, and perhaps you address that in later parts of book.
The largest group size of any Institution throughout the levels of representation or support should stay under Dunbar's number [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number], and a gov of huge numbers of people could be effectively represented in a few levels of such, where one in each group is member of the group above.
Democracy - if it must be suffered - then a good steppingstone towards returning Sanity but let us address a related and very significant issue. Perhaps and I hope it will be a stimulation for you and others to write and discuss with others this thought; ..
.. that allowing everyone to vote is insane. That a simple policy of requiring full citizenship power be earned by 4 or more years of voluntary Service, community, national, and-or international, sex-separated dorms, in skill training, .. and most things if makes sense to be separated - real sense and not the broken-slimy-twisted-lying feminist-feelie 'sense' .. and when done those 4 years we all can trust that person to care for others and Nation, and likely to not vote if they are unclear on issues.
The sex-separation is clearly best for those that was once a young man filled with hormones and distracted so easily by young women, and back then we did not have fellow students wearing tight yoga pants where camel-tow clearly displayed. Would I have been able to do two years of advance AP Calculus or do well in any subject under such situation? The young women I studied with and friends and lovers with would not have done that to us men, and I assume the teachers would not have allowed that for the reason I stated.
Is there any objections along the line that young men should [somehow] not be distracted, and with all my thousands of generation of successful procreation Just and Energy I could kick such vile male-hating retards toothless and remove them, and gather thousands or millions of young men across the Sick Western womanhood Poisoned nations, those men and their fathers and others that hope for a chance for those and all young men to not be crippled by such vileness and-or ignorance, and kick toothless and remove every millions of you that actively hold such a position and are to immune to the damage they do with the putrid vile vomit that spews from such women and others, and discuss removing all the adults in those poisonous families.
You see, I hold as true that it is a goodness and effective to punish mothers and all significant people that shaped those people that are shown so dangerous, for making us suffer them. And as such which women would not seek the best possible father and then keep them.
Do you think we will see Justice in all the mothers killed by their [trans] adult children in the future? They each know who it Just to kill her, along with the millions across the West of others that supported or did not try to stop such clear evil insanity. Those millions that they cannot remove and prevent from destroying other children's lives .. and some people think mass death worldwide from nuke war or other BlackSwan event would not be Just and for those that survive - a Goodness.
Since this was written before my warning, Steve, I'll skip over the parts that demean women and respond to the ideas. I don't write about the Jubilee in my book but I do in my analysis of the Torah. According to Hebrew scriptures, once land was divided by choosing lots among the Hebrews, it was theirs in perpetuity. So they were the landlords and someone could pay for 50 years to cultivate and build on the land. But at the end of 50 years, they took it back. I think that's the insidious history of the Jubilee. And remember, it's in the same scriptures that empowered the oligarchs who rule us through financial control today--as you rightly point out.
My system, as you'll see if you stay to the end of the book, enables communities at the size of Dunbar's number to control their own labor by issuing the debt backed by the housing--the mortgages--and also student debt, along with issuing the credit to repay the debt. It doesn't give anyone control over anyone else, and the credit needs to be distributed equally to all members of that community.
Members need to include any person born there who currently resides there, and all primary-resident homeowners when the plan is instituted. So mothers, at the neighborhood level of Dunbar's number, can't be excluded or any person arbitrarily. You can, however, say that you'll only include non-native residents in your distribution and voting after four years of public service.
In my Santa Cruz home, I'd recommend eight years of residency before someone's a member because we're inundated with students who vote in local issues as freshmen and crowd out families and workers from housing. Our challenge is to lower the cost of housing by giving those born here, long term residents, and those who work here priority.
In my Appalachian hometown, I'd recommend new homeowners be made members right away. Their challenge, and why they offered a $20K bonus for people to move there, is not enough money in circulation. They had 1000 applicants before they cut it off, and only funding for 10, btw.
For your neighborhood, you could propose that any classes that use the educational credit be segregated by gender, or only exercise classes. The women might agree.
I still need to get back into the groove of continuing to read the rest of your book, but this was a phenomenal way to start. I wasn't sure what to expect going in, but I wasn't counting on my understanding of the historical progression of human liberty to be outright shattered. Which revealed to me how little I ever really questioned it. I'm still processing what I've learned reading so far, and trying to integrate my new understanding is taking time.
Regarding the questions:
All-else-being-equal I would argue the form of government matters a great deal more than the size, it's really easy to nit-pick size when the goal is to micro-manage society. If good models can scale well, great! If they can't well why not still use them where they're best?
"Is the US a capitocracy? How does money determine power?"
I definitely don't understand the higher levels of finance. The more I peer into how the "upper levels" of power operate, the more clear it is that money "is no object" at those levels. What's confusing is that it does seem to still matter at that level in ways I can't quite figure out.
It's taken me some time to absorb the concept of money itself being a tool to legitimize and institutionalize oppression. I used to believe this was exclusively an attribute of debt-based currencies, but I see your arguments that these weapons of financial manipulation can create profound imbalances in power.
Later in the book you outline how even "hard" currencies were manipulated in US history, and the competing economic models that existed in those times. It has certainly raised a lot of questions in my mind about if there is a way to properly separate currency from slavery, which I deduce is covered more in later sections.
It's fascinating to me, because I had often wondered if the real failing of the "p2p digital currency" space was failing to automate mutual credit, instead of "minting" digital assets. Your model as I understand it, goes further by backing said system with tangible assets...
I think there's a lot more to what you bring up than what someone would take at face value. I recognize that it's difficult for me to incorporate the radical paradigm updates which very much seems to be in the way of almost any interesting or novel endeavor.
I really look forward to further reading, and hopefully soon finishing your book!
I am, as always, grateful for your insight and perception, Gabe. "I wasn't counting on my understanding of the historical progression of human liberty to be outright shattered." Yay! Mission accomplished!
I see your point about form mattering more than size, but I'd been thinking along different lines. I could see a neighborhood deciding they wanted a socialist form of government, particularly in food distribution, perhaps. A commonwealth might want a strict accounting of exchange, capitalist perhaps. A third might insist on direct democracy, where they vote on every decision. A fourth could have representative democracy. And a fifth and sixth might be savvy enough to give fascism and national socialism a whirl--rescuing them from the propaganda and going back to their principles. At this level, it's very fluid and if one doesn't work out, you can try another. The larger levels seem too big to fail, meaning they will.
However, after I originally posed that question in my book, I've decided that it's better to steer clear of any type of government and keep it clear that this is 'only' an economy. By setting the rules that the distribution has to be equal, it protects it from being need-based or salaries--from which it could never return once dedicated that way. And there is no larger static bodies of governance because each commonwealth and village is unique to the hamlet, being the hamlet and all its surrounding hamlets, or the village and all its surrounding villages. So there's no way to seize control from above. Although these are the questions I look forward to hashing out with a like-purposed group.
You ask the key question of my book, about a way to separate currency from slavery. I don't think that's a question anyone else is asking. I'll put that into my Bitcoin vs. the Caret episode.
With a p2p digital currency or any trade currency, you start out with the problem of the initial distribution. If you start out with only some people owning the currency, it's not trade but another form of extraction. For trade, everyone needs to start with an equal amount. So it only works within a small enough community that they're dealing with the same cost of living. The distribution parallels that cost of living because it's initiated by the mortgages.
This gets a little complicated but what reinforces that starting point is the equal distribution as bank capital of the Social Security Trust Fund, at approximately $9000 per person. Banks can issue 10X their capital reserves and 10X their deposits (both must be met) in loans. So it sets a limit on lending, giving parity. A place like my Appalachian home that has little money in circulation doesn't want to lend more than can be repaid, so a 20% downpayment would make sure the value of the home isn't underwater of the mortgage. I'd also set the same for Santa Cruz refi's. But a high cost of living place like SC will build up its reserves and deposits faster, enabling it to lend over the standard $90K per person while bringing the cost of housing down.
Thanks for engaging, Gabe! It's such a pleasure to talk with someone math-minded who's interesting in the details!
This all reminds me that the greatest tool we have to assist us in sovereignty from outside rule is when we decide (realize) we don't require outside rule.
There are no victims or perpetrators other than those who choose it.
I woke this morning thinking that the three big lies are: 1) democracy is self-governance 2) money is trade and 3) the god of the bible is good. These three lies, once we accept them into our minds, put us on the side of the empire. It's all the oligarchs need to do to control us. And while we can't change the power structures of politics, economics and religion, we each own our minds. We have complete power to change them. It's the first thing we need to do and maybe the only thing.
Agree - we just need to decide and say No.
I like how Tucker says it in his charming autistic way:
NO! SHUTUP!
We don't need the shutup part, but I like how he says it lol.
Well you may notice that you are the first comment I was able to 'like' so far. I find that undoing and challenging these lies requires a lot of patience and compassion. For me, it's taken 20 years of 30 hrs of research and writing a week to get where I am. I'm sure that if I tried to explain to Tucker how he's fallen for these lies, his response would be "NO! SHUT UP!" Last I looked, he still was a believer in democracy, money and the bible.
So I welcome the opportunity to engage, as long as it's on ideas and not trading insults--something of course, that isn't in either of our natures.
Re: Tucker - I think he is representative of a whole group of people alive today that have gotten the message... they just aren't quite sure how to translate it yet.
Many of them resort to going backwards into fundamentalism, such as him.
I think if we can softly direct them through example, they will come along.
They know what they're feeling. They just aren't sure what to do with it yet.
This is why we don't want to alienate the ones who are reverting back to religion of sorts. It's all they know that can explain their feelings. And it's the closest thing to a spiritual awakening that their constructs will allow them.
Tucker is what I refer to as a "Leader Personality." However, the label is misleading as they aren't really leading. They must be gently led to discover the truth themselves. That's where we come in.
'Leader Personality' is like calling one person the Christ. It deprives all the rest of us from that empowerment. I think the Christ is one who sees the Christ in others. If I were to say people are stupid for their beliefs, I'd be contradicting that. Yet if I don't point out where I think they're mistaken, I'm disrespecting them--because I secretly think they're too stupid to see it--along with those who are demeaned by that belief.
The ideas of leaders need to be challenged most of all because otherwise we're being led by a charismatic personality. I don't follow Tucker and I certainly applaud him talking with Putin, for instance. The most attention I paid to him was during the Project Veritas fiasco, which I described as:
"Pfizer-goes-on-a-first-date. The science presented by Project Veritas is nonsense, requiring zoos full of monkeys to be infected and pass around viruses until they mutate naturally. No one with any sense, much less a background in virology, would fall for it. And even if you did, the caricature of a woke post-pubescent Pfizer VP and the Three Stooges fight scene over the computer should have tipped you off. So it’s the flim-flam scam of psy-op tricks like this." https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/phony-maloney-and-wikispooks.
In another I write, "The Project Veritas 'gotcha' combined scientific nonsense with journalistic playacting and anti-woke dog whistles, while casting Robert Malone as the spokesperson for the dissent. ... Robert Malone and Steve Kirsch [are first] on a conference video talking about the PV video and what a great job it did in exposing what goes on with the revolving door between pharma and regulatory agencies. They see this as a turning point and Kirsch is starting a superPAC to elect Robert F. Kennedy for President. But Malone has to go to his next interview with Tucker Carlson. There he talks about how this Pfizer exec has no morals and this is the kind of person in high level positions responding to a virus that has killed millions. Not remdesevir. Not ventilators and lack of early treatment. Not lockdowns. The Virus.
"Tucker then shows the second video where the second PV reporter comes out of the back holding the computer with the only copy of the incriminating interview and confronts ‘Jordan,’ who says he was who says he was just trying to impress his date. He calls the police saying “There are too many white people around, I don’t feel safe.” A skirmish ensues where they wrestle over the computer, which scuttles from one person to another, and ‘Jordan,’ in the last scene, hurls himself in front of vans that might have the goods.
"That’s how most undercover operations go, right, where you do the big ‘gotcha’ at the end to see what the reaction is? It works well with the Mafia. And let us count the anti-woke dog whistles: 1) he’s gay, 2) he’s a person of color who clearly did not get his position on his qualifications and professionalism, and 3) ‘there’s too many white people, I don’t feel safe’? REALLY? This is a ham-handed script and at this point, we know beyond a doubt that it’s all staged and PV is in on it, along with Malone. For Kirsch and Tucker, they’re either gullible or part of the con, you choose." https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/is-malone-the-zelensky-of-the-covid.
This all got swept under the rug when it didn't go as planned, but Tucker is front and center in this psyop. That makes me take him with a shaker of salt.
You're misinterpreting what I mean by the term "leader personality." I left a link below that explains better than me. I'm not using it in the traditional sense.
I never paid any attention to Tucker until he left Fox. That said, even 2 or 3 years ago is a long time ago by today's standards.
I don't think we forget what we know or have seen, but I've seen real change in less time in people. I'm not defending him. But I think I'm a pretty good judge of what I hear now from someone.
He's a nut - but has his hand on something big, he just doesn't know what it is yet. It's that neuro-divergence that is his saving grace.
Things are moving quickly. We don't want to get in our own way by holding to the past. Caution is called for. But not conclusion. Not that you are.
And once they get on board, there is no stopping that train. That's why we are seeing such an influx of neo-diverse voices like him and Elon moving into the landscape.
Unlimited energy, but need gentle direction.
Leader Personality
https://eliasweb.org/Session/201602211
I am enjoying these chapters. I look forward to a near future ( it is hoped) when some people would enthusiastically try out your model in a local decentralized economy. I say enthusiastically not because all experimenters are fully on board from the start but because they have the wisdom to see it's potential as a foundation even if some modifications were necessary.
Your contributions are important. I am glad there are people here who see this. Thank you for your world service.
Thank you, Chris. I see the next five years as a time of planning and modeling, and there are some fun projects in the works along those lines. My focus is on system change, so it's not a plan that can be implemented piecemeal. The power to create money out of thin air has to be withdrawn from the private banks, otherwise they own the houses for free and we all work for them. But I do think it's a change that could happen quickly if we know what we want. The next five years to their Agenda 2030 will be key.
It makes me happy that you're enjoying them. Thanks for letting me know!
I am finding that depending on how much change someone is willing to accept (and most don't seem to even explore that within themselves ) determines the kind of support or resistance one will get when offering a new way forward.
Some that appear to be on board for change begin to push back at a certain point:
>some want everyone on board because in a 'war' the truth and deep discussion are less important than short term momentum in toppling over the 'opposition' (discussion as a tactical maneuver instead of for clarity and long term social cohesion- social conservatives did this first, coming more from their survival brains and now it pervades all sides and all media...importantly, this social media 'winning the battle ' has taken over much of the progressive sphere as well to our collective detriment)
>others not in war/winner-take-all -mode value the connection and clarity as being more important
>some think everyone is on the same page about systemic change until they realize it also involves systemic collapse....and just how far does that go? (I reassure people here that we are fortunate to have basic infrastructure and so we don't have to revert to tin roofs, open sewers and out houses.)
>the point being people claim to be arguing over a particular detail of a new idea or system but are unconsciously (except for the tens of thousands online whose actual job it is to sustain social fragmentation) afraid of change that crosses whatever internal lines they have vis a vis safety and stability. They'll say "you are crazy!" or "wrong" or "naive" but really they don't want too much change and believe smaller changes would suffice. To them, these smaller changes are big so they think we are talking the same language about big changes.
I like that you ask to clarify terms when discussing and are reasonably thick skinned. Most people, including apparent allies, are often not deeply aware of what they are doing/saying so it's best to let go quickly and stay on course with where you are pointing.
I take thick-skinned as a compliment, thank you for noticing! Yes, someone has to intend to offend me before I take offense, and often I still don't get it ;-)
I start with measurable, tangible goals: increasing the self-reliance of a community, increasing home ownership, small local businesses, small local landlords, families living close by, people living where they work and working where they live. If someone can accomplish those goals without changing who creates the money and owns the houses, I'm all ears.
I don't know if it would require system collapse. I think it could be triggered by a bank failure where they do a 'haircut' and take a percent of all deposits. That would let people know that your money isn't being stored by the banks, you've bought 'shares' that can never go up but only down.
The transfer to CBDC could do it. Or a decline in the dollar. But perhaps the most predictable would be revoking Social Security, after everyone had paid in. That would unify Repubs & Dems. And preserving Soc Sec is the cornerstone of my plan, which can only be done by taking back the issuing of mortgages from private bankers.
You're right that the primary objection to my plan has been 'they'd never let us get away with it. Start small.' But of course they wouldn't let us get away with anything that actually changed things. So do they want to keep spinning their wheels on things that won't?
Thanks for your thoughts, Chris!
Yes, please take it as a compliment :)
Even after reading it, it’s so nice to hear you say it out loud. It’s a dense book, not gonna lie, with a limited understanding of the subject, a few elements go over my head. This helps me grok it on a deeper level, especially for the later chapters.
Btw, the aesthetic with the metallic paint and the flowers and the ensemble is *chef’s kiss*!
Can't wait for you to see that metallic paint in person! Thanks for liking my reading.
Tereza, I must get your book! Btw, there is a green card category called Alien with Extraordinary Abilities which inspired me to create my extraterrestrial alter ego, Micropixie, Alien with Extra ]ORDINARY[ Abilities. (ie. MPX has a lot of ordinary abilities — anyone can do what she does — but she has an extra set of ‘em 👽✨)
That is fantastic, you EXTRA ordinary alien, you!
Off topic but continuing with a central theme - I knew you would like this snippet ...
At 1:34:24 – Duane Hayes – “And I would say that that’s the trick they’ve done with progressivism too – that the misdefinitions of things … Defining our terms is extremely important because terms have more than one meaning […] before we get involved in any emotional back and forth right and wrong we must define our terms.”
• Bavarian Pretzel or Bulletproof Pub: Demystifying History – Daniel Kristos - Ba'al Busters
https://ftjmedia.com/channel/BaalBusters/video/.Prl-K0rk5aV63p3UU7EPXw/bavarian-pretzel-or-bulletproof-pub-demystifying-history-on-27-nov-24-09-20-05
OR
https://rumble.com/v5tkdq2-bavarian-pretzel-or-bulletproof-pub-demystifying-history.html?e9s=src_v1_ucp
Earlier on Duane says:
[1:18:58] “So you get into these multilayers of lies – that if you’re going to try to wake up a normie person, you have to first start – you almost have to walk them through the wake up process that WE went through. First you have to understand it by THIS definition, then you have to understand it by THIS [other] definition .. “
I indeed like that snippet! Glad someone else is spreading the gospel of clear definitions.
You have a limited historical perception. You should read Imperium by Francis Parker Yockey and Oswald Spengler. Your essay deals with only the Classical Period and the Western European period. The Classical Period ended the same way this period will end, a victim of Enlightenment thinking. It has happened to every high culture in history, 8 or 9. Culture arises in a landscape, among a particular group and based on that groups insular distance, it achieves success and ultimately expands due to biological imperative (population growth) until it is forced to deal with outer groups, which are subdued and incorporated into the society as peers or subjects depending on the outer group’s ability to be incorporated into the body of the culture or are incompatible with that society for racial or cultural differences.
To find the place where we disagree, Dojun, let me start with the basic point that this chapter is looking to prove: at the invention of democracy, Greece was a slaveowning society, an empire with colonies. Do you disagree with that? Those people were excluded, along with all women. Inclusion required wealth that was produced by those who were excluded. So the word democracy, as rule by the common people, is a psyop. The common people were doing the work, and had no say or vote in governance. The lords of the land, who held people hostage to their stomachs, were required to increase the archon's capacity for violence as the price of entry to the assembly.
Tell me where I'm wrong about this particular slice of history, the origin of democracy. And the rhetorical trick of 'read this to see why you're wrong' is what I call throwing the book at it. You've read Imperium. Tell me the evidence it cites that contradicts the above.
Democracy, enlightenment thinking, happened in all previous cultures that grew out of their boundaries and became civilizations. Meaning they started incorporating people unlike themselves. After ruling over them, they did, in fact, democratize. To a certain extent you are correct that it is a pretense, INITIALLY, but the pretense is fulfilled in reality by the common people and the civilization self-immolates. Only a vanguard of cultural custodians is capable of building up a society and maintaining it. Once those custodians are replaced, eclipsed, bred out of existence by submerging themselves with the “other”, the outsider, heathen, etc., the society must collapse as its progenitors no longer exist. This is a fact. There is no more Spartan/Athens, Rome from the Classical, there is no Spain, France or Britain of the West. The United States worked with Communist Russia to destroy Europe and the West along with it. This was because most of the West, as well as nihilist Russia, were under the control of cultural outsiders, in fact, the same outsiders that destroyed the Biblical period. People we now refer to as Jews, who claim to be Israelites but are clearly not if one actually studies Scripture. There is a golden thread that runs through history going back 5000-6000 years. Your historical perspective is, alas, myopic.
Another way of saying myopic is focused. Rather than spouting generalities with no actual citations or new information, I'm presenting one particular point in time. You haven't contradicted a single point I made above. Really, you'd call it a pretense when the ruling class tricks the population into fighting with each other instead of rebelling, and the same trick is still working 3500 yrs later? I'd have a stronger word for that.
I don't disagree (I think) with the overall point you're making about the infiltration and usurping of cultures by a group I'd call Hyksos or the Royal Scythes or the Black Nobility. Back then they organized nomadic tribes like the Habiru or Hebrew to do their dirty work. I've written a lot about that. But I don't see the relevance of that to the question: is empire compatible with democracy? If so, how? If not, which was ancient Greece?
The answer seems clear in our examples of today, with the Enslavement of States and all our ancestors by the Freemasons and powerful Jews linked to the Private City of London and connected banking-investment that controlled British Empire in secrete and immunity by actively debt-enslaving the powerful in the Empire.
The same procedure was used in the once States and instigated an unJust genocidal war and enslaved all States and peoples under the Federal Gov which was so immune to the wants and needs of the population that it stopped being anything not best handed from a tree to protect us and all the world, as we see it now, Poison-Death spewing GreatSatan Empire directed from Hell.
Similar enslavement in Europe and used debt-enslavement mostly, possible because those in control had murdered so many virtuous white Christian men in WWI, WWII, Holodomor, and more in those close enough to influence like the Armenian Genocide, while mind-raping us - especially Western womanhood into a functional destructive Machine serving Hell and Witch directed that was turned against Fatherhood, family, unborn, themselves, and Love, Joy, Truth, Justice, Order, .., goodness and sanity.
Not only is Empire never democratic, like Federal Gov and EU we all would be free and safer if it destroyed and every person and the adults in their families removed so completely that dog would piss on where they are, like that their plan for us has been for centuries ..
.. after all, we are all Palestinians now and have been.
God Bless., Steve
Steven, my policy is that all ideas are welcome to challenge but I don't allow insults to people, as individuals or groups. Like "[turning] Western womanhood into a functional destructive Machine serving Hell and Witch directed that was turned against Fatherhood, family, unborn, themselves ..." or "GreatSatan Empire directed from Hell".
When you write "virtuous white Christian men" are you talking about the 'Holy' Roman Empire, that wreaked more destruction on the world and caused more suffering than any other institution? And with the Church as the greatest global empire, would you be okay with someone else saying that we would be free and safer if every adult Christian was removed from every family so dogs would piss where they were?
If you continue to attack people rather than challenging ideas with logic and facts, I will need to ban you. I would do the same if someone insulted you.
Thank you for the warning to not express to much truth in my warning, personal experience, and clarity, I truly expected no different, only hoped beyond reason - it still springs eternal.
Assumption of bad-faith in others is a poison. Beware.
God Bless., Steve
If by 'truth' you mean your innate moral superiority and god-given right to rule over others--judging and condemning them--you're welcome to express that here, but expect it to be challenged.
From my previous work, it seems you did expect 'no different.' I'm glad that my consistency led you to that and you don't take it personally.
Odd that you would say "Assumption of bad-faith in others is a poison." My dogma that I'm no better than anyone else means giving everyone the benefit of the doubt for their good intentions. That's exactly what I'm critiquing in you, when you say Western womanhood serves Hell and is directed by witches, and mothers of trans and all adult Jews should be killed. Is that not assuming that they have acted in bad faith?
Greek Democracy was articulated by writers who had studied how the Greek farmers had organized themselves for decision making. The Greek guy who writes about this is Evaggelos Vallianatos. Perhaps similarly, Thomas Jefferson envisioned a yeoman small farmer decentralized democracy. After the Civil War the big question was what to do with the land of the former slaveowners, hence the idea of "40 acres and a mule" championed by Thaddeus Stevens and others. Some land had already been distributed to the freed men as well as to poor whites. Alas, northern factory owners were concerned that this idea of "free land" might catch on in the north in which case they would lose their "wage slaves." Land reform is still the undiscovered revolution in American politics which is why the movements that I engage with are working for tax shift off of labor and production and onto the commons rent, a decentralized land value based form of property tax.
Hmmm ... that seems like it contradicts this account, Alanna. Solon is the inventor of what he termed democracy. He was an archon, a member of the ruling class, and a merchant. If by farmer you mean those who did the work of farming, they couldn't participate in democracy because they were producing those thousands of bushels of barley for those who did.
My purpose is to establish a foundation for the book by reaching agreement on one point on which to build. In the next chapter, I get into coinage and taxation--which was on the land. But here I'm looking to establish that the origin of 'democracy' was for slaveowners and lords of the land, using other people's labor. No matter what happened later, that was how it started.
Evaggelos Vallianotos is a Greek (American) author who writes about the origin of democracy with the then INDEPENDENT Greek farmers. This would have been before Solon took credit for the ideas and distorted them to favor aristocrats. Taxation on land would have been because there was not much else to tax at the time and would surely have been disproportionate falling more heavily on small landowners who were relatively disempowered. (PS: I work for land value taxation which is different than land taxation as it captures the unearned income, the commons rent, (highly concentrated in urban areas) for the benefit of everyone while removing taxes on labor and needed productive activities).
A good place to look for the corruption of democracy would be the Roman empire with its goal of dominium which is pretty much the same as our "full spectrum dominance." The corruption of Christianity was under Constantine (note Council of Nicea 325 AD) who defied the Christian economic principles of the land as "koina" (commons) for the "autarcheia" - the self-sufficiency of all. Augustine then came up with Just War Theory as reasoning behind why pacifist (thou shalt not kill) Christians should participate in wars (now called "Responsibility to Protect" - R2P) You can deep dive into this with Charles Avila's book Ownership: Early Christian Teachings" and a bit with my E.F. Schumacher Lecture Democracy, Earth Rights and the Next Economy here:
https://open.spotify.com/episode/6eWpo96sOB1NG2NHtCz4eK
where I also talk about the Crack in the Liberty Bell which is the lack of democratic rights to the earth as a birthright leading to gross wealth and power inequality.
Here's a better definition of freedom: self-determination to goodness.
For example, a junkie, though free to ruin his life, he is not really free, right? the more he chooses drugs, the less free he becomes.
So freedom is a value in itself, not just the anti-thesis to slavery and lack of choice.
We won’t be able to find real solutions unless we identify “the powers that SHOULDN’T be” and their goals:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
Is there any proof that they really want to murder all of us?
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/criminal-intent
How to get out of this political genocidal mess?
SIMPLE SOLUTION in 3 steps:
1. Pray MAGA: Make America God’s again. Pray “Thy Kingdom come”. Make the world His Kingdom of love. “God is love”.
John Dickinson, Chairman of the Committee for the Declaration of Independence (1776): “Our liberties do not come from charters; for these are only the declaration of pre-existing rights. They do not depend on parchments or seals; but come from the King of Kings and the Lord of all the earth”
The US national motto is “in God we trust”1, the Oath of Allegiance sums up in “so help me God”2, and the Pledge of Allegiance is “I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.”
“Under God”, not only means under God’s protection/providence, but also under God's will/authority and Commandments.
America fist should mean God first as in the first Commandment!
Separation of church and State doesn’t mean banning God from civil life, but only "freedom of conscience", i.e. that a Government should not impose any particular religion. It doesn't mean that public officials can't show and live their faith in public, and it means that the State must always put all actions "under God", definitely not “under Satan” or over God ’s Will. Lincoln: “the nation shall, under God, have a new birth of freedom.” 3
Freemasonry is one of the “churches” of Satan: in their documents worship Lucifer as their “Great Architect”. “Separation of church and State” requires eliminating the demono-cracy over Government.
Theocracy comes from “theo”, God, “cratos”, power, but this has nothing to do with God, but Satan and his demons, so it’s a demono-cracy by the SSS (Satanic Secret Societies).
Get the murderers out of government: force masons to self-identify by law under severe penalty (their oath doesn't forbid self-identification, also, evil oaths are void).
1st Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of (the masonic) religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof (of other religions, like they did with lockdowns); or abridging the freedom of speech (like the massive masonic censorship of the conspiracy evidence, especially since 2020), or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble (lockdowns), and to petition the government for a redress of grievances” (like the wrongful COVID response and compensation to the victims, especially those fired for refusing getting poison in their veins and those disabled by them).
----------------
2. This will never stop unless we stop using those UNBACKED colored worthless papers that we call money, masons keep counterfeiting in trillions of dollars per year to buy, corrupt (Epstein-style) and bribe EVERYTHING for sale, starting with consciences.
MAGA (Make Assets Great Again): money should be 100% backed with gold and real assets. This makes masonic counterfeiting harder. They are buying everything with trillions of fake money: listed corporations, media, medical system, political parties, prosti-ticians, universities… !
Satanic secret societies like the masons are increasing the financial supply through:
- Forging dollars using the Federal Reserve they fully control
- Money creation through bank loans without reserves
- Financial “wealth” creation out of thin air through financial instruments such as derivatives
- Government debt
It's what I call finflation: inflation of financial instruments
The way out of this financial nightmare:
1. Create an easy system for “real money”: private currencies/warrants/tokens based on real assets, goods, services, etc. (gold, corn, flour, oil, distance/volume/weight transportation, labor human hour/minute, etc.)
2. Ban:
a) Legal tender (free markets decide which “real money” they prefer to trade with)
b) Paper-backed debt, including:
- Currencies (even foreign)
- Government debt: allowing a government to get indebted is like giving credit to a drug-addict.
- Fractional reserve loaning: all financial loans should be 100% backed by deposits (so banks don't create money based on air), and therefore, there's no need for a Central Bank, because there would be no risk of bank-runs since all their loans are fully backed. Kill Central Banks.
3. Make usury illegal again! It’s a sin in the Bible!
Force all social networks and media to kill algorithmic moderation (shadow banning, etc.) and reinstate all closed accounts. Only messages selling things can be blocked IF it comes from outside one's network. Let people decide who's in their social network and that's it.
Replace the internet with a new peer to peer protocol, not government controlled, not centralized.
Get out of the UN organizations (including WHO), get out of the IMF, WorldBank, OAS, IADB, etc. All have been weaponized. Create alternative cooperative organizations, never legally binding.
------------------
3. Start your local parallel economy: organics coop.
Start by giving free talks on the benefits of going organic. Form a conscious community first!
The full plan exposed and 16 laws we need to exit Extermination Planet
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/the-plan-revealed
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/laws-to-exit-planet-prison
No Free Speech without Reach. We need a #FreeReach laws urgently!
http://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/no-free-speech-without-reach
Why is food poisoning legal?
How Rumsfeld forced the approval of lethal Aspartame.
Artificial sweeteners, MSG, PFAS, Glyphosate ... go organic!
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/why-is-food-poisoning-legal
How about REAL democracy: townhall republican democracy?
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/reinventing-democracy
Minimize the Federal Government. Repeal 16th amendment (income tax)
Rethinking science
Sciencing the rigged and corrupt scientific system for an overdue turnaround
Unless we change it, we’re doomed to the next PLANdemic. And yet, nothing has changed, only got worse!
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/rethinking-science
Government spends 2x per student in public schools with respect to private ones and 3x at university level, with worse outcomes in all levels of education.
Time for a 100% voucher system, where parents can choose schools or earn the voucher money themselves if they homeschool (and their kids pass the exams), or through grand/parent/teacher coops.
This would allow many mothers to leave a work they hate, double their income, and stay home with their babies and children, especially in the most important years of childhood until 6 years old. It would have a deep impact on society and recover fertility replacement rate!
How to save the life from the COVID vaxxed in 10 easy fast steps?
Appeal to authority (that’s the only thing they listen to):
1. Show that, while it is still given in the USA, all countries in Northern Europe banned Moderna due to the severe after-effects (let’s not call them side effects, but deliberate effects).
2. Show them Florida’s declaration not recommending COVID vaccines to most of the population.
3. Show Texas and 4 other states suing Pfizer for lying about vaccine efficacy (couldn’t sue the rest because of special DoD protection).
4. Show Health Canada’ statement about finding DNA plasmids in mRNA shots, proving they hacked the cell nucleus. Show the Swedish study proving that the cell nucleus is hacked by mRNA vaccines. Show that 30% of the proteins produced by the hacked cells have nothing to do with COVID.
5. Show that Health Canada also says that Pfizer inserted a sequence of the SV40 monkey virus. Show the studies proving that SV40 is carcinogenic.
6. Show that the Republican Party declared COVID “vaccines” a “biological and technical bioweapon” and instructed the authorities to seize vials and run a forensic analysis.
Appeal to science:
7. Show the studies proving that the injected are still producing spike protein and other unknown ones.
8. Show the studies proving that the spike protein was engineered to kill in Wuhan by adding HIV sequence and a Moderna cancer-related patent.
9. Convince them to labtest the amount of spike protein in their blood, which is still produced by their hacked cells and if they can’t afford it:
10. Convince them to lower the spike protein in blood by trying any of the spike detox protocols based mostly on cheap medicines. They have nothing to lose, by trying it for a week, if their health improves, then they know that the bio-weapon caused their health problems:
https://covid19criticalcare.com/protocol/i-recover-post-vaccine-treatment/
https://worldcouncilforhealth.org/resources/spike-protein-detox-guide/
https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/p/lipid-nanoparticle-associated-inflammation/
https://anamihalceamdphd.substack.com/p/methylene-blue-prevents-and-reverses/
https://www.earthclinic.com/remedies/methylene-blue.html
God willingly, I’ll soon post about all that, in-depth with all the references.
When looking at the true meaning of a word when it was coined, I think that etymology is telling. It shows how we're being limited in our thinking by the language itself. The quote that Julius had cited, which got me started looking it up, was this in full:
"One of the important central concepts in Ivan Ilyin's thinking is the definition of freedom. The word ‘freedom’ in the West has been butchered to the point where it now almost means the opposite of what it originally was meant to be. The word that we should use I think that would make better sense is ‘autonomy’ rather than freedom. In the West there's a tendency to believe that freedom refers to the ability to do whatever you want, that there is a lack of external restraint and so it comes down to being able to act arbitrarily, having no reason to act the way you do, because there can be no causality-[…] it's freedom to do whatever you want, and that's somehow a good thing.”
Matthew Raphael Johnson on discussing Russian Nationalist Philosopher Ivan Ilyin (at 21:23):
https://odysee.com/@InvincibleOrthodoxy:3/russian-nationalist-philosopher-ivan:c
I tend to agree with Ilyin that autonomy or self-reliance or community autarky is a more meaningful term, none of which is possible without land. If someone drops you in the forest or in a war zone or a ghetto and says, "There, now you're free!" what does that mean? To have self-determination we need other people. Freedom means nothing as an individual, imo.
Well said! Freedom cannot be enjoyed without the ability to satisfy basic needs, and this necessarily involves community autonomy , self-reliance and autarky which defends those basic rights.
There’s a real case where a whole family was suddenly deported by the Russian Stalin-communists to Siberia and dropped at a train station in the middle of the night in the woods, -20 C°. They were free to go… nowhere! The 1-year old baby died of hypothermia, others lost fingers.
Thank God they believed in Divine Justice. Otherwise, anyone would go mad in such desperate situation.
It’s like a thermostatic self-regulated system: when evil increases, goodness over-compensates and win. Sooner or later evil burns itself to ashes. Genealogies prove that no evil man has more than 4 generations: Henry VIII, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, Pol Pot, etc.
Next generations will be able to track the Biblical curse on the COVID scum behind the COVID scam: Tedros, Schwab, Gates, Fauci, Collins, Biden, Trudeau and the long list of villains.
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/payback-time
@Fred Nazar: I like the idea of the school vouchers and the home schooling, that's a great one.
In regards to the ending of usury, I don't feel that's rational. Banks require employees, operating costs, cost for collections, advertising, etc. You can't expect anyone to run a business that won't make a profit, outside of socialism. What would be their incentive for offering loans, and when people inevitably don't pay loans back, who is going to eat the cost of the loss? Especially since the loaned money would be based on 100% backed money, no fiat lending, and it is without a doubt that some won't pay the loans back, if nothing else because they die off, or can't work, then the bank would be operating at a loss. So then there would be no banks, and of which then, there would be people who needed to borrow money in order to gain skills training, buy into infrastructure for living, such as a mortgage, etc and couldn't find the funds, unless they had relatives who could help. That would mean that those who had family and friends with money would have an advantage and those who didn't, who always be poor and require to always be renting and wouldn't be able to go to school. Without usury, you would definitely need to have socialism or a hybrid socialist/capitalist system. What are your thoughts on this? How would you keep banks open without usury?
I hope you stay with the book reading until I get to the end, Songtsan. I deal exactly with the points you're raising.
About your objection to ending usury, at over 60 yo I remember my grandmother trying to guide her daughter (my mother) against getting a car loan, by saying that when they and her ancestors wanted or needed something the saved and suffered, did without.
Unfortunately my mother's generation as with mine and all since disrespect the old wisdoms, and my grandmother might have been more effective in speaking of usury enslavement like the recent generation is under with student loans and that our now President Biden when a senator pushed one of this Satanic directed laws that exclude those loans from normal bankruptcy, Biden did it because he sold his soul to Satan as a young man seeking power and look at him now and the State of the Presidency and our nation in the world and in the endless death, suffering, horror and evil most of us and the world see it is - he would have been wiser (in not deal, of course) but to seek power over a hot-dog stand, it would be impossible to get near the hideous Evil murderous soul-destroying tool of Hell that this GreatSatan Empire is now.
And she and those before her understood Suffering was a big and valuable part of every life, and delayed gratification was rewarded in many ways.
Of course, back when I was a Child and my grandmother was alive, such Truth was not clear to her or few, and so we suffer the daily murdering of our souls, poverty of slime Grace, ignorance, Pride, Godlessness, Sin and Hell, with hopes and joys that otherwise would be Loving Healthy Life aborted before their first breath, much like the 60, the average number of babies tortured to death in every State every day.
God Bless., Steve
I'm not objecting to ending usury. I just can't see how it could be done, other than ending financial lending institutions altogether. If one plays the game right of course, one can easily navigate the world of debts and come out on top, by doing it strategically, borrowing for what will give one an advantage in life, such as a vehicle or tools for running a business. Then with the ability to broaden ones ability to bring in income, one pays the debt off quickly and one benefits from the loan. The fed should not be able to print money, based on credit, and what they do is this: the government sells bonds, etc which are bought by private buyers who then immediately turn around and sell most of them to the fed, which then can print the money based on the bonds and other instruments. The banks that run the federal reserve can't fiat lend if they buy the bonds, etc directly from the government, but they CAN if they buy them from private sellers (middlemen who take a profit off of the exchange, who are also associated with the same families who own the federal reserve banks). Now they can fiat lend that money. The money comes out of thin air. It makes no real sense, but neither does lending someone money without interest, because inflation will keep happening with this system, and so when someone pays back a loan down the line after inflation had occurred, they are actually paying the lender less money, so the whole system needs to be scrapped. If the system stays the same, then usury makes sense. No one is going to lend anyone money and accept the money back later if its been devalued by inflation. Thats silly. Its rotten to the core. Babylonian black money magic as they say. I've never ever heard of a sensible cure for the problem though. Everyone complains at how it is but none of the complainers, to my knowledge, has a better system in mind. Now, okay, let's say you do the thing where you don't borrow at scrimp and save, be patient. That simply won't work in every situation, if you are already poor. Let's say you live in the country, and there is no public transportation. Maybe there is nowhere nearby to get a job, absolutely nowhere. You need a vehicle, you are a kid who just graduated from high school, maybe your parents are poor, and there is only one car and it's already in use. You maybe have to borrow then, or maybe you are trying to go to college, and none of your relatives have money to help out. So you have to borrow. As I said, it's easy to say that the system sucks, but pragmatically speaking, in lieu of a replacement system, and I use the serenity prayer for this one, who is going to change it? It is what it is. To change it would be so enormously complex and require something akin to complete regime change not only nationally-wide, but internationally as well, since this is the system almost everyone uses. I HIGHLY doubt that will ever happen, not in this lifetime, so why bother complaining. Wisdom to know the difference when things cannot be changed. Then instead of devoting energy to complaining about what will not be changing soon, one should instead focus on what can be done within the system that is. The only possible option I can think of, which probably wouldn't work anyways, is to form a government within a government, based on whatever value system you have, maybe such as the Amish do, and interact as little as possible within the outer government. I haven't researched this, but I doubt the Amish lend eachother money with interest. That type of community is not possible within a heterogeneous population though. It takes people invested in the same level of ethical and moral principles, that you know won't take advantage of eachother for one, to make a system like that work. We have to deal with the lowest common denominator though in terms of what will work in regards to heterogeneous populations and that appears to be mainly capitalism and usury based lending. There is too much inequality and people (like 40% of the world population or MORE) who live by getting over on everyone else, scamming, cheating, lying, etc. If everyone always paid debts back and no one scammed and lied, cheated, etc. yeah you could probably come up with an usury free system, but good luck with that. The real world is not conducive to it. That's axiomatic.
In essence, my system does what you're describing, Songtsan, as "a government within a government, based on whatever value system you have," although mine is an economy within an economy. I don't try to change the government or nat'l/ global economy at all, other than ONLY allowing local community-owned banks to issue mortgages on the properties within their borders, and issue the credit to repay them as an equal monthly distribution.
I'll be interested in your response when I get to chapters like Banking is Governance. From my research, it works differently than your statements but I'll leave that for when we get there.
Interests should never be above GDP/capita growth, or population growth (if GDP is proportionate).
Interests are forbidden in certain Islamic nations. Instead, Banks charge admin costs and get part of the stock or profits. Insurance solves collection problems.
Also, there's peer to peer lending and coop finance.
If your neighbor asks for a cup of sugar, would you require a spoonful as interest? Why not? Why can't we build something like: I lend you now, I get x points, so when in need I could use those points for a community loan?
The same could work for a friends and family based blood donation bank!
One book that I have on my shelf is Islam and the Moral Economy by Charles Tripp. How it says that Islam defines usury is more than twice the amount borrowed in repayment. This is what I adopt in my plan when the community-issued mortgage can't exceed 5.3% over 30 yrs. It would also resolve student debt, which goes far beyond that. And national debts should always be denominated in the borrower's currency, so they're like an IOU against future production, and can't be used to extract land, real estate, natural resources, corporations or assets of the borrower.
They also can't exceed 30 yrs, which is one generation--who's debts can't be passed on to the next creating debt in perpetuity like Haiti, among others. And an analysis of predatory or extractive debt should determine if anything is owed, or if the lender actually owes the borrower.
If all housing needs to be bought outright, it seems like it would monopolize ownership in the hands of those who already have money. The rest would be crowding their parents' house until they died, then fighting over who gets it. My plan allows for flexibility along with taking responsibility for previous and next generations as a whole. It doesn't leave that up to good faith, but builds it in as an economy of reciprocity.
But we're getting far ahead of ourselves. I'll look forward to comparing our plans in the final section of the book. For the first three sections, I'm looking to establish a deep understanding of the problem, and how far it goes back. Thanks for engaging, Fred!
If it would be possible to calculate the real value of a loan exactly, inclusive of devaluation due to inflation, REAL costs of administration, and REAL percentage of infrastructure involved in maintaining the lenders business, dialed in to a T, I think that would be fair, but I'm thinking of this as nonprofit, meaning only covering actual costs, and not for-profit. Also, you should, as what I am basically describing is something like a credit union, equally share the costs of those members who end up not paying the loans back for whatever reason. I think a community owned bank, perhaps the same as a credit union, is the way to go, but this brings up other points of interest, such as, shouldn't everyone share in the ownership of land equally? How can someone be born into this world owning no share of the land? At one point, there was no real land ownership. We are stuck now in this day and age, looking up to the ones who had ancestors who basically just went out and claimed land, "first come, first taken, first owned," and newcomers now own nothing. When population was small anyone could go out and find land. If we as humans went to a system of land ownership which was fairly split among all members of the human collective, then one would come into this world owning a % of land, and one could then borrow off of it as collateral. If they don't pay the loan back and lose their land share, that's their problem. Then individuals could have collateral for use in using credit from a lender. This would also help defray the tendency of the have nots to hate the haves, which leads to people hating from births the haves, in which case they borrow and don't pay back, and steal, and so on, because there is a deeply felt sense of having been shafted. I think any perfect economical system must take into account the fact that many come into the world (especially with ever increasing population) owning nothing. I think that since there is something like 5 acres of land per person in the world, that public lands, even those upon which things are already built, should be collectively owned and everyone should, immediately upon being born, deserve a share in this collective land.
There is no inflation under my plan, and even reverse inflation--which should always be called dilution because it dilutes the value of money relative to the asset that backs it, in this case housing. https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/inflation-colonization
Under my plan, everyone IS born with an equal share of the land of their commonwealth, distributed as an equal share of the collective mortgages. But in order to use it for their own mortgage or rent, they need to earn it from their neighbors while at the same time using their own share to pay their neighbors for food, wellcare, education and home improvements.
Your statement earlier was that we can't change the system, hence the serenity prayer. Now you're talking about a forced redistribution of land, perhaps the most extreme system change. My book uses three sections to show that nothing but system change can work, and then asks what the simplest change would be to make the most difference for the most people. Since you want to skip the sections I'm reading aloud to understand the problem and go right to comparing solutions against measurable criteria, may I suggest you buy my book? It would be easier than me trying to fit the whole thing in a comment box.
https://www.amazon.com/How-Dismantle-Empire-2020-Vision/dp/1733347607.
Link doesn't work
Money is not a tangible asset though, it's mutable. The cup of sugar stays the same. A cup is a cup. Inflation in 2023 was ~4 % or whatever. Therefore to borrow money and pay it back later after it's inflated means you are paying less back. It's funny how the fed seems to lend money to the banks at less interest % than Inflation rate much of the time, but anyways, interest should at least be at the level of the rate of Inflation that occurred over the life of the loan, calculated exactly. However, I believe it would be better if we got rid of banks and we all just borrowed directly from the government, which is ideally the people. At the same rate the banks get to borrow at. If the government sold debt bonds to itself and cut out all the middle men, then it would be the people selling debt to themselves, and paying themselves back. The money is fake and everyone knows it. Silver and gold really have not much value other than use in electronics and jewelry. Since they still store it in the form of gold bars all over the world it's obviously not that much in demand. The whole problem is valuing a currency on something else. The value of things fluctuates. Therefore the value of money fluctuates. Therefore loans will lose out as things fluctuate. Things lose their value, unless the market is artificially manipulated to expand perceived value. Did you ever read Silent Weapons for Quiet Wars? The system itself is so easily manipulation prone, that a complete replacement of the system is the only thing that will suffice. I don't know how we could do that with the "momentum" it has, from thousands of years of "investment" - my assumption of course, that it needs to be replaced.
Agreed again on borrowing directly from the gov't, but in my system that's a commonwealth gov't not centralized, which we misleadingly call Federal.
Borrowing directly from the government has already been tried in many countries turning into a complete disaster: a huge debt no one pays back, or with fake bankruptcies while people flee away with the money.
The solution is real money: bills backed by real goods and services such as 1 oz of flour, 1 gallon of gasoline, one tonne of soya beens, 1 human hour/minute of labor. The latter provides credit even to the most poor.
Wow, Prof. Fred. There is little here I would change.
But perhaps simplify - like revert corporate law back to the earlier version where they did not have personhood legal rights and those that own or direct are no immune to the evils and mass destruction they are used for now, as well as the 'Money is Speach' which turned them into Satanic Dragons with super-personhood and many more powerful in wealth and resources today then entire countries, and the loss of immunity to the dead, horror, destruction and other Stanic purposes they are now put to would be gone, that no owner, part owner, or executive would ever allow the size (number of people employed) to grow beyond their personal ability to manage well, at risk of ripping away every resource of theirs and often their families and anywhere they may use to hide it.
Traditional Catholic Theology and Doctrines on governance is relevant and the writings available which lays-out the reasons from first principles like Natural Law and Common Law brings a level of Clarity that I find brings Clarity and Right Order to this topic and so many others.
There can be know true Freedom without Truth, Justice and good Oder shaped society and family, Darkened Intellect and other mind-crippling that this mind-raping Hell has done to us for generation of forced acceptance as sane and reasonable; mothers torturing to death our babies on whim, destroy Fatherhood & families and cripple for life all children, and all lovingly close or dependent, sexually mutilating and sterilizing our children, mind-raping them with life-shortening unending failure confusion .. and unending suffering till early death and suicides, allowing lying to go uncorrected, unLovingly and with hateful Sickening of womanhood and harm to all that would or do love them by immunity to all Just and Loving punishments and hyper-empowering them and filling with insanities and hate-fear of their benefactors and forces for good, .. and .. and .. such insanity we all forced from crib has weaken and so damaged our intellect, judgement, prudence, humility, ... all virtues and Loving proper Fear of God.
As implied - public correction of all lies and other socially destructive behaviors (10 Commandments and related) from age 15 with 13-14-year-olds required to be there and able to watch no less then 3 times each year, and public pain&shame used as default first level of corrections of those others judged to be proper regarding the crime and the damage and related. In the week of judgement - say Saturdays - each is taken to a public park or some other public place and videos streamed with relating information and they secured and a collar around the neck and tasered the length of time directed - with expected soiling and scream seen by all.
.. what a better world if would be and better us if we lived in it, with this Loving addition in it. Think of all the powerful and often all the adults in the families in recent memory that lied and manipulated us and our resources into wars that killed millions, how Just this would be as well as their public execution in the ways of men and other died from their lies, the pouring of White phosphorus over them, or them trapped in a burning tank screaming with others in their vile poisonous sick families.
We could replace courts with a few - up to 12 - fathers and grandfather that have raised children into decent adults that are a Blessing to community. And allow for ability for interpersonal corrections backed by loss of civil abilities if they refuse to properly respond to a Call for Justice, in what form accepted by the damaged person, with Taser-duel as the standard, that is both write up their side of the issue for public access, and in a place designed for this function - police station or room in court house.
There would be two chairs and each sits and someone would buckle both down and attach neck collars and the slow increasing taser pain would start when both of the two button (each has one) is pushed, and does not end until both are released - and had such existed there have been women and some men that I would suffer till unconscious with them screaming and piss themselves to Thank Them for the Hell the caused me and to help them remember not to do it again - for the simple reason they and all watching on video stream or recording, they might f-with another man like me that would kill us both if needed to stop their vile evil, and to protect any future targets they might find.
There are so many simple ways to turn this Hell-Train around and to keep us all going in the Just and Loving direction - that those simple effective options are now impossible because of baby-murdering twisted putrefied-souled powerful Vag-nazis and Satanic Gov are always near and directed by those in power that clearly hate us and want us all and all we love suffering till dead, as we should be able to see by now - we are all Palestinians now and have always been to them.
So many possible solutions and related perspective that your excellent comment has inspired me to write, but Alas, Babylon!, beside simply suggesting worldwide Nuke war might be best, the spirit is willing, but the body has been up all night, and I have other priorities. Thank you again for this comment.
Gid Bless., Steve
love the free dom part, lots of mixing can be done and the two definition together makes atrocity: like love-doom, or take a wife as a statute right, free her by owning her. democracy as asked in further question is for me a capitalocracy. AS then in greece as now in america. money gave power, and what gabe says down there is true too. at a higher stage no need for money. but it still relates cause the no need for money is possible cause they all owned the money. what we got is lended nothing more. the house, the car the cash, what we think we own they provided to keep that veil of liberty in everyone face( guess not only musulman woman lol) if we look at it metaphoricly.
if i can point something else, you mentionned gnostic definition of archon. what perplexes me often is how everyone claim gnostic are the source of satanism and freemasonery at one point. And in other moment they can use their wise view of the world to validate their belief. its either they evil liars or good man who didnt want to be part of the society we all trying to decypher.
i was wondering whats your take on gnostic? i have a view sided findeing the second definition more accurate. Maybe thats why they call me an heretic sometimes. hehe who knows=)
i'll keep reading, and i'm back at ya when i know the caret system ;)
I studied the gnostics pretty intensely for awhile, especially the gospel of Philip. I started writing a book called Revolutionary Mystics and How to Become ONE. Here are the first couple chapters of it:
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/revolutionary-mystics-and-how-to
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-genesis-of-the-dysfunctional
And these deal with gnosticism: https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-tonic-gnostic
https://thirdparadigm.substack.com/p/the-isha-the-gita-and-the-course
The literal meaning of gnostic is anyone who believes God is knowable, the inverse of agnostic who says "we'll never know God. Why try?"
It's over 200 different texts from different authors, different schools of thought. I don't think we should lump them all together.
The Sethian gnostics believed in the demiurge, and that's where I think a lot of the Satanism comes in. I think they were the proto-Genesis, the mythology that preceded the story of Eden and Adam and Eve begetting Seth, who's also the destructive god Set aka Yahweh. They just can't be lumped together as if everything that isn't Biblical Christianity is the same.
The book sounds interesting, and recall that the end of the debt-Jubilees was the end to freeing of so so many enslaved directly or through usury, and perhaps you address that in later parts of book.
The largest group size of any Institution throughout the levels of representation or support should stay under Dunbar's number [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number], and a gov of huge numbers of people could be effectively represented in a few levels of such, where one in each group is member of the group above.
Democracy - if it must be suffered - then a good steppingstone towards returning Sanity but let us address a related and very significant issue. Perhaps and I hope it will be a stimulation for you and others to write and discuss with others this thought; ..
.. that allowing everyone to vote is insane. That a simple policy of requiring full citizenship power be earned by 4 or more years of voluntary Service, community, national, and-or international, sex-separated dorms, in skill training, .. and most things if makes sense to be separated - real sense and not the broken-slimy-twisted-lying feminist-feelie 'sense' .. and when done those 4 years we all can trust that person to care for others and Nation, and likely to not vote if they are unclear on issues.
The sex-separation is clearly best for those that was once a young man filled with hormones and distracted so easily by young women, and back then we did not have fellow students wearing tight yoga pants where camel-tow clearly displayed. Would I have been able to do two years of advance AP Calculus or do well in any subject under such situation? The young women I studied with and friends and lovers with would not have done that to us men, and I assume the teachers would not have allowed that for the reason I stated.
Is there any objections along the line that young men should [somehow] not be distracted, and with all my thousands of generation of successful procreation Just and Energy I could kick such vile male-hating retards toothless and remove them, and gather thousands or millions of young men across the Sick Western womanhood Poisoned nations, those men and their fathers and others that hope for a chance for those and all young men to not be crippled by such vileness and-or ignorance, and kick toothless and remove every millions of you that actively hold such a position and are to immune to the damage they do with the putrid vile vomit that spews from such women and others, and discuss removing all the adults in those poisonous families.
You see, I hold as true that it is a goodness and effective to punish mothers and all significant people that shaped those people that are shown so dangerous, for making us suffer them. And as such which women would not seek the best possible father and then keep them.
Do you think we will see Justice in all the mothers killed by their [trans] adult children in the future? They each know who it Just to kill her, along with the millions across the West of others that supported or did not try to stop such clear evil insanity. Those millions that they cannot remove and prevent from destroying other children's lives .. and some people think mass death worldwide from nuke war or other BlackSwan event would not be Just and for those that survive - a Goodness.
Thoughts?
God Bless., Steve
Since this was written before my warning, Steve, I'll skip over the parts that demean women and respond to the ideas. I don't write about the Jubilee in my book but I do in my analysis of the Torah. According to Hebrew scriptures, once land was divided by choosing lots among the Hebrews, it was theirs in perpetuity. So they were the landlords and someone could pay for 50 years to cultivate and build on the land. But at the end of 50 years, they took it back. I think that's the insidious history of the Jubilee. And remember, it's in the same scriptures that empowered the oligarchs who rule us through financial control today--as you rightly point out.
My system, as you'll see if you stay to the end of the book, enables communities at the size of Dunbar's number to control their own labor by issuing the debt backed by the housing--the mortgages--and also student debt, along with issuing the credit to repay the debt. It doesn't give anyone control over anyone else, and the credit needs to be distributed equally to all members of that community.
Members need to include any person born there who currently resides there, and all primary-resident homeowners when the plan is instituted. So mothers, at the neighborhood level of Dunbar's number, can't be excluded or any person arbitrarily. You can, however, say that you'll only include non-native residents in your distribution and voting after four years of public service.
In my Santa Cruz home, I'd recommend eight years of residency before someone's a member because we're inundated with students who vote in local issues as freshmen and crowd out families and workers from housing. Our challenge is to lower the cost of housing by giving those born here, long term residents, and those who work here priority.
In my Appalachian hometown, I'd recommend new homeowners be made members right away. Their challenge, and why they offered a $20K bonus for people to move there, is not enough money in circulation. They had 1000 applicants before they cut it off, and only funding for 10, btw.
For your neighborhood, you could propose that any classes that use the educational credit be segregated by gender, or only exercise classes. The women might agree.