189

Democracy Is Dead…Long Live Democracy

Iain Davis

Pericles Funeral Oration, at the end of first year of the Peloponnesian War (adobe stock).

The word “democracy” (demokratia) derives from “demos” (people) and “kratos” (power).  Literally translated it means “people power.” It is the best model of governance ever devised. So it is a shame that no one alive on Earth lives in a democracy.

Sadly, most people don’t know what democracy is. As a result, they can be deceived into believing that so-called “representative democracy” is democracy. The electorate are told that representative democracy enables them to exercise “democratic oversight” and that this has something to do with democracy. What a deception—and perhaps a deliberate one.

Not only is representative democracy anti-democratic, its precepts are ignored by governments anyway. Indeed, there is no democracy to be found in any nation. Government, based upon the idea that representatives are empowered to make laws, are not democracies.

In this article we will discuss the problems inherent in representative democracy and explore what could be the best possible remedy: real democracy.

The Death of Representative Democracy

Democracy has nothing to do with voting to elect representatives. The reason citizens do not need to be represented by politicians is that in a democracy the people make all political decisions themselves.

Many national governments pretend to value democratic principles. They often assert the right to defend democracy in their country or to promote democracy in other countries. None of the governments that make such claims are democratic. Their pretensions often result in war.

As mentioned above, no nation-state currently practices democracy, but many of them foist representative democracy on their citizens. In a democracy, the people are the government. They protect themselves from their own potential errors and excesses through the checks and balances built into the rule of law, which is determined solely by the people.

In a representative democracy, on the other hand, the government claims the authority to “govern” the people and forms an autocratic state for that purpose. So-called representative government “allows” the populace to select their political leaders once every two, four or five years.

In the years between elections, these “representatives,” few in number, exercise the executive power to rule over everyone else. This form of government is called an oligarchy, and it is the antithesis of a democracy.

The UK Oligarchy

Nonetheless, the people have been “educated” to believe that an oligarchy is a democracy and have become attached to this system. They believe the oligarchy, which they call their “representative government,” honours some foundational principles that are in and of themselves worthy. These principles are often referred to as democratic ideals.

Democratic ideals have been shaped over thousands of years by political leaders, reformists and philosophers. British sociologist T. H. Marshall described democratic ideals in his 1949 essay Citizenship and Social Class. He called them a functioning system of rights. Even though democratic ideals are far from an adequate substitute for democracy, Marshall recognized that they offer a representative democracy’s citizens at least some protection from the whims of the oligarchy whom they’re permitted to elect.

Democratic ideals embrace certain rights—the right to freedom of thought and expression, including speech and peaceful protest and the right to equal justice and equal opportunity under the law. Apparently these rights are essential and inalienable, for without them representative democracy cannot function.

Oligarchs govern with the aim of protecting and promoting the interests of the establishment. They are put in high political positions to ensure that a nation-state is ruled, from behind the scenes, by the wealthiest individuals and families, the multinational corporations they own, the non-governmental organisations they fund and the banks they control.

The establishment achieve their ends by using their wealth to lobby and corrupt politicians, political parties and the political processes that collectively constitute so-called government. They also form  partnerships with this thing called “government.” Through government, public-private partnerships affords members of the establishment direct access to executive power while denying it to everyone else.

Although a representative democracy has supposedly even-handed judges and justices, their decisions often do not reflect good judgement or actual justice for the common man or woman. True, not all judges are corrupt, but a defendant generally needs a lot of money to win a case—proof that the primary purpose of the judicial system in a representative democracy is to protect the authority of the establishment.

Often the people are the victims of court rulings.

Jury trials are permitted to a limited extent, but the judge controls and interferes in the process by “instructing” the jurors. Members of the establishment can “appoint” the right judge to the right case and use the courts to persecute citizens, thus warning others not to threaten their authority or interests.

Although a representative democracy has lawmakers, its “rule of law” does not apply to all equally. “Lex iniusta non est lex” (an unjust law is not a law) is supposedly a foundational principle of all of these “legal systems.” Therefore, the alleged rule of law operated by governments cannot be considered to be any law at all.  

While some protests are allowed, even encouraged, by representative governments, other protests are not only considered unacceptable but are even attacked by the establishment’s media and suppressed by their “partners” in government. Moreover, representative governments use the venal courts to unlawfully imprison protestors.

Procured politicians have also been known to make up powers in order to unlawfully seize protestors’ assets.

Representative governments couldn’t care less about freedom of speech. If a media outlet doesn’t report the authorised news, it is banned or censored in some other way, including having its broadcast license removed. Representative governments routinely work with their establishment partners to actively suppress free speech.

The UK Parliament notes that, for its system of representative democracy to exist, certain liberties have to be maintained:

Freedom of association and freedom of expression are fiercely protected rights. We rightly expect people to be able to say things which challenge or even shock, and to be able to organise, campaign and lobby. Democracy [read: representative democracy] would not function without these rights.

Such language presents advocates of representative democracies with a quandary, because the very oligarchs they have elected and are defending don’t actually respect any of these liberties or alleged rights. Thus, absent any attempt to maintain democratic ideals, representative democracy is, by its own definition, an impossibility.

We need a solution, and democracy offers one.

Representative Democracy

Inalienable Rights vs Human Rights

Democracy is based upon inalienable rights, not on the political construct of “human rights” which representative democracies claim to bestow upon their citizens.

Inalienable rights are “qualified” by nothing other than Natural Law. They are not granted by government.

Inalienable rights are self-limiting, since they require every human being to observe, honour and protect—and never infringe—the inalienable rights of all other human beings. They precede genuine democracy instead of arising from it. Governance exists only by virtue of the people exercising their inalienable rights.

The UK oligarchy itself explains why the aberration of representative democracy doesn’t remotely resemble democracy:

Conversely, democracy [read: representative democracy], along with the rule of law, itself is a precondition for functioning human rights. Few rights are absolute; many are limited or qualified. Sometimes a given context will require different rights to be balanced against one another. [Emphasis added.]
This description is an inversion of the true nature of rights. Inalienable rights are shared equally by all, without exception. No one can add rights or have more rights than another, neither can anyone subtract rights or have fewer rights than another.

No human being has the prerogative to define or to “qualify” the rights of another human being, even if they claim that their so-called “law” allows it. Defining and limiting rights is not a function of democratic governance. It is merely an unjustified claim of right made by authoritarian representative governments. In reality, additional rights do not exist. The belief that they do is a monstrous deceit.

By claiming the non-existent right to create or limit “functioning human rights,” representative oligarchies assume the authority to permit or deny said “rights.” One could say, then, that human rights are not rights but rather government permits.

Representative democracies like the UK parliament assert that they are “sovereign.” They want their constituents to believe that they possess yet another additional—albeit impossible—right to be the supreme legal authority.

This is an anti-democratic power grab based upon yet another lie. No, the institutions of government are not sovereign in a democracy; the people are sovereign.

We don’t have to put up with the tyranny of representative democracies or the governments that operate them. There is a better political system called democracy. Let’s explore the latter in more depth.

What Is Democracy?

Democracy is a political system first and formally established in ancient Greece by Cleisthenes (c. 570–500 BCE). Following the overthrow of the last tyrant of Athens (Hippias) in c. 508 BCE, Cleisthenes led the political and legal reforms that created the Hellenic Athenian Constitution.

Cleisthenes introduced “sortition,” which was the random selection of citizens whose names were drawn by lot. Under his reforms, the Boule proposed legislation (statute law), and the Ecclesia (assembly) would then debate the proposed laws and vote on their implementation. The citizen members of the Boule and the Ecclesia were selected by sortition.

Cleisthenes

Once their work was done, the Boule and the Ecclesia were disbanded. The people would return to their everyday lives. The next time the Boule and the Ecclesia were needed, sortition would again be used and a different group of people selected.

Sortition was also used to form the juries, whose citizen members sat in the Dikasteria (courts).

The jury in the Dikasteria represented the highest law in the land. It could overturn the enactments of the Ecclesia. This political system enabled the people to create legislation (statute law) as well as law derived from precedent (case law).

Ancient Greece wasn’t an egalitarian society in the modern sense. For instance, full citizenship was restricted to non-slave male Athenian landowners. These citizens, selected through sortition, regularly attended the Ecclesia (assembly) on the mount at Phynx. This marketplace of ideas, and other civil activities, was called the Agora.

Proposed statute law (bills) would be presented to the Ecclesia by the Boule. The gathered assembly (Ecclesia) would then vote to either pass or reject proposed bills or suggest amendments. If an amendment were suggested, the bill would be passed back to the Boule for further deliberation.

Crucially, Cleisthenes empowered the Dikasteria (the law courts) to overrule (annul) any law that was found in a trial by jury to be unjust. There were no judges. Magistrates were merely administrators for the court. If the defendant was found guilty, both the judgement (ruling) and the nature of the punishment (sentence) were decided by the citizen jurors.

If the full application of the law (including legislation) did not serve justice, the jury could annul it. The defendant may have technically contravened the law but could still be found not guilty if the jury believed the defendant had acted honourably, without any intent to cause harm or loss (mens rea).
In such a circumstance, it was the law, not the accused, that would be found at fault. Any faulty legislation would be wiped from the statute scrolls, and the Boule would have to amend or abolish the law in light of the Dikasteria’s ruling.

Aristotle would later describe the Athenian Constitution. Unfortunately, when the partial record of Aristotle’s writings was discovered in 1870, his explanation of many of Cleisthenes’ most crucial reforms was missing.

Justice James Wilson, one of the Founding Fathers of the US Constitution, noted the true purpose of the Athenian Constitution:

In Athens the citizens were all equally admitted to vote in the public assembly, and in the courts of justice, whether civil or criminal. [. . .] It [the jury] was favourable to liberty because it could not be influenced by intrigues. In every particular cause the jurors were chosen and sworn anew [. . .] No one might mix with them, or corrupt them, or influence their decisions. [. . .] They were an important body of men, vested with great powers, patrons of liberty, enemies to tyranny.

Wilson added an account of how this system empowered the citizenry. Each citizen, he wrote, had an equal share of political power, for each was vested with…

[. . .] Judicial authority[,] as Jurors in Trial by Jury[,] in which laws and measures passed by legislatorial majorities in the assembly could be judged, overruled and annulled whenever this was deemed by the Jurors necessary to serve justice, liberty, and the interests of the people. [. . .] The Jury must do their duty and their whole duty: they must decide the law as well as the fact.

Cleisthenes created a system of government in which the rule of law was created by a sortition of the people. A separate sortition of citizens would then apply the law through the mechanism of trial by jury.

The randomly selected jury of the people was the supreme law of the land. The people were sovereign. This political system, governance by trial by jury, was called demokratia (democracy.)

Who do they really represent?

The Implications of A Modern Democracy

As democracy ensures that a governance is conducted by the citizenry, it naturally serves the will of all citizens. Through the system of sortition, citizens chosen at random are briefly given some legislative authority. Then they make way for the next round of sortition. All new legislation is tested in trials by jury. If found wanting, any law can be annulled by a sortition of the people.

As a result, no government has authority over the people. There is no institution with the ability to rule unjustly. Governance is merely the apparatus through which the people administer their affairs and address any issues that may arise. Democracy is the rule of law without rulers.

Citizens who live in a democracy cannot devolve their responsibility for decision-making to someone else. Each citizen is equally responsible for every decision made and for the conduct of society as a whole. Democracy is truly governance of the people, by the people and for the people. It redefines what we mean by the word “government.”

Officers of the state, such as police, magistrates and other civil servants, implement and serve the will of the people. The will of the people is constantly tested and, where circumstances dictate, adapts.

A democratic society requires the active and constant participation of each and every citizen. Any citizen can at any moment be called up to take his place in the Boule, in the Ecclesia or in a jury in the Dikasteria. Citizens are perpetually engaged in the process of government, both at the national and the local level. All citizens in a democracy have a duty to remain informed and to actively pursue justice.

Consequently, in a democracy the primary objective of education is to develop critical thinking skills. Democracy demands that every adult citizen—today’s citizens include women and are not necessarily landowners—be ready to swear their solemn oath to protect and serve justice. All democratic people must prepare themselves to practice the rule of law.

Because democracy places a duty upon all citizens to be critical thinkers who are able to understand potentially complex issues, examine evidence and act judiciously, propaganda spun by the news media is largely non-existent. There simply isn’t a market for it.

Granted, some citizens in a democracy would still band together to form interest groups and attempt to influence public opinion through propaganda, but the majority of people, schooled in critical thinking, wouldn’t be easily fooled by such deceptions. Sortition greatly reduces the likelihood of propaganda swaying political decisions.

Delivering justice is the primary function of a democratic society. This requires an extensive court system (Dikasterias). The Dikasteria network must be funded in such a way that access to justice is free to all at their point of need. Otherwise, wealth would still dictate access to justice. Purchased justice is not justice and is forbidden in a democracy.

Democracy decentralises power to the individual. It also necessitates that the institutions of governance (government) are decentralised. No one court (Dikasteria) has primacy. A ruling made in a county or town to annul national legislation carries the same authority as a decision made in the national capital.

In order to operate democracy on a large scale, enabling it to serve a population that numbers many millions, a national Boule, Ecclesia and Dikasteria might be set up to enact primary legislation that shapes the rule of law. The decentralised authority of each local Boule, Ecclesia and Dikasteria would have to work within this nationwide legislative framework.

Each local Boule and Ecclesia would be free to create local laws that meet local needs, providing that their legislation doesn’t contravene the nation’s rule of law. Similarly, these local decisions would be constantly checked and verified by the local Dikasteria. A local decision to annul may affect only local legislation, compelling the local Boule to reconsider a ruling.

In such a system, the overarching rule of law must be just—fair and applied equally to all. Without justice, it would be virtually impossible for the national Boule to function.

Primary legislation must be acceptable to all citizens, no matter their social status. Thus, the legislative framework at the national level would have to be confined to defining principles of law rather than creating specific acts that regulate the entire population. Both the scope and scale of legislation and regulation is miniscule in a democracy compared to a representative democracy or any other form of “government.”

Through the Dikasteria, the question of guilt or innocence is the only determinant of justice. Guilt is found only if the crime violates the principles of Natural Law. Did the accused act with the intention of causing harm or loss? Or was the accused guilty of negligence, thus causing harm or loss? The ruling on a case must not contravene Natural Law. If it does, it will be annulled.

In a democracy all citizens possess immutable, inalienable rights from birth. They are free to exercise those inalienable rights in an honourable way—in harmony with Natural Law. Should they cause harm or loss, thereby infringing another citizen’s inalienable rights, they would be subject to judgement in the Dikasteria.

The use of sortition (the random selection of citizens) and the temporary nature of each citizen’s decision-making power ensure that no political factions can be formed. No alliance, no seeking to advance personal interests, can influence a governance in a democracy.

In any event, there would be no point in trying to do so. Unjust legislation and legal precedent, subsequently judged to have failed to deliver justice, would be annulled through the supreme rule of law, exercised by juries in the Dikasterias across the land.

Politicians and political parties would serve no purpose in a democracy. No one person or party leads a truly democratic government. Democratic decisions cannot be ordered or controlled by any power base.

A democracy doesn’t prohibit citizens from campaigning for change. On the contrary, people are free to petition their local or national Boule. A democratic society is shaped by new ideas and responds to crises as required.

Despite the absence of politicians, people in a democracy might still choose to follow leading campaigners, skilled orators or knowledgeable leaders. What they cannot do is exploit any collective power their association might afford them or succeed in any attempt to coerce or corrupt the legislative process. Sortition precludes the possibility.

Democracy eradicates political power. It would be practically incorruptible.

Democratic Regulation

Secondary legislation, meaning the delegation of political authority to individuals empowered by primary legislation, is an impossibility in a democracy. There is no such thing as democratic executive power.

All are equal under the rule of law, and no individual, group or organisation can be imbued with rights that do not exist. That includes any claimed right to make autocratic regulations.

This does not mean that regulations cannot operate in a democracy. The Ecclesia may, for example, pass regulation on food or drug safety standards. This protects the health of the citizens and is congruent with Natural Law. The democratic rule of law dictates that these regulations must not infringe anyone’s inalienable rights nor cause any harm or loss.

If any regulation unfairly disadvantages some producers and manufacturers, while handing a market advantage to others, it could cause potential harm or loss. Those impacted would be free to bring a case to the Dikasteria, who would then rule on the justice of the regulation.

In any given democracy, it is up to the people to decide how to strike the proper balance. The commercial interests of farmers, retailers and pharmaceutical corporations, for instance, are judged against the need to uphold all peoples’ inalienable right to live healthy lives. Ultimately, this may disadvantage the commercial interests of some, but no one has the inalienable right to make a profit by poisoning others.

In a democracy, market regulation can never unjustly cause harm or loss to some simply to protect the interests of others. Any such regulation would swiftly be dispatched in a Dikasteria.

Democracy lends itself well to the operation of a genuinely free market—something that, like democracy, does not currently exist. Free markets produce order without design.

There is no inalienable right to prosper in a free market. Some will be more successful than others in a free market. Democracy does not stop individuals from accruing wealth, nor does it protect others from falling into poverty. However, democracy excludes the possibility that wealth can influence justice or the decisions of government.

The current imposition of representative oligarchy enables the wealthy and the powerful to influence legislation and regulations to protect their interests and limit the market access of others. In a democracy they would not be able to do this. Regulations governing markets are minimal in a democracy. No groups can be formed to act as regulators and to potentially build cozy relationships with corporations. Instead, regulations in a democratic society would be made through one process only: the people administering the rule of law.

Democracy allows an authentic free market to blossom and enables innovation to flourish. In such a system, there is no centralised control of industries—healthcare, engineering, technology, agriculture—or of science or of academia. Orthodoxy would become a thing of the past.

Democracy wouldn’t necessarily prevent a corporation from being formed as a sole person in law. However, that is precisely how a corporation would be treated—as an individual entity, with no more or no fewer rights than an individual human being. Incorporation would not afford a company any additional inalienable rights. Thus, neither money nor connections could skew justice or influence government. There would be no politician or regulator to connect to, so there would be no one corrupt!

Indeed, corrupt legislation or regulation cannot survive in a democracy. For example, if the Ecclesia passed a law that effectively banned physicians or scientists from researching cancer treatments simply to protect the profits of pharmaceutical corporations, this law would certainly be annulled in a Dikasteria.

Providing equal access to justice is the core objective of a real “democratic government.” Consequently, there is no financial impediment for any individual citizen to bring a case against a corporate “person.” One human person standing before the jury in the Dikasteria would have exactly the same access to justice as any wealthy corporate person.

Conclusion?

We are faced with a choice. It is clear that representative democracy does not serve the people. On the contrary, it is an oligarchical system that oppresses the people. Even by the tenets of their own authoritarian doctrine, so-called representative governments no longer practice what they preach, if they ever did. Representative democracy, as the majority of us understand it, is most assuredly dead.

So what are we going to replace it with?

It is obvious what the globalist oligarchs wish to transition us into. They envisage a system of global governance operating as a technocracy, powered by the Fourth Industrial Revolution, a Great Reset, Central Bank Digital Currency, and other centralized, digital forms of controlling the masses. Put another way, the oligarchy of today is openly and swiftly moving towards extreme neo-feudalism with the express intention of enslaving humanity.

We must oppose this technocratic nightmare through mass noncompliance. Moreover, we must individually take action every day to move ourselves towards decentralisation and freedom and away from centralised tyranny. But there is little point in opposing one political system or another if we have nothing better to offer in its stead.

If we wish to resist slavery, then, we have to stand for something that defeats slavery. Why not Natural Law and the rule of law through trial by jury?

Why not democracy?

You can read more of Iain’s work at his blog In This Together or on UK Column or follow him on Twitter. His new book Pseudopandemic, is now available, in both in kindle and paperback, from Amazon and other sellers. Or you can claim a free copy by subscribing to his newsletter.
Follow us on Telegram for regular updates & commentary

can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

Unlike the Guardian we are NOT funded by Bill & Melinda Gates, or any other NGO or government. So a few coins in our jar to help us keep going are always appreciated.

Our Bitcoin JTR code is: 1JR1whUa3G24wXpDyqMKpieckMGGW2u2VX

4 41 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
189 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jacob Jonker
Jacob Jonker
Apr 26, 2022 1:45 PM

Briefly, for now: The comments are worth wading through. Almost all here seem to be genuinely exercised by the difficult times which appear to be threatening to spread from the trouble spots to practically everywhere. As to the essay, not to do the author down, but other than eliciting worthwhile commentary, which a piece a quarter of this essay would do just the same, if any good, I question severely the use of this kind of essay under the circumstances, except the use referred to already. As has been said, it’s utopian, not fit for the purpose required in this day and age, etc., etc. Also, I wonder why there is still so much about Greek democracy which was far from ideal, did not last, and would not last a decade if it were possible to establish it where it will not now grow.

There are some answers which few people care to seek out. This is to undertake study. Some here would claim to have studied plenty. I mean a kind of study which shows in the comments, or the essay in the first place. I mean the getting of wisdom. Without wisdom, people are lost, no matter how much they know. Maybe wisdom is not allowed. For thousands of years a wisdom tradition has been available to those who ardently sought it. Well, first one needs to realise that it is a useful thing to do. Many people have casually been acquainted with it, through Eastern philosophy, the occult and religions dissenting from the established ones. So, the answer to our travails id awareness, consciousness, or, conscious awareness. This sounds to most a trite thing to offer, in my experience, yet, few people who think about it know what it means to be consciously aware of how it works. I know this. How do I know this? I know from experience.

A few pointers for they who wish to have a go:
Begin with The Secret Doctrine by H.P.Blavatsky. The consider that the last three thousand years have been birth pangs. So it could yet be a humane society stillborn. The Basques are possibly the remnants of Atlantis, a civilisation which also reached a high level of technical sophistication and went off the rails, very much like our own.

The key today is psychology, but that is a difficult things to handle. However, the internet is as yet wide open to scrutiny. Once that is censored effectively, people have to rely on inner study. Debate is almost of no use if people are not prepared to apply themselves in that regard. Never mind Buddhism at large, but Buddha Gautama himself had some pertinent advice. Then there are Patenjali’s Yoga Sutras. Good for years of serious study.

Jax
Jax
Apr 21, 2022 3:30 AM

democracy has never existed
all countries are human farms
your owners are human farmers

mari01337
mari01337
Apr 20, 2022 11:55 PM

dḗmos means the settling of clans in ancient greek. It doesn’t mean “people”. And it gives you a clue that this form of government was never devised for millions of people.

It functions vertically in a village setting but it will not work on a nation level. This was already clear to thinkers as Cicero and even Aristotle. You have to be very naive to still believe that Democracy is that one god that allows no doubt, as you will be indoctrinated in school. Author should take a look at Hans-Hermann Hoppe – Democracy – The God That Failed.

Democracy killed Socrates
Democracy killed Socrates
Apr 19, 2022 11:56 AM

Human rights are universal and inalienable. That means they are everywhere present and can’t be altered. Human beings have human rights. Nothing else has human rights. Rights of property or property rights are not human rights. Organizations like corporations have no human rights.

Mixing human rights with any form of government is losing those rights. That is because to be governed means losing your freedom, which is one basic human right. It doesn’t matter who governs you, whether it’s the majority or the minority, you are being governed and under someone else’s rules.

Who makes decisions for you? In democracy decisions are made by majority if democracy is direct, and by minority if democracy is representative. Either way, you don’t get to decide. Either way, reason and conscience don’t matter. So humanity and the individual human being don’t matter. Numbers matter. But people can never be reduced to numbers.

Democracy is based on a principle of voting and the majority rule. But that is the worst kind of method to do any judgement or decision. The majority is always ignorant about any issue. The majority is easily fooled into anything. Look up Milgram experiments and see for yourself. The majority are killers and all it needs is a mere suggestion from an authority figure.

True decisions are based on reason and conscience.

Every human born is equipped with reason and conscience. We all know what is good and what is evil. Even newborn babies know that!

But when we as human beings submit to authority who lies to us, we lose our reason and conscience and our humanity.

So democracy as a majority rule is just very stupid and silly. It’s also a very sure way to destruction of humanity, as can be seen and evidenced. Don’t believe that big lie any more!

Sovereign Citizen
Sovereign Citizen
Apr 18, 2022 2:11 PM

This is an excellent article. I have some questions, would appreciate if anyone here can answer:

1.) What happened to the original direct democracy government the ancient Greeks set up?

2.) If it’s such a fantastic system why did it only last 70 odd years?

3.) Why has it never been replicated and why are we the first people to consider this a suitable replacement to the oligarchy, talking about it 2500 years after its first inception?

4.) If we were to replicate it, how would we ensure it lasts longer than 70 years this time?

Niall Warry
Niall Warry
Apr 18, 2022 11:58 AM

Please contact me off The Harrogate Agenda Website as I would like to have a chat with you on our common ground about democracy.

http://harrogateagenda.org.uk/

mrbump
mrbump
Apr 18, 2022 10:24 AM

Why should a corporation be given the same rights as a human being? They are amoral entities with no body, blood or tears. Rediculous. This is the same Capitalist mindset that got us into this undemocratic mess inthe first place. If they had the same rights as people then Sortition would necessarily have toallow corporations to judge others and determine laws.

Robin Ashe-Roy
Robin Ashe-Roy
Apr 17, 2022 12:13 PM

This is the minimum of what must be taught in all education establishments -Mutual Aid, Kropotkin and Bakunin would be proud

eman
eman
Apr 17, 2022 9:57 AM

democracy is not dead, it has never been allowed by the Oligarch who devise, plan and institutionalize nation states. The 256 member nation state system is an invention of the Oligarch. Always the Oligarch derived nation state adopts, by its constitution (or other founding documents), anything but a democracy. Often the propaganda allowed by the Oligarch designed nation, is designed to promote into Oligarch published propaganda a republic, because it is easy to disguise a republic as a democracy. The Oligarch and their governments nearly all promote distribution of propaganda to the governed masses, the idea that because those it governs are allowed to vote occasionally on matters that really make little difference, that the government operating within the nation state is somehow democratic?
Nearly all such allowances, are about who shall be the elected few, but not about what it is the elected few must do and not do..

The truth is:: government secrecy by itself is a complete and total block to democracy. Democracy can only correctly function under condition of complete and total access of its governed citizens to the information taken as a whole. Those in government and to those who are the governed must have available the same information at all times for a democracy to exist. Without information transparency there can be no democracy.

Any form of government which denies, blocks or separates information available to those who govern, from those who are the governed, cannot by definition be a democracy. Information transparency is the basis of democracy anything short of that condition infringes on the right of the governed masses to self determine their own governance..

But because the Oligarch refuse to allow democratic government does not mean democracy is dead. It means democracy persist in the person of each governed member of the nation state span of governance. The collective conscious of the governed masses sometimes reaches majority defined critical stage, and it is at that moment, the masses have information relevant only to those who are the governed.

Lost in a dark wood
Lost in a dark wood
Apr 17, 2022 6:17 AM

Neil Oliver’s Latest Demented Rant

Remember . . . ?

https://www.gbnews.uk/gb-views/perhaps-joe-bidens-decline-is-a-metaphor-for-a-new-reality-for-the-us-says-neil-oliver/273723
Remember 2019? Cast your mind back to that year, that oh, so recent time when everything was different. 2019 was not a perfect time, or a perfect world, but it was very different from this one of 2022. In 2019 the rights and freedoms we’d had for years – and shamefully taken for granted – were still broadly intact, or so it seemed.

Not, of course, if you lived in some war-zone like Yemen or Libya. Or if you lived in Samoa and the UN Nazi goon-squads were coming round to vaccinate you at gunpoint. Or if you were a child in many western “civilised” countries and had to have a full schedule of neurotoxic jabs just to go to school. Or had to submit to biometric scanning just to get your lunch. That probably wasn’t the 2019 which Oliver remembers!

Lost in a dark wood
Lost in a dark wood
Apr 17, 2022 4:59 AM

No democratic form of government would be able to withstand the global “ruthless conspiracy”.

The Secret War
https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/john-f-kennedy-secret-societies-speech-transcript

Today, no war has been declared and however fierce the struggle may be, it may never be declared in the traditional fashion. Our way of life is under attack. Those who make themselves our enemy are advancing around the globe. The survival of our friends is in danger, and yet no war has been declared, no borders have been crossed by marching troops, no missiles have been fired. If the press is awaiting a declaration of war, before it imposes the self discipline of combat conditions, then I can only say that no war ever posed a greater threat to our security. If you are awaiting a finding of clear and present danger, then I can only say that the danger has never been more clear, and it’s presence has never been more imminent. . . .

For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding it’s sphere of influence, on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific, and political operations. It’s preparations are concealed, not published. It’s mistakes are buried, not headlined. It’s dissenters are silenced, not praised. . . .

Perhaps there is no answer to the dilemma faced by a free and open society in a cold and secret war. In times of peace any discussion of this subject and any action that results are both painful and without precedent, but this is a time of peace and peril which knows no precedent in history.

It is the unprecedented nature of this challenge that also gives rise to your second obligation, an obligation which I share, and that is our obligation to inform and alert the American people. To make certain that they possess all the facts that they need and understand them as well; the perils, the prospects, the purposes of our program, and the choices that we face. . . .

And so it is to the printing press, to the recorder of man’s deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news, that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help, man will be what he was born to be, free and independent.

mgeo
mgeo
Apr 17, 2022 8:11 AM

Creeping totalitarianism requires no dictator, one-party rule, glorification of government, dissolution of legislature or denial of reason. -Bertram Gross c. 1997

Lost in a dark wood
Lost in a dark wood
Apr 17, 2022 9:26 AM
Reply to  mgeo

They’ve been “creeping” with a directional intent for a very long time!

hotrod31
hotrod31
Apr 17, 2022 2:37 AM

True democracy will always be a fiction, just as true communism. Both governmental systems scare the living shiite out of the greedy and avaricious. Human beings are what they are, greed invariably overpowers the majority … and if it doesn’t , there are those who will ensure that it does. Any ‘official’ State Secrets Acts are the introduction for the DECEIT, writ large.
Happy Easter to all … and;

Good Luck to Vlad the Dragon-slayer, I hope that the Banksters system of usury will finally be put to rest.

Louis
Louis
Apr 17, 2022 12:21 AM

Reading this brought a smile to my face… just imagine how magnificent life would be under a true Democracy.

Gav
Gav
Apr 17, 2022 12:00 AM

The thing is, ‘inalienable rights’ are a deceit, too. All rights are either given or taken, both by the powerful. And who would allegedly guard those rights? You guessed it.

Keep dreaming. I will, too.

Sophie - Admin1
Admin
Sophie - Admin1
Apr 17, 2022 12:30 AM
Reply to  Gav

The freedom to exercise a right can be taken but not the right itself. That’s what inalienable means. And acceptance of this concept is the only basis for ethical civilized living

Gav
Gav
Apr 17, 2022 1:09 AM

Oh come on, a right is nothing if it cannot be exercised. What you’re essentially describing is a belief, a perception. “They cannot take that away from us!”

A tiny bit of the critical thought encouraged in this article ironically reveals the idea as Utopian. If this was analogous to currency, it would be the political equivalent of an NFT. 😉 

Look, I hate being pessimistic, but…

Sophie - Admin1
Admin
Sophie - Admin1
Apr 17, 2022 1:19 AM
Reply to  Gav

You clearly don’t hate to be pessimistic. In fact that’s why you’re here. The best way to enslave a population is to instill the idea they have no inalienable rights. Your folks must be so proud

Gav
Gav
Apr 17, 2022 1:35 AM

No, I really do hate it, so please try to not make a whole summer out of one swallow. Can you do that?

It isn’t exactly sophistry to remove the word ‘no’ before ‘inalienable rights’ from your contention of what entails enslavement, and present an equally valid appeal to common sense.

But really, it’s all academic.

Sam - Admin2
Admin
Sam - Admin2
Apr 17, 2022 2:24 AM
Reply to  Gav

True slavery is in the mind. Like those elephants tied up with string.

No slave class ever rose up and threw off their shackles with your mindset.

For those in the grips of despair, their sole comfort is to drag others down with them.

If we’re getting real, let’s start by acknowledging your defeatism.

A2

Jacques
Jacques
Apr 17, 2022 4:53 PM

It’s not a question of pessimism or optimism, but practicability.

So, these inalienable rights, as defined here, exist, can be exercised, and are protected within the current societal system? Ditto natural law?

If yes, fine.

If no, how will you assert and exercise these rights? I mean, you can claim that you have this or that right all you want, but if those who are in power say no, you’re out of luck. You’d have to muster up enough support, power, or force to push the rights through. Hopefully by peaceful means. But it will be an uphill battle because the powers clearly prefer the current societal system.

Tons of things look good on paper but are impossible to put into practice.

Right now, we’re not even at a stage where we’d clearly know what we want, how it should work – even though this text certainly is a step in the right direction. We haven’t convinced the masses that whatever we’ve got is the way to go. So, we obviously don’t have their support. We have a rough idea how things could work. It’s a good start. But the point this guy and a bunch of other commenters have made regarding viability and practicability are very valid.

Sophie - Admin1
Admin
Sophie - Admin1
Apr 17, 2022 5:55 PM
Reply to  Jacques

Ethical truth is not dependent on societal conditions. Human rights are innate, even when denied. Just because you are locked up unjustifiably doesn’t mean you no longer have the right to freedom, does it?

That’s what “unjustifiable” means. It means that society has imprisoned you but had no moral right to do so.

Don’t you see that by saying rights only exist if they can be exercised you are legitimizing tyranny.

Jacques
Jacques
Apr 17, 2022 7:26 PM

You’re needlessly antagonizing me, as well as the other guy. I think we’re pretty much on the same page as far as rights.

I’m talking about the next step. About making it work. For the existence of rights without being able to exercise them is clearly useless.

FYI, I grew up in the Second World, where people were denied the exercise of some rights. In many ways it wasn’t unlike the crap we’re experiencing now throughout the West. Some of the rights people couldn’t exercise existed within the communist system and people were denied these rights basically illegally. Some did not exist within the system; they only existed in the First World. The only two solutions were getting out, which is what I did, or revolution, which is what eventually happened.

So, right now, we know that we’re getting fucked over. We know what rights we should have, or want to have. Whether or not they’re inalienable or stemming from natural law, that doesn’t really matter. What matters is how you achieve the desired state of affairs.

TexasRepublic
TexasRepublic
Apr 20, 2022 2:11 PM
Reply to  Jacques

I haven’t looked at this site in quite a while, after consuming every word for about a year. How quickly things change. Hostile antagonistic admin jumping on people for exercising their rights. I see I’m not missing anything.

austrian peter
austrian peter
Apr 16, 2022 10:00 PM

Bravo Iain – you have hit the nail squarely on the HEAD. My solution to the problem of governance is to avoid centralised control and revert to a localised economy but with strong links to other local economies.

This is provided by the proven African model of UBUNTU. The author, Michael Tellinger is practising this in South Africa now:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/UBUNTU-Contributionism-Blueprint-Prosperity-Exposing/dp/1920153098/ref=asc_df_1920153098/?tag=googshopuk-21&linkCode=df0&hvadid=344397542285&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=18189320232179907128&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=c&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=9045678&hvtargid=pla-493304840116&psc=1&th=1&psc=1

I am basing UBUNTU for my book: ‘The Financial Jigsaw Part 2 – Surviving the New Economy’ which I am writing now and posting weekly articles which form the book in much the same way as Charles Dickens:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358117070_THE_FINANCIAL_JIGSAW_-_PART_1_-_4th_Edition_2020

https://austrianpeter.substack.com/p/media-complicit-stress-in-germany?s=w

niko
niko
Apr 16, 2022 9:52 PM

Some further reflections on Athenian ‘democracy’ (for citizens, not slaves):Every Cook Can Govern by C L R James.

See also Kirkpatrick Sale’s Human Scale Revisited regarding the need for decentralization, and the work of Michael A. Lebowitz (e.g., The Socialist Alternative) regarding democratic regulation of (market) economy.

Art Costa
Art Costa
Apr 16, 2022 8:06 PM

Excellent piece Iain. Can human’s actually live in such fashion without government – self-rule? I hope so, but what we have is worse than not working.

I’ve been interested in Gaddafi’s The Green Book and how he came to the same conclusion and formulated this:

government – What was Libya’s form of direct democracy (Jamahiria) like in practice? – History Stack Exchange

Steve
Steve
Apr 16, 2022 5:29 PM

The argument for representative democracy over direct democracy has always been justified due to the very real problem of how individuals in a society of millions would form the necessary assemblies for such a system to be be feasible.

Wouldn’t the soon to be implemented universal digital identity concept completely remove the necessity for indirect representation. Surely, we should all be able to vote on all matters remotely from that point onwards.

Funny how our MPs are keeping quite about this fantastic opportunity to extend direct governance to the people. Still, I’m sure it’s just a temporary oversight and they’ll be floating the idea in due course, with a national referendum to follow thereafter.

Paul Vonharnish
Paul Vonharnish
Apr 16, 2022 3:59 PM

A splendid article by Iain Davis!!! I’ve posted the suggestion of election via Sortition many times on many web sites. I’ve also posted reference to the viability of Direct Democracy as a replacement to the inherent fraud perpetuated by “representative” government.

Direct Democracy features public vote on civil Law and Statute via referendum, rather than implemented policy via a group of “elected” officials…

Alas. Nothing but crickets chirping. Civilians are receiving the governance they deserve…

Thank you, Iain Davis, for your well-considered article.

Annie
Annie
Apr 16, 2022 3:36 PM

we have to start changing our mindsets because all the elites parasites are doing is trying to change our perspectives.

script
script
Apr 16, 2022 6:19 PM
Reply to  Annie

+10

George Mc
George Mc
Apr 16, 2022 2:49 PM

WSWS as gatekeepers:

“Mass demonstrations spread worldwide as food, gas costs spiral

The intolerable increases to the cost of living triggered by the US/NATO war against Russia in Ukraine are producing a massive wave of working-class protests throughout the world. Two years into a pandemic that has killed 20 million people and still rages on, social anger that has been building up around kitchen tables and on shopfloors is now boiling over into the streets. Masses of people of all racial, ethnic and linguistic backgrounds are reaching the same conclusion: life cannot continue in the old way.”

Interesting. It was the Left sites who kept saying we were heading towards the biggest crash ever. They have been saying that for decades i.e. long before covid and Ukraine. But what have we here? Economic meltdown blamed on covid and Ukraine!

QuickDraw
QuickDraw
Apr 16, 2022 2:06 PM

Too funny. A democracy as written here only can work in a small city-state like entity like Athens. When you have too many people as does the US it cannot work. That is the reason why the US is supposed to be a republic. Because even when our population was smaller the founding fathers knew democracy would only lead to the tyranny of the majority–which with the voting fraud we saw last election doesn’t even matter any more. The other problematic issue is universal suffrage. People so stupid they willingly wear masks shouldn’t be allowed to vote. People who own no property shouldn’t be allowed to vote. Few under 25 have the maturity necessary to vote (a few over 25 as well). And look what happened in the hundred years since we allowed women to vote. People are basically selfish and really capable of living well only in small communities. The size of modern societies as well as basic human nature are the problems.

Howard
Howard
Apr 16, 2022 1:38 PM

One word demolishes not only the concept but the value of anything even remotely called or considered “Democracy.” That word is COVID.

There is absolutely nothing inherent in rule by the people to prevent an independent entity, such as the Media, from flooding a nation with non-stop lies.

We have seen how easily the people are led by the nose.

Does anyone seriously believe such an entity as the people is competent to set agendas and make laws?

Until such time as people clear their minds of lies and nonsense and begin actually thinking about things, perhaps they should remain a sleeping beast.

Democracy will ALWAYS devolve to the lowest common denominator.

The only solution is to abandon the childish notion that there must be “Rule” and “Government.” Anarchy is the only sane and sensible human condition.

He rules best…who rules not at all.

GR-Watch
GR-Watch
Apr 16, 2022 3:21 PM
Reply to  Howard

Well-laid out argument.

“We have seen how easily the people are led by the nose”

The astonishing and frightening thing is to the realisation, for ordinary people, that there isn’t any governing department/body (or aspect) that respected human dignity.

Doctors were threatened with penalties and even de-registration should they deviate from the enforced narrative.

There is really no governing body left to defend and protect ordinary folks.

Steve
Steve
Apr 16, 2022 5:10 PM
Reply to  Howard

Your comment is understandable given the levels of ignorance widely displayed by a clear majority of the people during COVID (and seemingly now with the Ukraine narrative). However, a truly democratic system would not support the conditions that enable the mass psychosis to form within the populace in the first place. The power is removed from those forces that control media, and ultimately, their capacity to drive the narrative.

Howard
Howard
Apr 18, 2022 3:38 AM
Reply to  Steve

But what would be the mechanism in a Democracy to insure that entities like the media do not secretly collude and present propaganda in the form of “news?” Simply saying “This is not allowed!” may not stop the collusion.

Where there’s power and hierarchy – be it the power and hierarchy inherent in the people or any other entity – the system thereby created will inevitably devolve into an oligarchy.

The real enemy is not those who become tyrants but the system that allows for tyranny. Any system based on power and hierarchy allows for tyranny and will eventually devolve into it.

justin_case
justin_case
Apr 16, 2022 1:25 PM

Seems even congressmen admit that the version of “sortition” practiced in the US is more of the obvious kind:

US congressman reveals seats on committees are ‘literally’ bought

http://www.rt.com/news/553964-lobbyists-buy-congress-seats-brooks/

Grafter
Grafter
Apr 16, 2022 12:45 PM

Article in today’s local newspaper….

“Residents urged to continue to wear mask as an act of kindness”

They just don’t get it.

Lost in a dark wood
Lost in a dark wood
Apr 16, 2022 12:50 PM
Reply to  Grafter

.

rubberheid
rubberheid
Apr 16, 2022 2:23 PM

+ 10 not far at all of the mark. what a sad society. it ended hilarioiusly too : )

GR-Watch
GR-Watch
Apr 16, 2022 3:31 PM
Reply to  Grafter

“Residents urged to continue to wear mask as an act of kindness”

i wonder if they meant: “Do it nicely or in time we have to use the electric shock”

Lizzyh7
Lizzyh7
Apr 16, 2022 7:52 PM
Reply to  GR-Watch

Exactly. And if you don’t do it, you aren’t nice and anything that happens to you is your own fault for being such a selfish asshole.

mgeo
mgeo
Apr 16, 2022 12:37 PM

Contrary to what the article implies, the legislature is far from being the oligarchy. The latter is the same as the “deep state”. It is a small coterie of
:- the very wealthiest (the plutocracy) colluding with
:- ambitious compliant government leaders they have annointed.

On the global scale, the servants of oligarchy (Globocap) include
:- the diabolical Empire and its principal running dogs
:- organisations purporting to be global, e.g. WTO, IMF, WB, ICC, ICJ, FAO and WHO
:- inter-governmental organisations controlling groups of governments, e.g. G7, EC and ECB.
:- BIS network of central banks
:- other subverted governing bodies for professions, industries, technologies, etc.

script
script
Apr 16, 2022 12:17 PM

It is the best model of governance ever devised.

High percentage of people actually still believe in this molded sold fantasy about this ‘good democracy’ but if only the right person people was in place crap.

Stupid peters launched his snake venom nonsense just in time for easter and funnily enough Coordinated. like clockwork in the U.K.
U><K column sells this type of crap also and had mp sir C3hristopher c3hope appeared just in time for Easter & May local selections & season 3 of covid.

Tobias ellwood runs UK’s first 5G capital – Bournemouth.
Christopher chope runs Christchurch (bet they never mentioned that part was literally the same council) links to the Cabernet office M15 etc.

It is Britannia firsts super council called BPC Bournemouth Christchurch and Poole (military strong hold – 5G testing bed)

And just like that the USA / U.K Conservative christian fake Easter PR stunt make over and fake democracy Illusion was repackaged to the Naive that believe in this type of nonsense like but if only the right person / people / political party was in power crap and we could all have real democracy illusion..

Jozef Kolbe
Jozef Kolbe
Apr 16, 2022 11:43 AM

You present democracy (people power, or rule by the many) as if it were some kind of panacea. It isn’t.

Aristotle’s described six systems of government, three that in his mind served the common good, and three that served only the rulers. The good ones were monarchy  (rule by one), aristocracy (rule by a few, the very best) and polity (rule by many). Each of these had a pathological twin: tyranny, oligarchy and democracy, which only served the rulers.  Aristotle knew that the many were less easily corrupted and appreciated the wisdom of crowds, but he also knew that they were susceptible to demagogues –the rule of the mob, and indeed that was why many democracies in the ancient world fell. Another problem was the fact these were relatively tiny city-states. It’s hardly practical for a large state to conduct affairs in such a way.

Therefore, the model preferred by Aristotle was a mixed system of government. That was more or less the model of the Roman Republic, and in a sense it was robust enough to last  a very long time. It stands to reason that large groups of people, e.g. nations, occasionally need leaders. They also need specialists to deal with special problems that concern the many. But of course we need checks and balances, we also always need democratic control and I for one, don’t think it’s actually dead. It might sound outrageously cruel, but I generally think people get the governments they deserve. And it’s always been like that. What actual power did the Roman senate have after emperors were installed and declared themselves gods? I can well imagine a John Gielgud type deliver a moving speech, then off to the circus to watch gladiators kill each other or Christians being ripped apart by lions. And it was probably even worse in ancient Greece, probably just voting on starting yet another war or consulting the Delphic oracle.

Yes, because the army and religion is also something you need to factor in.   

Pig Swill
Pig Swill
Apr 16, 2022 12:06 PM
Reply to  Jozef Kolbe

I think the “people get the governments they deserve” is a bit of a cop out or yet another “truism” that comes straight from the top and filters down to the peasants as lore. If anything, ‘the people’ get what they are given.

Big al
Big al
Apr 16, 2022 4:01 PM
Reply to  Pig Swill

Ya, on the other hand, we let it happen.

Lizzyh7
Lizzyh7
Apr 16, 2022 8:08 PM
Reply to  Big al

Did we? Do we really have any agency at all in what happens to us? Not trying to be confrontational but many times I have to remind myself just how many lies “we” have been fed and for how long.

I had a conversation yesterday with a co-worker about Ukraine and Russia. This woman is 70 years old, still believes fervently in the version of America she was taught. She’s heard me go off on some rants before, particularly about war and how it seems to be all OK when we do it, but not Russia. So she’s well aware of what I might say when she brings up Russia. She’s firmly in the belief, or at least spouted what she’s been taught, that Russia is “killing civilians” on purpose, and “we” would never do that. I had to rebut that, just had to, can’t NOT do it anymore. We had a civilized conversation, if you can call it that, no hurt feelings or anger, but it stuck with me most of the day. The blindness. The willful belief in all things good in America. She’s absorbed that shit for 50 years, how in hell am I really gonna counter that? I’m not. She’ll maybe nod along while I spew, but she’ll go right back to CNN and the nightly “news” for her information and she’ll never realize how big those lies really are. Can I blame her solely for that? Can I really condemn her attitude when that’s learned behavior? Does my condemnation help matters at all?

We have allowed this, yes indeed. But if “we” really do not even have any idea just what we have allowed, was it intentional? Or is it an orchestrated allowance that we’ve been taught? We here discuss how governance is ultimately flawed and destructive, but what other paradigm do we really have? And can we even imagine something truly different since we have been taught for so long that there is no alternative? I do not know, but I do know even I have trouble contemplating a wholly different system, and I read sites like this that at least discuss that. Most do not. Can I blame them entirely for that? If I do that am I any better than the psychopaths who have taught such idiotic behavior?

wardropper
wardropper
Apr 16, 2022 12:26 PM
Reply to  Jozef Kolbe

A very relevant comment, Jozef.

About your last sentence: If, as Rudolf Steiner said 100 years ago, “war is obsolete” (WW1 was very much on his mind at around that time), then it stands to reason that armies are also obsolete.

Chaos and destruction await us unless we also factor in some serious consideration of a world in which it isn’t taken for granted that it will always be 1914, or 1958…
“We’re the good guys, and we need a large enemy to stir up conflict perpetually – Oh, and sell lots of arms…”, still seems to be the philosophy of choice these days…

wardropper
wardropper
Apr 16, 2022 12:42 PM
Reply to  wardropper

P.S.
The noble thoughts of Aristotle and others put our modern movers and shakers to shame.
Today there are no moral principles, because the only religion that is factored in is superficial materialism praying for more of the same.

Education has similarly degenerated into unremarkable brainwashing by misguided fools who answer to no one.
Is the best we can do simply to watch in horror as everything bright turns dark, and everything good turns to filth?

We do need help, but neither Boris nor Keir comes within a mile of being that help. A political system which automatically removes people who are capable of thinking profoundly and contemplating the future is going to wreck our species.

Howard
Howard
Apr 16, 2022 1:50 PM
Reply to  wardropper

On a cosmic scale “everything bright turns dark.” It cannot be otherwise. Everything burns itself out.

True, that fact does not automatically translate to a universal principle. But neither is there a compelling reason to believe otherwise.

Yes, it takes suns billions of years to turn dark; and takes societies barely a millennium. But given their relative size and fuel, the proportion is fairly constant.

wardropper
wardropper
Apr 17, 2022 12:01 AM
Reply to  Howard

Quite right.

But I’m talking about fatheads like Boris Johnson turning light into darkness overnight – just for fun.
Johnson is surely not a cosmic event…

mgeo
mgeo
Apr 16, 2022 12:46 PM
Reply to  Jozef Kolbe

Declaring oneself a god or “descended” from one was a claim by rulers in many regions of the world. In parallel, priests claimed to have authority from the gods. Sychophants have always played along.

QuickDraw
QuickDraw
Apr 16, 2022 2:08 PM
Reply to  mgeo

You mean like Lord Fauci?

Rhys Jaggar
Rhys Jaggar
Apr 16, 2022 10:56 AM

The sorts of questions needing discussing are actually more pragmatic:

  1. How in such a system of truly disseminated democracy do you bring people together to choose to embark on major national infrastructure projects, be it building new motorways, railways, air traffic control systems, commercial canals etc etc?
  2. How do groups of local communities come together to defend themselves against foreign aggression?
  3. How do disparate regions with short-term divergences in economic conditions (e.g. local weather events adversely affecting local crop yields) agree to support each other through such periods?
  4. When ethical practice leads to less short-term wealth, how do you handle the demands of the more corrupt when they have more money than you?

Democracy is relatively simple to envisage in communities of villages where life is relatively simple, ordered and based upon a traditional agrarian existence.

It’s far, far more complicated when life involves international travel, mass transportation, weapons of mass destruction etc etc.

It’s not saying it’s impossible, I just don’t think that people should have any illusions as to the challenges inherent in trying to bring a true democratic accountability to a modern nation state.

wardropper
wardropper
Apr 16, 2022 1:15 PM
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

I agree that our focus needs to be pragmatic. Religious-philosophical considerations are very important too, if our identity as a civilization is to have any meaning at all, but the questions you raise do need credible solutions.

Regarding No. 2, I’d say that it’s been a very long time since the western world was subject to ‘foreign aggression’, and the reason isn’t just the “Mutually Assured Destruction” scenario of deterrence. There is also the humiliating thought that other countries simply aren’t interested in us. We in NATO (the US) are the world’s aggressor – the greedy bully, and are best ignored by any sensible foreign nation.

No. 4: The demands of the corrupt are the demands of the three-year-old tyrant, and are similarly best ignored.

Howard
Howard
Apr 16, 2022 3:21 PM
Reply to  Rhys Jaggar

The questions you raise ironically bring home the immense shortcomings – not of “Democracy” to deal with the modern world but of the “modern world” itself.

Everything you mention, especially in Question #1 (Yay! I got a chance to use the number sign as a number sign and not a f**king Hash Tag!) is fundamentally unsustainable in a finite world.

We simply cannot continue turning the planet into a glorified, overblown gridwork for getting us from point A to point B. Or, more to the point, the planet will no longer allow us to destroy it in the name of human convenience.

This planet is no more “ours” than it is a nest of ants’ planet. It’s about to remind us of that simple fact.

Nigel Watson
Nigel Watson
Apr 16, 2022 10:00 AM

Democracy died a long time ago in Britain. I live in Pori, which is in South West Finland. The war memorial in Pori is a good example of the level of contempt held by politicians for their people. Finland looks likely to be pushed into NATO by the Marin regime (I would have thought that a decision this important & far-reaching should have gone to a referendum, surely?) Like most other countries, Finland is governed by puppets appointed by the World Economic Forum. I say it’s time for people to wake-up. 

Sofia
Sofia
Apr 16, 2022 9:35 AM

Great article! It’s really important to envision an alternative to what we have. On the positive side I see a lot of social experiments happening in the U.K. coming out of the lockdown movement, people trying to create communities and alternatives in health and education the more this grows the more we are likely to come up with an alternative vision of governance.

It’s clear that they have another winter of fear waiting for us. I had to take my mum to A&E yesterday (Spain). She’s elderly and has serious underlying conditions. The visits always fill me with a certain amount of anxiety as the vaccine question always comes up and neither of us are vaccinated and I don’t want to get into an argument about it while my mum is unwell. There are posters everywhere about covid restrictions in the hospital. In Spain they have been full on fascist about covid. While my mum was having blood taken the doctor said and all vaccinated? Meaning both of us and I just ignored the question but she assumed we were and typed something into the computer. Then they gave my mum a covid test which she’s never had before and my mum questioned it and said I thought covid was over? Oh no no no it’s coming back said the doctor. The covid has just been so fully integrated into their medical practices now. I was anxious if they had to keep my mum in as I wouldn’t be able to visit they have a strict no visitors policy. Generally the care my mum has received has been excellent over the years and she’s managed to avoid the big v which she is totally opposed to but the hospitals have become less humane places and I don’t see that changing for a long time. But how do we realistically provide alternatives for medical emergencies?

Judith
Judith
Apr 16, 2022 11:43 AM
Reply to  Sofia

I think many of us are wondering the same thing. I will do anything to stay out of an emergency room. It is frightening to think that once you are admitted to a hosptial you pretty much lose all rights. Many stories of families fighting to keep their kin off of ventilators and remdesivir.

Sofia
Sofia
Apr 16, 2022 12:41 PM
Reply to  Judith

Yes it’s quite scary. I dread the winter time and what will happen eventually when she does have to go into hospital. They will only allow someone in if the patient is dying but last winter they wouldn’t let in unvaccinated patients, a friend’s mother died in hospital and he was unable to see her but they allowed him in when she was in the morgue – so cruel.

Sofia
Sofia
Apr 16, 2022 12:46 PM
Reply to  Sofia

Having said that I don’t think Spain is as bad as the US in terms of treatment protocols you mentioned as as far as I’m aware they are not financially incentivised to put people on ventilators and I think that practice has been stopped now unless the patient is unable to breathe on their own. However not being able to be there with them and ensure they are taken care of is wrong difficult to believe this is still going on.

Howard
Howard
Apr 16, 2022 3:27 PM
Reply to  Sofia

How convenient it is for hospitals not to have anyone looking over their shoulder to make sure they aren’t harming the patient more than helping.

Saves a bunch of lawsuits down the line.

Ottomanboi
Ottomanboi
Apr 16, 2022 9:20 AM

Democracy is a «small is beautiful» thing. Size does matter.

DaveMass
DaveMass
Apr 16, 2022 8:47 AM

Switzerland has (had?) a form of plebiscite voting.
pretty close to people getting what they want?

Edwige
Edwige
Apr 16, 2022 10:24 AM
Reply to  DaveMass

And Switzerland is hardly the model most of us would want to copy. It shows that breaking the money power is truly the great issue, it poisons everything it touches.

rubberheid
rubberheid
Apr 16, 2022 2:39 PM
Reply to  Edwige

they all have guns too, state sponsored. where is Davos again??

les online
les online
Apr 16, 2022 8:35 AM

Redtexts “Democracy is the last refuge of all the disavowals and betrayals, because it is the first hope of all those who believe in purifying and re-invigorating the current movement which is rotten to the core.”..

The Democratic Mystification...Jacques Camatte:
5.1.2.Democracy was born from the moment that there was a division between men and the allocation of possession. That is to say, it arose with private property, individuals and the class division of society, with the formation of the state. It follows that it becomes increasingly pure as private property becomes more general and as classes appear more distinctly in society..

5.1.4.Democracy in no way excludes authority. dictatorship and the state. On the contrary, it needs the State as a foundation. Who can guarantee the allocation, who can regulate the relations between individuals and between them and the common good, if not the State ?
In fully developed capitalist society the State also presents itself as the guardian of redistribution from two different angles: it prevents the proletariat from nibbling away the surplus-value and it guarantees the distribution of this surplus value as profit, interest, rent etc, among the different capitalist spheres…

5.1.5.Democracy thus implies the existence of individuals, classes and the State; with the result that it is simultaneously a mode of government, a mode of domination by one class, and a mechanism of union and conciliation…

https://www.redtexts.org/html/camatte_1969_democratic_mystification.html

Trigger Warning to the Sensitives. This is communist propaganda by Camatte. Camatte resided on the Left Communist end of the political spectrum – not to be confused with ‘left-wing extremist, which, along with it’s mirror image, right-wing extremist, was invented for use a couple of decades ago (post 9/11 ?) by the capitalist propaganda media because the terms ‘left’ and ‘right’ had lost their use-value ie, their use no longer scared the masses…

Dan
Dan
Apr 16, 2022 8:17 AM

The essay assumes an entity “democracy” that is out there, floting in eather, waiting for as to grab. This kind of naive and idle fantacy is taking part in the shamful political state we are currently in. The athenien democracy was in fact a power hungry empire-like city state that terrorized all its neighbors and non-citizens, untill they called the persians for aid. Socrates, who the democratic jury sentenced to death over his “currapting opinions”, said that democracy is a mask behind which is a monster, half plutocracy (the rule of money) and half ochlocracy (the rule of the mob). The idea of a pure and ideal democtatic rule is a dengerous illusion, so people do not realize their fundamental existance as connected and under the powers of greater forces, never a self-sufficient ego (and god-like). As Goethe would say, no one is more enslaved then those who think themselves free. Sorry for my bad english, not my language.

Howard
Howard
Apr 16, 2022 3:43 PM
Reply to  Dan

The value of what you have to say more than makes up for a few mis-spellings.

Roger G Lewis
Roger G Lewis
Apr 16, 2022 8:01 AM

“The Oligarchical temper would seem to consist in a love of authority, covetous, not of gain, but of power.
The Oligarch is one who, when the people are deliberating whom they shall associate with the archon as joint directors of the procession, will come forward and express his opinion that these directors ought to have plenary powers; and, if others propose ten, he will say that ‘one is sufficient,’ but that ‘he must be a man.’.
Of Homer’s poetry, he has mastered only this line, —
No good comes of a manifold rule; let the ruler be one:
of the rest, he is absolutely ignorant” . Theophrastus
The Pen is mightier than the Sword.The Oligarchical temper would seem to consist in a love of authority, covetous, not of gain, but of power

Roger G Lewis
Roger G Lewis
Apr 16, 2022 6:15 AM

“the chartered rights of men.”. Burke, and The East India Company Charter. Thomas Paine the trial of common sense! SOme Pamphleteer memorabilia.

I was in this respect greatly impressed with the confession of one of the most accomplished readers and excellent critics that any author could have fallen in with (the unfortunate Joseph Gerald). He told me that he had received my book late one evening, and had read through the three volumes before he closed his eyes. Thus, what had cost me twelve months’ labour, ceaseless heartaches and industry, now sinking in despair, and now roused and sustained in unusual energy, he went over in a few hours, shut the book, laid himself on his pillow, slept, and was refreshed, and cried,
“Tomorrow to fresh woods and pastures new.”
The work begins with a list of eight principles which are expounded throughout the work. Generally, the principles can each be summarized as follows:[4]

1. The object of moral and political discourse is how to maximize the amount and variety of pleasure and happiness.

Roger G Lewis
Roger G Lewis
Apr 16, 2022 6:42 AM
Reply to  Roger G Lewis

The Iron Law of Oligarchy
‘Democracy is that institutional arrangement for arriving at political
decisions in which individuals acquire the power to decide by means of a
competitive struggle for the people’s vote’.” Joseph Schumpeter, Quoted
from Roy Madron, Super Competent Democracies who in turn Cites.
“Participation, and Democratic Theory” by Carole Pateman. Dr Pateman
says that, Schumpeter and his followers: … set the current
Anglo-American political system as our democratic ideal (with) a
‘democratic theory’ that in many respects bears a strange resemblance to
the anti-democratic arguments of the last (i.e. 19th) century. No
longer is democratic theory centred on the participation of ‘the
people’; in the contemporary theory of democracy it is the participation
of the minority elite that is crucial and the non-participation of
the apathetic, ordinary man lacking in the feelings of political efficacy,
that is regarded as the main bulwark against
instability.”

Towards an Integral Analysis of World Views in the Oligarchy. Part 1. ( Left and Right , Rich and Poor )

Donald Duck
Donald Duck
Apr 16, 2022 8:33 AM
Reply to  Roger G Lewis

I think that it was Max Weber, along with Roberto Michels who first mooted the theory of the ‘Iron Law of Oligarchy’. Michels was one of the trio Italian elite theorists, which also included Gaetano Mosca and Vilfredo Pareto. This reactionary grouping was instrumental in the rise of Mussolini.

Roger G Lewis
Roger G Lewis
Apr 16, 2022 9:06 AM
Reply to  Donald Duck

Pareto proposed the Iron Law of Wages, or at least Ricardo did influenced by Pareto ( no doubt?). A title does not denote a subscription to a particular theory, Mr. Duck. My own inquiries are grounded in a philosophical Anarchism ameliorated by the Pragmatism of C S Pierce.

The Pen is mightier than the Sword.The Oligarchical temper would seem to consist in a love of authority, covetous, not of gain, but of power. Love conquers all.

Love Is The Answer.

Roger G Lewis
Roger G Lewis
Apr 16, 2022 9:13 AM
Reply to  Donald Duck

 the Iron Law of Oligarchy. ´´first developed by the German sociologist Robert Michels in his 1911 book, Political Parties.[1] It claims that rule by an elite, or oligarchy, is inevitable as an “iron law” within any democratic organization as part of the “tactical and technical necessities” of organization´from Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_law_of_oligarchy
also in the linked to blog.
https://notthegrubstreetjournal.com/2016/01/06/the-iron-law-of-oligarchy/
appearing as the title highlighted in brown.

Roger G Lewis
Roger G Lewis
Apr 16, 2022 10:26 AM
Reply to  Roger G Lewis

https://youtu.be/bMW2y1WqM28?t=260

THE THEORY AND PRACTICE OF OLIGARCHICAL COLLECTIVISM by Emmanuel Goldstein. “Translators – are false horses of enlightenment” #Covid1984

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Apr 16, 2022 9:20 AM
Reply to  Donald Duck

Archbishop Vigano had some interesting comments on the ownership of La Stampa and other Italian newspapers. Earlier generations of this family apparently supported Mussolini. Unexpected given their ethnicity.

Edwige
Edwige
Apr 16, 2022 10:28 AM
Reply to  Roger G Lewis

“how to maximize the amount and variety of pleasure and happiness.”

And if people get pleasure and happiness out of committing evil? Ten people abusing a child are getting a lot of pleasure and happiness but unless one is insane as Bentham you don’t think that makes it right.

Theobalt
Theobalt
Apr 17, 2022 4:15 AM
Reply to  Roger G Lewis

Mental masturbation? (We used that term in college, as a reminder)

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Apr 16, 2022 5:54 AM

Injecting snake venom into almost all of mankind is probably mankinds’ greatest achievement. Take a bow , Lord R and Kill Gates. I didn’t believe it when Kill Gates stated it quite shamelessly two years ago. But it happened.

Paul Watson
Paul Watson
Apr 16, 2022 8:54 AM

Perhaps clulling the useless eaters is a good thing

Russian Hank
Russian Hank
Apr 16, 2022 10:06 AM
Reply to  Paul Watson

Take more boosters and save the Earth.

script
script
Apr 16, 2022 11:29 AM

Snake venom psyop by the military industrial intelligence complex flashy fake alt media .

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Apr 16, 2022 5:47 AM

The only positive thing in the pre convid era was that our masters were nice enough to allow us the illusion of democracy and freedom.

jimbo
jimbo
Apr 16, 2022 5:38 AM

good stuff but too wordeee give us a bit of break bro

all the best!!

ps: ‘It is not desirable to cultivate a respect in the law so much as in the right.’
HDT

les online
les online
Apr 16, 2022 3:57 AM

It has been reported that Zelensky has claimed that ‘Russia will use nuclear weapons’.
We all know where this is going ?

Jax
Jax
Apr 16, 2022 3:06 AM

the human farm
the eyes behind the space
the space between the bars

the tiger caged
the rage delayed
the futile clawing
the wars all staged
the sick parade
the willing slave
the puppets wave
the hand grenade
the pale fade
the golden glade
the sickening groaning wilting promenade

dos e doe
around the shade
swing your partner
sink the blade
her hands were splayed
we wept and prayed
the ones who left
also stayed

the prison earth
their names engraved
the poisoned well
where laws are made

a willing slave
a voting slave
a loyal slave
a slave
a slave

Jax
Jax
Apr 16, 2022 2:53 AM

all isms, capitalism, communism, totalitarianism, socialism, ALL ISMS, are simply different forms of human livestock management.

when you look at a map, and you see the names of “countries”, what you are really seeing is the names of human farms.

all countries are human farms, your owners are human farmers

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Apr 16, 2022 5:42 AM
Reply to  Jax

True. Civilisation is actually domestication. We are all domestic animals under the control of the central banking cartel. Irresistible forces turned us from relatively free hunter gatherers to domestic animals of different kinds.

Placental_Mammal
Placental_Mammal
Apr 16, 2022 5:45 AM
Reply to  Jax

And now we are being herded like sheep or pigs to the slaughter. Our masters have decided that the societies they created are unsustainable.

Maxwell
Maxwell
Apr 16, 2022 2:41 AM

Democracy was never intended to empower the people. It’s history dates back to the Greeks and it’s founding principles were to create elite and quite controlled social and political arrangements.

The understanding of the “State” as growing directly out of the “Police” and the army, and intended for no other purpose than to enforce property dates back much, much farther. The original organization of Athens is based on military districts which not only
yield a fixed quota of troops but also revenues to fund mounted archers who are slaves – the first police force.

The rule of the demos, i.e. “democracy”, grows directly from this. The innovation here, is not the “fairness” of the Athenian democracy. In fact it is a huge step backward from the Greek Tribes which were based on consensus and one vote for each adult.

In place of that, the “Democracy” recognizes only one out of every 32 people as citizens. It’s key is not its incorporation of the people (except for those formally so defined), but in its organization of the state, and through it, the guarantee of personal property, most importantly in slaves.

This is yet another example of a thing we see through a thick fog, whereas those who came before us had a much clearer view.

Twenty five hundred years after inception of democracy, we still do not understand that we are ruled by Pentacosiomedimni, Solon’s aristocracy, who could generate 500 bushels of goods annually.

Nothing has changed in the meantime no matter how many hollow civic rituals they use to persuade you otherwise.

jubal hershaw
jubal hershaw
Apr 16, 2022 3:07 AM
Reply to  Maxwell

Did the Greek’s democracy develop from a need to bring a tyrant to heel, or was it a stepping stone to rule by a tyrant – that is the question.

mgeo
mgeo
Apr 16, 2022 4:08 PM
Reply to  Maxwell

Good comment except for “aristocracy, who could generate 500 bushels of goods”. Did you mean “extract 500 bushels of grain from everyone else”?

Penelope
Penelope
Apr 16, 2022 1:46 AM

NEXT STEP IN EU / US ECONOMIC CRASH:
ENGINEERED DIESEL SHORTAGE
The situation in the USA is not better. For political reasons the true state of the diesel fuel crisis is reportedly being downplayed by the Biden administration and the EU. Inflation is already at 40 year highs in the US. What the unfolding global diesel fuel crisis will mean, barring a major turnaround, is a dramatic impact on all forms of truck and auto transportation, farming, mining and the like. It will spell catastrophe for an already failing world economy. Yet governments like the German “Ampel” (traffic light) coalition, with their insane Zero Carbon agenda, and their plans to phase out oil, coal and gas, or the Biden cabal, privately see the exploding energy prices as further argument to abandon hydrocarbons like oil for unreliable, costly wind and solar. The real industrial interconnected global economy is not like a game of lego toys. It is highly complex and finely tuned.That fine tuning is being systematically destroyed, and all evidence is that it is deliberate. Welcome to the Davos Great Reset eugenics agenda.”
https://www.globalresearch.ca/nato-sanctions-coming-global-diesel-fuel-disaster/5777305

If you doubted that the purpose of the war was to serve as pretext to destroy the world economy read the whole article, by Wm Engdahl

Donald Duck
Donald Duck
Apr 16, 2022 8:44 AM
Reply to  Penelope

Sorry to be boring but I have to bring it up again: The Bible and the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. In turn:

In our present age we have had 1. plague real or contrived (corona virus) 2. war (East versus West) 3. famine (massive unemployment) and 4.death.

I think that we are probably at the beginning of stage 3 a massive economic collapse.

Theobalt
Theobalt
Apr 17, 2022 4:43 AM
Reply to  Donald Duck

Problem is, the « apocalypse » seems to be repeating itself quite often

les online
les online
Apr 16, 2022 12:28 AM

I keep tripping over Natural Law
Democracy would probably declare it illegal…
We all have Inalienable rights,
only ET has alien rights…

I was following the story OK ’til Property Rights
made their appearance. (The rights of the property
owners); and on their heels, Economics. (Political
Economy)…
Democracy helps the Free Market function better:
“Free markets produce order without design.”
Interpretation: Democracy requires transparency,
The Hidden Hand of The Market > opacity…
“Market Forces” organise society into One Big Market.
Property Rights Rule. Democracy serves The Market/
defends the Rights of Property holders….
(“Possession is nine tenths of the law” can mean
that 90% of laws deal with property, 10% with civil
rights. Notice how The Bill of Rights was later tacked
onto The US Constitution, which was mostly about
limiting government interfering with property)…

And from there ‘Democracy… wont prevent a corporation
(a ‘legal fiction’)…being a sole person in law.’
And as this legal entity has rights, Democracy has
to defend its rights against democracy…

Veri Tas
Veri Tas
Apr 15, 2022 11:51 PM

Yes, let’s live by Natural Law. I’ve been dreaming about this ever since I listened to Marc Passio’s long lectures years ago. But a dream it will remain, I’m afraid.

May Hem
May Hem
Apr 15, 2022 11:31 PM

Did you know that the “Great Reset” was launched by Prince Charles?

His official website announced on June 3, 2020: “Today, through HRH’s Sustainable Markets Initiative and the World Economic Forum, The Prince of Wales launched a new global initiative, The Great Reset”.

Thanks to a brilliant piece of research from Winter Oak, the real work of Prince Charles is revealed in all its horror. The many royal and wealthy parasites associated with his empire also have a nasty history.

“The amount of controversy and scandal surrounding numerous participants in his various projects makes one wonder how someone who likes to be referred to as “His Royal Highness” can associate with so many examples of what most of us would regard as low life. Seems they have their fingers/tentacles in just about every pie.

Charles and his ruling-class collaborators have to dress up their insidious agenda as “doing good”, as “philanthropy” or “conservation”, because they know that otherwise the rest of us would not go along with it.”

Once this illusion has been destroyed and the horrible reality exposed, then decent people everywhere will turn their backs definitively on these vile parasites and their evil empire of exploitation.”

https://winteroak.org.uk/2022/04/15/charles-empire-the-royal-reset-riddle/

Big al
Big al
Apr 15, 2022 10:24 PM

Good stuff. Relative to mass non-compliance, there needs to be a push to change our political systems. We have to get that front and center. Voting for these established and completely corrupted political parties is what keeps them in power, and is what keeps them keeping the globalists in power and able to pass their fucking treaties. We are not represented as the author points out, it’s all a scam. We need to tear it all down and start over.

I’ve tried to encourage boycotts of elections for over a decade but it just doesn’t take off as an organized effort. Plenty do it individually, or vote for third parties or whatever, protest votes. But it’s more of a silent protest. Hell, in 2014 the total voter turnout in the U.S. was 36%! And nobody said a thing, except for a few of us. For me, that’s where the noncompliance should start, but it has to be more than that. It has to be a protest movement and boycott that will lead to the discussion we need to have on this planet, i.e., that democracy is being held hostage by the psychopaths. That it’s all a scam just like their fake virus scam and their fake wars. That Trump or Elon Musk or whatever billionaire is not going to save us. And it’s getting worse and worse to the point where these fuckers actually want to kill us all. We need to get them before they get us. Alternative political systems, alternative educational systems, alternative food systems, we need to go all the way at this point.

paul
paul
Apr 16, 2022 12:31 AM
Reply to  Big al

You may have something there. In the 2016 election about 120 million voted for Crooked Hilary, the Orange Idiot, the Green Idiot, and some other figure. That was 48% of the 250 million electorate. 52% didn’t vote. They were either disgusted by the whole tawdry spectacle or realised it had zero relevance to their lives. Despite all the media circus that accompanied it.

Imagine if that 52% could be raised substantially towards 100%. It would deprive these arrogant, venal, corrupt, ignorant and delusional clowns of any legitimacy. Deprive them of the oxygen of legitimacy. Imagine if Big Bag Of Bugger All A and Big Bag Of Bugger All B stood for election and nobody turned out to vote for them. Not even their dog. Then watch them try to preen and posture how they have a mandate from the masses. Refuse to acknowledge their existence. Treat this filth with the contempt they deserve.

A few years ago, MI5 brought out a study postulating that the middle class, or what is left of it, would supplant the working class as the new revolutionary class. It was argued that a modern state needs the active engagement and participation of millions of people to make the system work. People with scientific, technical, managerial skills. At a quite low level. Skilled workers. But those people had lost any stake in the system they may once have had. Reasonable pay and conditions, job security, pensions, some modicum of respect and fair treatment – all things of the past, ancient history. But they would not bring the system down by manning the barricades. They would bring the system down by doing precisely nothing.

By just refusing to take part. By complete apathy. By totally detaching themselves mentally from the system. Being present physically, but not in spirit. Don’t believe a word they say about anything. Ignore their lies. Don’t hate the people they tell you to hate. Don’t watch their media. Concentrate exclusively on what is important, family, friends, faith if you have any, fishing, beer and motor bikes. Apathy and complete indifference are revolutionary acts.

That may seem too passive and negative for some. But it does work. Places like East Germany and similar regimes were brought down principally because over a period of years, the bulk of the people simply lost all interest in the system, refused to participate, and withdrew into what mattered, their private lives. That may be the only hope for the future.

Sophie - Admin1
Admin
Sophie - Admin1
Apr 17, 2022 1:14 AM
Reply to  paul

Why do you think those published numbers have any connection with reality?

Theobalt
Theobalt
Apr 17, 2022 5:03 AM

Exactly. If noone turned up voting, they’d print ALL the filled ballots… and keep publishing credible numbers, and make credible docs and movies…. with a twist towards their agenda…

semaj
semaj
Apr 16, 2022 9:25 PM
Reply to  Big al

Nice one mate, spot on. Been noncompliant for 40 years but boy its hard trying to get others on board. Proud to say that all bar one of my family defied all the covid bollocks and did not change our lifestyle once, lost so called friends along the way with the usual conspiracy retort. Now at the point where I think peeps deserve whats coming, thick twats!

Theobalt
Theobalt
Apr 17, 2022 4:53 AM
Reply to  Big al

It’s not getting to the point of them wanting to kill us all, that decision was made a long time ago. It’s just unfolding around us as we keep expressing our sacrosaint opinions

Theobalt
Theobalt
Apr 17, 2022 4:54 AM
Reply to  Theobalt

Apparently compulsively

Kalen
Kalen
Apr 15, 2022 9:48 PM

“The individual loses his substance by voluntarily bowing to an overpowering and distant oligarchy, while simultaneously“participating” in sham democracy.”
C. Wright Mills,”The Power Elite” (1956)

In the US we have, to use Sheldon Wolin’s terminology, a “managed democracy,” political form in which governments are legitimated by elections that they have learned to control, a form of government that attempts to keep alive appearance of democracy while simultaneously defeating democracy’s primary purpose, self-government.

The act of electing some representative is nothing but an act of ultimate disenfranchisement of individual citizen from the political process, an act of giving up direct involvement in community affairs, act of surrender of one’s own sovereign authority to rule by completely removing oneself from any power prerogatives and instead turning sovereign citizen into spectator of political theatre of power and affluence, where governing happens beyond curtain of overwhelming institution of all-powerful, distant government.

Only direct democracy by consensus can achieve its primary purpose: self government. Otherwise we will always be governed by others.

Big al
Big al
Apr 16, 2022 12:16 AM
Reply to  Kalen

Here’s another, WEB Dubois in 1956, “Why I Won’t Vote”. He was 88 years old at the time and had seen it all. It’s like it was written today.

W.E.B. Dubois, I Won’t Vote (hartford-hwp.com)

fxgrube
fxgrube
Apr 16, 2022 2:48 AM
Reply to  Kalen

a lot of rural people (US) don’t vote and rarely, if ever, say why. in my county in 2016, only 52% voted. (the poverty rate here is only 8%)

I usually vote but I respect those who don’t more than I do myself. I feel the same way about vegans (can’t do it myself, but i sure respect them)

Maxwell
Maxwell
Apr 16, 2022 3:03 AM
Reply to  Kalen

“The act of electing some representative is nothing but an act of ultimate disenfranchisement of individual citizen from the political process…”

The forces placed on the elected person by the State machinery and pressures from big business dictate outcomes in a democracy not the “desires” of various politicians.

One can argue all they want that, “We need to keep up the pressure to demand Politician______ needs to listen to ordinary citizens, not to business”, and they will rot on the vine as their words disappear into the indifferent air.

It is the institutions that have power in the State due to their permanence, not the representatives who come and go.

Voting in the United States isn’t about “democracy”—it’s about perpetuating the illusion of democracy.