This post forms an unofficial trilogy with Sustainability and timing the crash.
The two core concepts covered were that society is founded upon fear and that modern day finance continues to exist due to confidence, or perhaps complete disbelief, in modern day finance,
This post covers the concept of how this 'belief system' is maintained.
For tens of thousands of years, human beings 'bartered' with each other. Friends and family would exchange gifts and favours. Excesses would be shared. Life was not hard. The streams were full of fish and the soil rich. Food grew wildly about the place and animals made out of meat wandered about looking to be eaten. Life would involve getting up once the sun had warmed up the place. Eating some fruit and berries that the children had collected the previous evening. The men would form a hunting party and just out of sight of the women, start competing with each other about who had the sharpest 'knife', best spear or just laze about playing gentle or aggressive games. The women would tend to the 'crops' and animals. In other words form groups and chat about whose husband had the sharpest 'knife' or best spear. The children would wander off playing games but keeping out of sight of the men who would find them something constructive to do or the women who would make them tend the 'crops' or muck out the animals. Mid morning, the children would continue exploring as the adults had naps. You get the picture, life was easy. Stress and excitement did exist but you had to go out of your way to find it.
You could say our ancestors had a simple life. They had no need of society, consisting of banks and government. That we have a complex life and thus we need society, consisting of banks and government. Well, that is the response that you have been conditioned to give. I write that with utter confidence as you will have never thought about an alternative or even realised that our ancestors had a far easier life than us. Our ancestors had a natural life and lived as human beings do naturally. We work forty hours a week and our ancestors around 16 hours a week. The elderly, less than half that.
Now imagine our ancestors without banks and government but with modern technology and medicine. That is our future. Food in abundance. Lots of shelter. Clothes to suit a full season of weather. Readily available tools to design and make things to share or exchange with others.
In this future, our future, humanities future, what is missing? Politicians and bankers. We are conditioned to believe that govt is powerful and that banks are wealthy. This is never questioned.
In the human civilisation I describe, either the future one or that of our ancestors, there is no govt thus the power resides within each human being. If we see someone in distress we would automatically render assistance and not wait for the authorities to do such a thing. We would take an injured child to whichever person in our group was most adept at 'medicine'. Larger groups may even have a dedicated building to help heal the injured. Without society, roads and hospitals would still exist. All good ideas would continue to exist. The written word would exist. Entertainment would exist. Would smart phones?
Quite naturally, society favours ideas that strengthen society. Banks like ideas that allow them to create bank credits and regulations that only the very largest can afford to ignore / implement. Government like ideas that give them more power and greater access to our wealth. Governments and banks love smart phones. Government and banks love social media. Thus societal wealth flows into such endevours that support society. With social media and smart phones mass surveillance becomes inexpensive. Now, let me be clear about what mas surveillance is. All individuals are not tracked and no-one cares who you slept with last night or what you are eating for breakfast. Mass surveillance means just that, 'mass surveillance'. Let us take this article, the instant I publish it four 'search engines' will 'read' it and tag the web address and label the content. One 'search engine' would be Google. This is so when you search using Google, this article is considered as a possible 'result'. It must be obvious that Google pre-searches and categorises web pages. Google doesn't read everything on the internet every time someone searches for something. Now, I mentioned that finance only exists because of our collective belief in it. I can write software and develop other metrics in an attempt to 'measure' confidence in the power of government and the confidence in the financial system. This should not be a surprise and not 'fake news' that a government agency or agencies would be doing this. The next obvious question is, 'can we change the way people view events?'. Can order be maintained, can society be strengthened, can a 'collapse' be delayed?
Well, once you decide that you would like to see if your self awareness can be enhanced, you might extend the effort required to do so. This would involve buying my books, researching better books, searching for 'meditation' guidance and perhaps you will trigger some software code that records an interest and your location. Thus if 2% or so of Kettering starts meditating, then this could be considered as a threat to society and our way of life. Not a serious threat yet but the start of the end. Should a minority commit a crime in Kettering then the news could go into overdrive and spin events so as to create fear in the minorities and the non-minorities alike. Libraries could be closed, always a good way to upset the chattering classes. The police could also be used. Should a meditation group have a member who has an unsettling sexual interest in children, then police raids on everyone, confiscating all smart phones, laptops, computers and ipads and kindles and so on, would easily disrupt the newly formed meditating group. The media could get quite a few sensational stories out of this and sell more media. I would describe this type of behaviour as 'fear tactics'.
Is this paranoia? Am I trying to scare you? No, I am not. I am calmly and politely (mostly) pointing out the world in which we live. Hopefully, painting a very vivid picture of the world we could live in. Or at least, encouraging you to imagine a far better world than this one.
Am I safe from this societal persecution? Yes and no.
Do I fear societal persecution? No.
Do I expect societal persecution should this blog be taken as a threat to society? Yes and no.
Do I fear societal persecution? No.
It takes a certain mindset to see that which I see.
It takes a certain set of experiences to mould a person into someone like me. It takes will power beyond the limits of reason.
I would simply see societal persecution as validation and promotion for my 'work' and as a test of my humanity. I do not fear failing such a test and passing it means less than nothing to me. There will always be tests and I understand that my humanity is less than absolute anyway.
Society has already tested me in the past and they will not be in a rush to do so again.
As I have already wrote, I am far more powerful than any member of society.
That may sound like boasting and I can back it up with facts and stories that you will not believe. Thus reinforcing your view that I am boasting. Forget about me. This entire blog is about you, your world and your descendants.
Govt and banking create rules.
Human beings create everything else
Govt and banking can only exist within a framework of enforceable societal rules.
Human beings, quite naturally, recognise injustices.
For society to continue, human beings must be heavily conditioned into accepting the cost of govt and banking. To believe that the plethora of injustices are necessary unavoidable otherwise we would have 'anarchy'.
By delaying the collapse of finance and then govt, we simply delay the dawn of civilisation.
With the dawn of a true human civilisation, we would experience 'abundance' created by our technological brilliance and the freedom (and necessity) to be both creative and productive.
I shall give one example and then have my breakfast. Imagine a council estate with a family of unproductive, uncooperative and aggressive members of society. We pay for their home and their food. We pay for their medical care and schooling. We pay for the police and social workers. We pay for the council to monitor their noise output and we pay for people to clear up their mess and graffiti. We have no power to do anything but must pay our taxes and pay for their chosen lifestyle. Subtract government and banking from this picture. When their children fall ill, it is likely that a member of the community will help them. A disheveled child is likely to be fed and clothed. Would the man be forced to crime to support himself? Well, either that or find something useful to do. So, he may become a productive human being and contribute to his community. However, he could choose crime. Perhaps stealing food from others. Many would tolerate this. However, he does risk stealing from someone who would physically punish him for his act. Who may even physically punish him for any theft, even from others. A productive man can always pay for his own medical care. It is difficult to steal medical care. Thus the former aggressive man turned criminal would soon see that his chosen lifestyle is unbelievably difficult to maintain. Without the support of his neighbours, his life becomes both nearly impossible and physically dangerous. The easy option would be to ask for help in trying to be productive. Thus our society enables him to be aggressive. Society tells us that it protects us from him. Society cares only for society. Society is rules. Humanity would naturally and with little effort and no cost, help the aggressive member of society to develop into a productive human being.
Society has you believing that the complex is simple and that the simple is complex. That you are weak and that they are strong. That banks are wealthy and that you are not. Our society is based upon believing a great many impossible things. This is not a healthy state of being.
If you have read this post without fear, you will see a seed of truth within yourself.
Only the last post is important. The rest were simply my personal journey to it. Thank you.
27 October, 2018
26 October, 2018
Timing the crash
I often mention 'sustainability' and the coming crash. Most people would assume that I am a doom monger or 'end of the world' sign manufacturer. Others simply want to know when the 'crash' will occur.
I am not a doom monger. The end of our society ought to happen when we are ready to usher in an actual civilisation. A society is one with rules and public institutions and a civilisation is one with people and common sense.
Let me start with a story. In 1920's America, people wore hats. Men wore hats. Women wore hats. The rich wore hats. The poor wore hats. Perhaps someone would insist that this hat wearing would end and no-one would wear a hat. Predicting when hats would no longer be worn outdoors would be impossible. Thus it is with predicting an economic crash or societal crash. Predicting when is impossible.
Let me colour the picture in for you. One Saturday, you would buy an expensive hat and on Monday your co-workers would admire it. However, there would come a time when you would buy an expensive hat and your co-workers would ask why you had wasted so much money on a hat and mock you.
This relates directly to when the financial system will crash. On Saturday, you have a conservatory added to your home, On Monday, your co-workers tell you how much value you have added to your home. At some point, your co-workers will mock you for an extension or attic conversion as a waste of money. Thus attitudes change and we all now this.
Now, should 2% of us decide to withdraw our entire savings and investments (pension) from the financial system, the financial sector would simply collapse.
Similarly, should 2% of us decide to withdraw our bank credits from our bank accounts, the banking sector would simply collapse.
I could not realistically predict when hat wearing would go out of or come back into fashion. In the same way I cannot predict when 2% of people would attempt to withdraw their funds due to a collapse of confidence in the banking or financial sector.
Some of you will probably want to know where I got the 2% figure from. Completely ignoring the basic point, the banking and financial system is based solely upon our confidence that it is fair and just and not simply a fraud committed against humanity.
Regardless, let me discuss five near complete failures of the financial system in my brief (50 year) lifetime. So, 1971. Foreign central banks could redeem US dollars for gold. Then Nixon told them they couldn't for a short period of time. They still can't. Black Friday in 1987. The 1997 Asian financial crash. The 2002 tech bubble crash. The 2008 Global Financial crisis. As the financial system still continues then you could argue that it is robust. Well, the financial system continues as we still have confidence in it. I say confidence, most people are indifferent to it.
The financial and banking sectors will never collapse whilst we still have confidence in them. In 2008, the banks needed bailing out. So, the govts borrowed 'money' from the banks and then gave it back to them. How much 'money' did the US banks need? No one knew or knows. Three bankers wrote as big a number as they thought they could get away with and three senators agreed. One of the senators stated that he was told that if he said no, the world would end as we know it. One of the three men who wrote the number on the back of an envelope admitted that it was just a guess.
Now, none of this matters. Each head of a central bank has only one function to perform. To do nothing which would cause 2% or more of the population to lose confidence in the dollar / pound / euro. In the UK, in order to meet demands for pension pay outs, the Bank of England bought near worthless govt bonds at full price. To keep a few massive financial institutions viable, the Bank of England bought near worthless corporate debt at full price. Did this effect our confidence in the pound? No. The Bank of England has unlimited buying power. It can buy the world simply by pressing the alpha numeric character known as 'one' on a keyboard and then holding down the zero key for as long as it takes. The only thing stopping them is the fact that we might or would lose confidence in the pound / financial system as a result of their actions.
Again, many very powerful bankers will state that there are rules and regulations which would prevent the Bank of England from buying everything and they are both correct and incorrect. If you recall, Zimbabwe decide to try this and the other central banks disowned them. A trillion dollar zimbabwee note is worth around one fresh doughnut. So, the rules and regulations are there but their only role is too help maintain credibility and confidence.
Fundamentally, it does not matter what I write. You will believe whatever it is you believe.
How about this. The IMF is made up of the heads of the worlds central banks. The IMF maintains a consensus. Should a central bank start trying to buy everything, the IMF will isolate them. The currency of the rogue central bank collapses to zero. However, the head of the IMF lost his job for being caught indulging in two favoured hobbies of bankers - hookers and blow. Did this effect our confidence in the entire financial system? No, he got the sack and Christine got the job.
Our confidence in the financial system is near absolute. Or perhaps, our indifference is? Or perhaps we live in a near perfect society of non-critical thinkers. I don't see the collapse of our society as a bad thing. Provided, that we are able to birth a civilisation of critically thinking human beings. This is the vision I share and continue with the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour. To live in a world where people use their eyes to see and their ears to listen.
Executive summary
We, the people, use bank credit as if it were money
Banks are allowed to create unlimited bank credit to satisfy any loan application
Central banks are allowed to create bank credit to buy anything
*********************************************************************
Some of you will believe that banks can only lend 10 times the 'money' that they have. One of the UK's banks topped out at 413 just as the 2008 collapse started. What this means is a bank that lends out ten times its own 'money' can survive a 10% drop in its assets value. (Without a central bank bail out.) At 413, the smallest of asset price drops causes complete bankrupcy. Yet, confidence remains near absolute. No-one cares. When 2% care, it is game over for our society.
Society is founded on fear and fear of anarchy allows society to continue.
The instant a member of society no longer fears what will happen when society / banks / finance collapse is the moment they begin to thrive in a human civilisation.
*************************************************************************
Again we are back to belief.
Do you believe that our society is founded upon fear?
If you believe that society is not founded on fear then nothing anyone will ever say or do will change your mind. In fact, you are more likely to choose to die than reverse such a powerfully held belief. Thus the dawning of a human civilisation patiently awaits your death and hopes that your children are not as childlike as you.
Or you can have a serious go at critical thought. Increase your own self awareness. In doing so enhance your awareness of others and truly begin to understand the world in which you live. Buying my three books may help this necessary, in my opinion, transformation.
With any luck, the books will be free over Christmas, starting December 25th and lasting for five days. Book One will be free for five days starting Saturday.
Be seeing you
21 October, 2018
Sustainability
Apparently, in the UK, banks are tightening credit and after many years of easy credit and very low interest rates, marginal businesses are expected to crash. The number of business expected to crash is expected to be significant and the stronger businesses are being increasingly wary of not being paid.
Now, I would have thought that marginal business collapse would be caused by the tightening credit and gently increasing interest rates but no this is not the case. Apparently Brexit is to blame. Not the banks.
If a significant number of marginal businesses failing in a short time frame is a problem, then are the banks not to blame for the number of years of easy credit and low interest rates for sustaining marginal businesses. (A marginal business is one where they can only just afford to meet interest and other payments or that they need to borrow to be able to meet interest and other payments.) No, the banks are encouraging us to blame Brexit and not the banks themselves.
I have discussed banks and government in many of my blog posts. Today, I have a different approach. To be honest, the thoughts are forming in my mind as I type.
Let us imagine a strong and thriving economy and lots and lots of happy content people. Opportunities abound for entrepreneurs, businesses, students, children, old people, philosophers and most important of all, blog writers. Spend a few minutes imagining this perfect world because we could start it on Monday.
In this 'perfect' world I will discuss two groups. Those who own a means of production and those who work for them. The owners make profits and the workers have savings. Profits can be re-invested within the business in an attempt to reduce waste and in other ways to improve the efficiency of the business. Or the owners may buy a yacht or a Ferrari. The workers may spend their savings on luxury goods or holidays or buying higher quality versions of things that they already own. Some workers may seek to 'invest' their savings in an existing business or start their own. Any business owner with an investment opportunity that he cannot fund from profits will seek to borrow the savings of those workers who seek investment opportunities. He will offer an interest rate based upon experience and the potential profitability of the investment opportunity.
The world discussed above is sustainable. It is how things have worked for thousands of years. It is not how things have worked in our lifetimes. The key difference is where in the 'perfect' world we have profits and savings, in our world we have money / currency / green backs / moolah / dollars / euros / dosh / quatloos and spondoolas. Our world is not sustainable simply because of the way we create currency. The business man is not overly dependent upon profits but he is dependent upon banks for credit. Workers don't bother with savings and as such are also dependent upon banks for credit.
The key difference of the 'perfect' world to our world is profit and savings versus credit. One higher order effect of that difference is that the 'perfect' world is sustainable and our world is not sustainable.
The perfect world is sustainable as a business continues to exist provided it has workers. The business need not make a profit but then re-investment in the business ceases. Should competitors prove to be more efficient, they would grow and offer incentives for the workers of the non-profitable business to join them. The business owner may well sell their business to their more efficient competitors. The business owner then has choices as to where to deploy his savings or even become a worker himself.
Now, in our 'real world' things are similar but the crucial difference is credit. There is no credit in the perfect world but there is in ours. With credit, we are not borrowing others savings or profits. It is just credit. In our 'real' world access to credit is the key to business success. In our 'real' world access to credit drives the economy. For decades interest rates have fallen and ease of access to credit has increased. Interest rates almost fell to zero in the UK. In other countries interest rates fell to zero and in others it dipped into negative territory. For our 'real' world to continue this trend must continue. The trend being falling interest rates and ever easier access to credit. The banks are now reversing this trend, albeit slowly and carefully. In the UK, the expected recession is being pinned on Brexit and not on banks not continuing the trend of ever lower interest rates an easier access to credit. The trend being interest rates to zero and then increasingly negative.
The sustainability question of our 'real' world has been addressed in the above paragraph. The control of our economy is not in the hands of the owners of production and workers, based upon profit and savings. The control of our economy is in the hands of those who issue credit. The control of the economy is not in the hands of the workers balanced against the hands of the owners of production. The control of the economy is not in the hands of the sixty million people living in the UK but on a handful of bankers. These bankers only issue credit but they get to decide who is worthy of this advantage. As bankers tighten credit, marginal businesses without access to credit collapse. Those the bankers deem worthy get access to credit to buy up failed businesses for pennies on the pound. The people get to experience lower standards of living as credit dries up. Bad businesses take down good businesses and standards of living collapse further. I don't call that a sustainable option.
In our 'real' world, a great many workers have what they consider to be both savings and investments in their pension. Well, when marginal businesses start collapsing, the major businesses will experience a drop in profits and you may wish to avert your gaze as your pension pot evaporates too. That won't feel very 'sustainable' and neither will those who can no longer make interest payments on the credit they been granted to purchase cars and homes.
Is our world really 'real'? It won't feel real when property prices crash as banks tighten up lending to new home buyers. It won't feel real as your employer is no longer able to pay you. It won't feel real when your car is repossessed and you realise that living in a large house in the sticks is not an easy place to commute from. Actually, it will feel very real once the shock has worn off. This 'real' world lacks sustainability. This is not immediately obvious. It takes critical thought to see it. It is a near certainty that you will not have been educated in critical thought. As I have taken the principles of higher order analysis from Control Engineering and applied it to our society and only I have done that . No-one will have been educated in that branch of 'social engineering' because I haven't taught it yet. (Other than through this blog.)
There is no need to panic or be particularly concerned, provided you are able to critically think and are able to perform high order analysis on your current situation.
Basically, the non-sustainable will not be sustained and the sustainable will. Until, we are enticed by govt and banks into accepting credit once more.
************************************************************************
There are benefits to credit. Banks can lend to certain sectors and through this very real but artificial stimulus they can promote growth and technological breakthroughs. This will be far quicker than waiting for profits and savings to fund such investment. Thus the comment by one investment banker that he is doing Gods work and he truly is. The only problem of this is that the banker is not a god or God and will make errors of judgments and the occasional mistake. This is unfortunate as the banker is effectively controlling the productive output of virtually everybody else and we will all suffer for his mistakes as we have benefited from his successes. As discussed above, this is not a sustainable state of affairs and eventually the bankers mistakes will offset banker successes and the people will suffer a massive collapse in their standard of living.
Basically, as the average standard of living stagnates and then collapses do not expect bankers / govt to explain why this has happened. They will believe it was because of Brexit or Russia or China or Trump or you the voter for being unproductive. Only a few will know why and even I will go dark.
************************************************************************
To those of you who believe that I am a purveyor of doom. Perhaps. To the question of sustainability of your 'real' world I offer two clues as to why it is not sustainable.
1) Your productivity must increase every year
2) Your house price must go up, perhaps not yearly but over time
3) Retirement age is increasing rather than decreasing
4) (world) debt must double every 6 - 12 years
There you go, I have given you a choice.
****************************************************************************
The original idea for this piece came from here:- https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-20/it-will-not-end-well-how-gibsons-paradox-has-been-buried
I haven't finished reading it yet either. So, rather than edit this I will continue with my research.
If anyone would like me to actually teach this stuff then you are going to have to find a way to pay me to do so. I choose to due pure research for my own amusement and sharing it for others to persue seems reasonable in my opinion. (It sates my desire to be productive.)
I am happy to share my thoughts and ideas for free, as this is my preferred method of research, analysis and evaluation tending toward understanding. (Mine, not necessarily yours.)
You take care
****************************************************************************
extra bit
It bears repeating that what we use as 'money' is in actual fact - bank credit. Thus when banks are tightening, they are removing 'money' from the economy. Even if banks were to be credit neutral, then they would still be tightening as bank credit comes with fees and interest payments.
Bank credit is what banks give you when you ask for and they grant you a 'loan' or 'mortgage'. Bank credit is what banks give to businesses when they ask for 'loans' or lines of (bank) credit. Should you have any savings or a pension pot, then that is just bank credit too.
All this bank credit has been loaned into existence and so when the banks tighten, less bank credit is created and so bank credit drains from the economy. In other words, as we are all conditioned to think of bank credit as 'money', tightening drains 'money' from the economy. With less 'money' in the economy GDP drops and companies go bankrupt. The average person must use savings too maintain his standard of living or lower his standards of living. All because of how much 'money' a banker decides we can, as a society, have.
However, if we did use 'money' as money, then banks would not be able to take it from us by tightening. If banks wanted the savings of workers or the profits of business, then the banks would have to actually earn it or at least offer a decent return when they borrow money from us.
I am not sure if you either believe me or cannot believe me. Let us imagine that we decided to pay back all our loans of bank credit. We would run out of what we call 'money' long before we paid back all the loans of bank credit. Our savings accounts would be drained. Our pension pots would be drained. Our wallets would be empty. Not a single coin or note would be found anywhere and we still would not be close to repaying all the banks loans of bank credit. This is the world as it is now.
In a perfect world, should the UK economy need one trillion pounds to function perfectly. Then one trillion pounds of money needs to be available. This money would be free to flow around the economy. Banks would be happy to step in and create one trillion units of bank credit, all of which needs to be repaid (with interest and fees). The perfect world is then corrupted into what we have now.
So, how do we create this perfect world? Well, everyone understanding that bank credit is not money would be a great start.
**************************************************************************
Even more
We all 'sort of' know that bank credit also known as currency is not real money. Yet we use it anyway as there does not appear to be a realistic alternative. Banks and government like this staus quo, as do many others and most of us. Let us see how much we like it when our standards of living start to fall a little faster than we are prepared to accept. Or perhaps you feel that your standard of living will continue to rise until you are dead. Well, what about the children? Yours may be OK but what about the average child? How about your grand children? Well, obviously, we aren't all that bothered as we don't even believe that a system better than what we have actually exists or could exist. We 'believe' we have what we have or anarchy. We are not conditioned to believe in anything else. My perfect world is just unimaginable. We believe that it could not exist and we are right. We are also right if we believe that it could exist. It could exist Monday morning. It starts to exist the moment you truly stop believing that bank credit is money. The moment you stop accepting that bank credit is money, your world changes.
I find it amusing to look at my bank statement and see the numbers, especially the bank balance number clearly labelled as bank credit. I like the fact that when I did take out a loan, the loan clearly stated that I had been extended bank credit.
The perfect world, as I described it, is but moments away.
If bank credit is not money, it isn't, then what are you personally going to accumulate as savings? More simply, what items of lasting value will you exchange your excess bank credit for?
Slightly bolder, what items of value are you going to exchange your bank credit denominated pension for?
A few examples, fine wine, art, whisky, luxury watches, land, buildings, houses, silver, gold or invest it in productive land and / or equipment that you own?
***************************************************************************
Hopefully, there is plenty in this one blog post for you to critically think about. Especially comparing and contrasting the real world with the perfect world I briefly described.
Be seeing you
Now, I would have thought that marginal business collapse would be caused by the tightening credit and gently increasing interest rates but no this is not the case. Apparently Brexit is to blame. Not the banks.
If a significant number of marginal businesses failing in a short time frame is a problem, then are the banks not to blame for the number of years of easy credit and low interest rates for sustaining marginal businesses. (A marginal business is one where they can only just afford to meet interest and other payments or that they need to borrow to be able to meet interest and other payments.) No, the banks are encouraging us to blame Brexit and not the banks themselves.
I have discussed banks and government in many of my blog posts. Today, I have a different approach. To be honest, the thoughts are forming in my mind as I type.
Let us imagine a strong and thriving economy and lots and lots of happy content people. Opportunities abound for entrepreneurs, businesses, students, children, old people, philosophers and most important of all, blog writers. Spend a few minutes imagining this perfect world because we could start it on Monday.
In this 'perfect' world I will discuss two groups. Those who own a means of production and those who work for them. The owners make profits and the workers have savings. Profits can be re-invested within the business in an attempt to reduce waste and in other ways to improve the efficiency of the business. Or the owners may buy a yacht or a Ferrari. The workers may spend their savings on luxury goods or holidays or buying higher quality versions of things that they already own. Some workers may seek to 'invest' their savings in an existing business or start their own. Any business owner with an investment opportunity that he cannot fund from profits will seek to borrow the savings of those workers who seek investment opportunities. He will offer an interest rate based upon experience and the potential profitability of the investment opportunity.
The world discussed above is sustainable. It is how things have worked for thousands of years. It is not how things have worked in our lifetimes. The key difference is where in the 'perfect' world we have profits and savings, in our world we have money / currency / green backs / moolah / dollars / euros / dosh / quatloos and spondoolas. Our world is not sustainable simply because of the way we create currency. The business man is not overly dependent upon profits but he is dependent upon banks for credit. Workers don't bother with savings and as such are also dependent upon banks for credit.
The key difference of the 'perfect' world to our world is profit and savings versus credit. One higher order effect of that difference is that the 'perfect' world is sustainable and our world is not sustainable.
The perfect world is sustainable as a business continues to exist provided it has workers. The business need not make a profit but then re-investment in the business ceases. Should competitors prove to be more efficient, they would grow and offer incentives for the workers of the non-profitable business to join them. The business owner may well sell their business to their more efficient competitors. The business owner then has choices as to where to deploy his savings or even become a worker himself.
Now, in our 'real world' things are similar but the crucial difference is credit. There is no credit in the perfect world but there is in ours. With credit, we are not borrowing others savings or profits. It is just credit. In our 'real' world access to credit is the key to business success. In our 'real' world access to credit drives the economy. For decades interest rates have fallen and ease of access to credit has increased. Interest rates almost fell to zero in the UK. In other countries interest rates fell to zero and in others it dipped into negative territory. For our 'real' world to continue this trend must continue. The trend being falling interest rates and ever easier access to credit. The banks are now reversing this trend, albeit slowly and carefully. In the UK, the expected recession is being pinned on Brexit and not on banks not continuing the trend of ever lower interest rates an easier access to credit. The trend being interest rates to zero and then increasingly negative.
The sustainability question of our 'real' world has been addressed in the above paragraph. The control of our economy is not in the hands of the owners of production and workers, based upon profit and savings. The control of our economy is in the hands of those who issue credit. The control of the economy is not in the hands of the workers balanced against the hands of the owners of production. The control of the economy is not in the hands of the sixty million people living in the UK but on a handful of bankers. These bankers only issue credit but they get to decide who is worthy of this advantage. As bankers tighten credit, marginal businesses without access to credit collapse. Those the bankers deem worthy get access to credit to buy up failed businesses for pennies on the pound. The people get to experience lower standards of living as credit dries up. Bad businesses take down good businesses and standards of living collapse further. I don't call that a sustainable option.
In our 'real' world, a great many workers have what they consider to be both savings and investments in their pension. Well, when marginal businesses start collapsing, the major businesses will experience a drop in profits and you may wish to avert your gaze as your pension pot evaporates too. That won't feel very 'sustainable' and neither will those who can no longer make interest payments on the credit they been granted to purchase cars and homes.
Is our world really 'real'? It won't feel real when property prices crash as banks tighten up lending to new home buyers. It won't feel real as your employer is no longer able to pay you. It won't feel real when your car is repossessed and you realise that living in a large house in the sticks is not an easy place to commute from. Actually, it will feel very real once the shock has worn off. This 'real' world lacks sustainability. This is not immediately obvious. It takes critical thought to see it. It is a near certainty that you will not have been educated in critical thought. As I have taken the principles of higher order analysis from Control Engineering and applied it to our society and only I have done that . No-one will have been educated in that branch of 'social engineering' because I haven't taught it yet. (Other than through this blog.)
There is no need to panic or be particularly concerned, provided you are able to critically think and are able to perform high order analysis on your current situation.
Basically, the non-sustainable will not be sustained and the sustainable will. Until, we are enticed by govt and banks into accepting credit once more.
************************************************************************
There are benefits to credit. Banks can lend to certain sectors and through this very real but artificial stimulus they can promote growth and technological breakthroughs. This will be far quicker than waiting for profits and savings to fund such investment. Thus the comment by one investment banker that he is doing Gods work and he truly is. The only problem of this is that the banker is not a god or God and will make errors of judgments and the occasional mistake. This is unfortunate as the banker is effectively controlling the productive output of virtually everybody else and we will all suffer for his mistakes as we have benefited from his successes. As discussed above, this is not a sustainable state of affairs and eventually the bankers mistakes will offset banker successes and the people will suffer a massive collapse in their standard of living.
Basically, as the average standard of living stagnates and then collapses do not expect bankers / govt to explain why this has happened. They will believe it was because of Brexit or Russia or China or Trump or you the voter for being unproductive. Only a few will know why and even I will go dark.
************************************************************************
To those of you who believe that I am a purveyor of doom. Perhaps. To the question of sustainability of your 'real' world I offer two clues as to why it is not sustainable.
1) Your productivity must increase every year
2) Your house price must go up, perhaps not yearly but over time
3) Retirement age is increasing rather than decreasing
4) (world) debt must double every 6 - 12 years
There you go, I have given you a choice.
****************************************************************************
The original idea for this piece came from here:- https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-10-20/it-will-not-end-well-how-gibsons-paradox-has-been-buried
I haven't finished reading it yet either. So, rather than edit this I will continue with my research.
If anyone would like me to actually teach this stuff then you are going to have to find a way to pay me to do so. I choose to due pure research for my own amusement and sharing it for others to persue seems reasonable in my opinion. (It sates my desire to be productive.)
I am happy to share my thoughts and ideas for free, as this is my preferred method of research, analysis and evaluation tending toward understanding. (Mine, not necessarily yours.)
You take care
****************************************************************************
extra bit
It bears repeating that what we use as 'money' is in actual fact - bank credit. Thus when banks are tightening, they are removing 'money' from the economy. Even if banks were to be credit neutral, then they would still be tightening as bank credit comes with fees and interest payments.
Bank credit is what banks give you when you ask for and they grant you a 'loan' or 'mortgage'. Bank credit is what banks give to businesses when they ask for 'loans' or lines of (bank) credit. Should you have any savings or a pension pot, then that is just bank credit too.
All this bank credit has been loaned into existence and so when the banks tighten, less bank credit is created and so bank credit drains from the economy. In other words, as we are all conditioned to think of bank credit as 'money', tightening drains 'money' from the economy. With less 'money' in the economy GDP drops and companies go bankrupt. The average person must use savings too maintain his standard of living or lower his standards of living. All because of how much 'money' a banker decides we can, as a society, have.
However, if we did use 'money' as money, then banks would not be able to take it from us by tightening. If banks wanted the savings of workers or the profits of business, then the banks would have to actually earn it or at least offer a decent return when they borrow money from us.
I am not sure if you either believe me or cannot believe me. Let us imagine that we decided to pay back all our loans of bank credit. We would run out of what we call 'money' long before we paid back all the loans of bank credit. Our savings accounts would be drained. Our pension pots would be drained. Our wallets would be empty. Not a single coin or note would be found anywhere and we still would not be close to repaying all the banks loans of bank credit. This is the world as it is now.
In a perfect world, should the UK economy need one trillion pounds to function perfectly. Then one trillion pounds of money needs to be available. This money would be free to flow around the economy. Banks would be happy to step in and create one trillion units of bank credit, all of which needs to be repaid (with interest and fees). The perfect world is then corrupted into what we have now.
So, how do we create this perfect world? Well, everyone understanding that bank credit is not money would be a great start.
**************************************************************************
Even more
We all 'sort of' know that bank credit also known as currency is not real money. Yet we use it anyway as there does not appear to be a realistic alternative. Banks and government like this staus quo, as do many others and most of us. Let us see how much we like it when our standards of living start to fall a little faster than we are prepared to accept. Or perhaps you feel that your standard of living will continue to rise until you are dead. Well, what about the children? Yours may be OK but what about the average child? How about your grand children? Well, obviously, we aren't all that bothered as we don't even believe that a system better than what we have actually exists or could exist. We 'believe' we have what we have or anarchy. We are not conditioned to believe in anything else. My perfect world is just unimaginable. We believe that it could not exist and we are right. We are also right if we believe that it could exist. It could exist Monday morning. It starts to exist the moment you truly stop believing that bank credit is money. The moment you stop accepting that bank credit is money, your world changes.
I find it amusing to look at my bank statement and see the numbers, especially the bank balance number clearly labelled as bank credit. I like the fact that when I did take out a loan, the loan clearly stated that I had been extended bank credit.
The perfect world, as I described it, is but moments away.
If bank credit is not money, it isn't, then what are you personally going to accumulate as savings? More simply, what items of lasting value will you exchange your excess bank credit for?
Slightly bolder, what items of value are you going to exchange your bank credit denominated pension for?
A few examples, fine wine, art, whisky, luxury watches, land, buildings, houses, silver, gold or invest it in productive land and / or equipment that you own?
***************************************************************************
Hopefully, there is plenty in this one blog post for you to critically think about. Especially comparing and contrasting the real world with the perfect world I briefly described.
Be seeing you
20 October, 2018
Feminine vs feminism
I have been 'binge' watching the Fiamengo files by Janice Fiamengo on Youtube and I can't believe how far society has advanced without me noticing.
Now, if you have read most of my work you may be aware that I believe that Heaven on Earth is brought about by promoting our own individual inner humanity, after which a civilisation will naturally come into existence.
We start this natural process by encouraging our own inner humanity and as we become better human beings we can then start encouraging others by deed and example. At some point we may begin coaching those who seek our advice. None of which is coercive.
In this way an aggressive male will transform himself into a physically capable human male. The benefit to the man is that he no longer needs to be aggressive to demonstrate his power. His power is noted by others both consciously and sub consciously. We all continually test each other and a true human male will easily pass all these tests. Our society contains a vast number of aggressive males but a civilisation would, by definition, contain vast numbers of physically capable human males.
Now where do you believe women fit into the grand scheme of things as described above? Can you imagine how a young lady can help a young man more readily become a human male rather than continue his existence as an aggressive male?
After watching 77 Fiamengo files it has become clear to me that a feminist is the equivalent of an aggressive male. Thus we are living in a very advanced society when groups of feminists can easily provoke or encourage men to act aggressively and then severely punish them from a position of innocent victim-hood. We are now at the point where clumps of feminists can even take down male human beings for occasional lapses or even for nothing at all.
A clump of feminists are eager to display verbal and physical aggression, which were the domain of the aggressive male discussed above. An aggressive male is keen to display physical coercion but a clump of feminists are eager to use their tools to impose their will on individuals and groups. The use of coercion in any form is ugly and non-human.
A feminist would have you believe that a feminine woman is somehow weak and dependent upon an aggressive male for protection. Well, feminists would have you believe a great many things. I suggest that a feminine woman is the equivalent of a physically capable human male. A feminine woman is a true human female. As such, she will develop her own humanity and the humanity of those around her. Ideally, she will have a mate and they will both develop their humanity together. Perhaps, creating life and raising the child in a loving and very much human environment. Or not, a feminine woman is powerful and more than capable of making her own decisions and dealing with situations as they arise without worry, concern or fear.
A feminine woman will naturally dampen the aggressive feelings and actions of an under developed human male, also known as an aggressive male or what I would call a male member of society. What concerns me most, as an aggressive male on the path towards becoming a true male human being is dealing with an enraged mob of feminists? Upsetting a female member of society is very easy and can happen without intent or even awareness. Once this upset female shares her feelings with a clump of feminists, then the 'war' starts.
Luckily, Janice Fiamengo has given her advice on this topic of engagement with a clump of feminists. DON'T APOLOGISE, as they take this as an admission of guilt. I would suggest that they see this as a sign of weakness and attack. Therefore, never demonstrate any weakness. Not to the feminists or any of societies structures that get involved, such as police, social workers, human resources or your boss. Just continue to be a human being and regardless of provocation, do not allow your inner aggressive human male to display any aggression. In other words, be that which you have chosen to be, a human being. Society may well punish you anyway but what would a human being expect from a society? Certainly not justice. A human being can just display by words and deeds that they are a human being and by that act alone will encourage others to do the same until human beings are in ascendance and birth an actual human civilisation that could easily be described as Heaven on Earth.
By maintaining your humanity and not allowing fear or aggression to dictate your actions you will also have an influence on a few individuals in the feminist mob which is attacking you. These may well leave the feminist camp and travel the path to humanity. A far greater effect will be on the feminist mob itself, taking down a true human being will have a massive psychological impact on their group psyche. I do mean massive. The feminist mob will be very careful not to do it again and thus inadvertently accelerate the transformation of society into a civilisation.
The previous paragraph is an excellent example of very high order critical thought and you are invited to re-read and ponder it at your leisure.
The aim of this piece is not to tell you what is or is not feminine. The true aim of this piece is not to establish gender norms for men and women. The goal of this piece is to encourage you, the reader, to either begin or continue the development of your humanity and to offer some encouragement and reasons for doing so.
The true aim of this piece was for me to consider my responses and behaviour should a clump of feminists wish to test my humanity. In hindsight, this is easy. Simply pass the test (by remaining human) and realising the truth, a society is not a civilisation.
I now no longer fear being tested. I now have an intellectual curiosity about whether I would rise to the challenge and pass the test. A failure to do so would just mean that I am not yet a true human being - which I already know.
My training continues and Janice Fiamengo has an important role to play. In watching her videos, I must see the injustice and contradictions. I must choose to note any fear or anger I may understandably feel but that these feelings undermine my inherent humanity. Fear and anger are just tools to help recognise an injustice, fear and anger will not help in creating a civilisation as only love and understanding can do that.
So, what do you think of feminism? Is it based on love and understanding or on anger and fear?
Remembering that only love and understanding can destroy fear and anger.
:-)
This piece was written in around three hours and not edited as I ought to do something else now, like eat food and say good morning to my partner.
I started writing this piece half way through
www.youtube.com/watchv=yUUavtvWrTo&index=7&list=PLHt1Hh27h4BuYuWu54bQrUOClZ_lPJ3X3
Fiamenga file 78
Now, if you have read most of my work you may be aware that I believe that Heaven on Earth is brought about by promoting our own individual inner humanity, after which a civilisation will naturally come into existence.
We start this natural process by encouraging our own inner humanity and as we become better human beings we can then start encouraging others by deed and example. At some point we may begin coaching those who seek our advice. None of which is coercive.
In this way an aggressive male will transform himself into a physically capable human male. The benefit to the man is that he no longer needs to be aggressive to demonstrate his power. His power is noted by others both consciously and sub consciously. We all continually test each other and a true human male will easily pass all these tests. Our society contains a vast number of aggressive males but a civilisation would, by definition, contain vast numbers of physically capable human males.
Now where do you believe women fit into the grand scheme of things as described above? Can you imagine how a young lady can help a young man more readily become a human male rather than continue his existence as an aggressive male?
After watching 77 Fiamengo files it has become clear to me that a feminist is the equivalent of an aggressive male. Thus we are living in a very advanced society when groups of feminists can easily provoke or encourage men to act aggressively and then severely punish them from a position of innocent victim-hood. We are now at the point where clumps of feminists can even take down male human beings for occasional lapses or even for nothing at all.
A clump of feminists are eager to display verbal and physical aggression, which were the domain of the aggressive male discussed above. An aggressive male is keen to display physical coercion but a clump of feminists are eager to use their tools to impose their will on individuals and groups. The use of coercion in any form is ugly and non-human.
A feminist would have you believe that a feminine woman is somehow weak and dependent upon an aggressive male for protection. Well, feminists would have you believe a great many things. I suggest that a feminine woman is the equivalent of a physically capable human male. A feminine woman is a true human female. As such, she will develop her own humanity and the humanity of those around her. Ideally, she will have a mate and they will both develop their humanity together. Perhaps, creating life and raising the child in a loving and very much human environment. Or not, a feminine woman is powerful and more than capable of making her own decisions and dealing with situations as they arise without worry, concern or fear.
A feminine woman will naturally dampen the aggressive feelings and actions of an under developed human male, also known as an aggressive male or what I would call a male member of society. What concerns me most, as an aggressive male on the path towards becoming a true male human being is dealing with an enraged mob of feminists? Upsetting a female member of society is very easy and can happen without intent or even awareness. Once this upset female shares her feelings with a clump of feminists, then the 'war' starts.
Luckily, Janice Fiamengo has given her advice on this topic of engagement with a clump of feminists. DON'T APOLOGISE, as they take this as an admission of guilt. I would suggest that they see this as a sign of weakness and attack. Therefore, never demonstrate any weakness. Not to the feminists or any of societies structures that get involved, such as police, social workers, human resources or your boss. Just continue to be a human being and regardless of provocation, do not allow your inner aggressive human male to display any aggression. In other words, be that which you have chosen to be, a human being. Society may well punish you anyway but what would a human being expect from a society? Certainly not justice. A human being can just display by words and deeds that they are a human being and by that act alone will encourage others to do the same until human beings are in ascendance and birth an actual human civilisation that could easily be described as Heaven on Earth.
By maintaining your humanity and not allowing fear or aggression to dictate your actions you will also have an influence on a few individuals in the feminist mob which is attacking you. These may well leave the feminist camp and travel the path to humanity. A far greater effect will be on the feminist mob itself, taking down a true human being will have a massive psychological impact on their group psyche. I do mean massive. The feminist mob will be very careful not to do it again and thus inadvertently accelerate the transformation of society into a civilisation.
The previous paragraph is an excellent example of very high order critical thought and you are invited to re-read and ponder it at your leisure.
The aim of this piece is not to tell you what is or is not feminine. The true aim of this piece is not to establish gender norms for men and women. The goal of this piece is to encourage you, the reader, to either begin or continue the development of your humanity and to offer some encouragement and reasons for doing so.
The true aim of this piece was for me to consider my responses and behaviour should a clump of feminists wish to test my humanity. In hindsight, this is easy. Simply pass the test (by remaining human) and realising the truth, a society is not a civilisation.
I now no longer fear being tested. I now have an intellectual curiosity about whether I would rise to the challenge and pass the test. A failure to do so would just mean that I am not yet a true human being - which I already know.
My training continues and Janice Fiamengo has an important role to play. In watching her videos, I must see the injustice and contradictions. I must choose to note any fear or anger I may understandably feel but that these feelings undermine my inherent humanity. Fear and anger are just tools to help recognise an injustice, fear and anger will not help in creating a civilisation as only love and understanding can do that.
So, what do you think of feminism? Is it based on love and understanding or on anger and fear?
Remembering that only love and understanding can destroy fear and anger.
:-)
This piece was written in around three hours and not edited as I ought to do something else now, like eat food and say good morning to my partner.
I started writing this piece half way through
www.youtube.com/watchv=yUUavtvWrTo&index=7&list=PLHt1Hh27h4BuYuWu54bQrUOClZ_lPJ3X3
Fiamenga file 78
The Ugly Face Of Carceral Feminism - TFF episode 78
19 October, 2018
Janice Fiamengo - feminism
My chosen communication medium is the written word. This is because it takes me 'forever' to decide what it is that I am trying to communicate to the world. By the act of writing I hope to illuminate that which I seek. UNDERSTANDING.
That said, lots of people prefer to view 'you tube clips' rather than read. Janice Fiamengo has published a great many valuable 'you tube clips'.
You can start viewing them here and I strongly recommend that you do as I won't be duplicating her work and it is very valuable : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XD65wnDGuTg
Janice Fiamengo is a critical thinker. She is also capable of higher order thought and her 'you tube clips' offer great examples of both.
I have stated that banking and the government are pillars of society. Many believe that without society you have anarchy - I suggest that without society you could easily have a civilisation. The three main ways to prevent a civilisation from displacing a society is by corrupting school, feminism and human resources. Janice does a far better job than I could ever do in explaining the (damaging) higher order effects / 'unintended' consequences of feminism.
I am not suggesting that she agrees with anything I have ever written. I am merely stating that Janice Fiamengo does a fantastic job of critical thought / higher order analysis of feminism. After viewing more than fifty of her 'you tube clips' I have realised that human resources is just an invasive branch of feminism. Schooling is also continually being 'corrupted' by feminism. These are probably not views that Janice Fiamengo currently holds but ones I have developed by incorporating her UNDERSTANDING into my own. This is as it should be.
As always, I hope this blog helps you as much as it does me
Take care and have some fun
PS I have just found her own you tube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwu6ByzAWMRvZ3SXoGvaYtw/channels
I would be astonished if it wasn't a treasure chest of critical thinkers
That said, lots of people prefer to view 'you tube clips' rather than read. Janice Fiamengo has published a great many valuable 'you tube clips'.
You can start viewing them here and I strongly recommend that you do as I won't be duplicating her work and it is very valuable : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XD65wnDGuTg
Janice Fiamengo is a critical thinker. She is also capable of higher order thought and her 'you tube clips' offer great examples of both.
I have stated that banking and the government are pillars of society. Many believe that without society you have anarchy - I suggest that without society you could easily have a civilisation. The three main ways to prevent a civilisation from displacing a society is by corrupting school, feminism and human resources. Janice does a far better job than I could ever do in explaining the (damaging) higher order effects / 'unintended' consequences of feminism.
I am not suggesting that she agrees with anything I have ever written. I am merely stating that Janice Fiamengo does a fantastic job of critical thought / higher order analysis of feminism. After viewing more than fifty of her 'you tube clips' I have realised that human resources is just an invasive branch of feminism. Schooling is also continually being 'corrupted' by feminism. These are probably not views that Janice Fiamengo currently holds but ones I have developed by incorporating her UNDERSTANDING into my own. This is as it should be.
As always, I hope this blog helps you as much as it does me
Take care and have some fun
PS I have just found her own you tube channel here: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwu6ByzAWMRvZ3SXoGvaYtw/channels
I would be astonished if it wasn't a treasure chest of critical thinkers
07 October, 2018
Is this as good as it gets?
Hi Gang,
I trust you are all well.
Our western world is based upon a great many unspoken assumptions and some very uncomfortable unacknowledged truths.
This is the point where I list them and then you 'decide' how you feel about my credibility in these areas. Unless, you are a critical thinker, in which case you spend a few hours contemplating my ideas and then revise your own but only if you believe that this is necessary.
Let me take a different route. Let us imagine that I am very wealthy and I wish to use my wealth to make sure that my family stay very wealthy for generations. I have two very potent enemies, public (opinion) and government. Public opinion could go against me and government could tax or imprison me based upon 'classified' and non-public 'facts'. Would you expect me to nothing?
So, what would I do? You already know. Let us face the reality that you always choose to not acknowledge. I would set up 'charities' to promote a public agenda but the 'unintended' consequences would be my personal and very real objective for that charity.
Better still, I would not foot the bill for these acts of self preservation, I would spend a small sum, a few million, lobbying the government and by advertising with a few media outlets, get a few stories in print to help sway government perception of public opinion. In this way, the public would pick up the bill and suffer the 'unintended' consequences - a far bigger bill.
Eventually, you end up with a population believing a reality that simply does not exist. In other words, you end up with what we have. Is this as good as it gets? No.
Your entire life, from cradle to grave, is based upon the 'real world' which is completely un-tethered from reality. Obviously, rather than face the possibility of this, it is much easier to label me as insane. Deluded. Or whatever.
I'd suggest that most people have no idea whatsoever on how to achieve this almost complete manipulation of billions of people. However, all it takes is time.
Currently, several billionaires are attempting to do this. The CIA have been attempting to do this for close to one hundred years. Yet, no-one seems to be comfortable even accepting that this is happening or even possible.
Let me make up a silly example. In order to stay wealthy and powerful it makes sense to weaken your enemies. It makes even more sense to set your enemies against each other. To remain wealthy, it is even better to get your enemies to pay for this very real battle. As mentioned above, the enemies are government and public opinion. How would I set up and maintain this battle? Easily. Very easily.
It is far easier to corrupt something that exists than to create something. I would corrupt education. I would corrupt the feminist movement. I would corrupt the 'Human Resources' movement. By corrupt, I am not talking about first and second order effects. I am talking about higher order effects. These higher order effects / 'unintended' consequences can only be seen by those who are able to critically think about higher order effects. Or by normal people who can instinctively realise or know that these higher order effects exist but without, currently, being able to be identify the source.
This isn't conspiracy theorist stuff. It is (un)common sense. As a wealthy person you will promote or give money to any group or movement that has higher order effects that benefit you and yours. Provided, of course, that you have high order critical thinking skills or someone on staff that does. if all else fails then 'trial and error' is a good fall back position.
Well done on reading thus far. This should be food for thought rather than 'trigger' you into an emotional state such as fear, hate, annoyance or whatever. Your emotions are yours and yours alone. In the context of reading this, if you are having an emotional response then these emotions are hindering your ability to reason and to think.
So, what is my high order critical thinking about the trifecta corruption of schooling, feminism and 'human resources'? Well, simply put, it has already happened. We live in a world where this corruption is not acknowledged. The public pay the ongoing bill and the far larger price for the effects of this corruption.
I ought to charge around one million currency units for this next paragraph.
Are you ready for the truth?
Can you handle the 'truth'?
Of course not. Allow the truth to slowly infuse your body and soul.
Now, my difficulty is in selecting the correct level for my million currency units explanation.
1) Always attempt to homogenise the population.
- feminism attempts to homogenise men and women
- schooling attempts to homogenise the children
- human resources attempts to homogenise the work force
This creates internal tensions in the public. Thus the vast power of the public is turned in upon itself.
If you recall, I stated that my two enemies were government and public (opinion)
2) Always support increases in government power
This does not make sense in either first or second order thinking / effects. However, it becomes obvious at higher levels / unintended consequence level.
- powerful government can exert massive forces to help further both goals of homogenising the population and to make this homogenisation incredibly difficult.
- in terms of feminism, create lots of new laws
- in terms of schooling, make it free and available for all, Discourage homeschooling. Make it all the same - the very definition of homoginisation.
- make all companies over 100 staff members employ a human resources person, this person to have government approved credentials.
There you go. I have described the world to you. Your real world. An unnecessarily harsh world. A world where internal struggles are (unnecessarily) intensified and government is artificially made increasingly powerful at our expense. Have I described this simply enough for you to grasp my basic point and for you to independently identify areas where your life is made harder, simply to guarantee the wealth of one in five hundred million of us?
There are consequences for ignoring the content of this blog post for the human race.
You might wonder at what this achieves for the wealthy few? Or perhaps, how this enables the wealthy few to stay wealthy?
- the internal stress created within the population stops them from being able to critically think. Their human responses are diminished and their animal responses amplified. Thus creating a perceived / very real need for far stronger government to protect us from each other.
- a more powerful government can more easily enforce laws to create a self reinforcing cycle of dehumanisation created by enforcing homogenisation.
This is not a doom and gloom end of the world post. Yes, we are heading down a very dark path. We have done for hundreds of years. No, this post hopes to explain why the world is as it is and how it can be changed in a heart beat. Deep breath in. Accept the truth. Don't accept lies.
The truth is we are all different. Men are different to other men. Women are different to other women. Children are different from each other. Men, women and children are not the same. People from other cultures are different. Even our friends and neighbours are different. There are six billion of us and we are all different. We have different skills, abilities and preferences. At eight years old we learn that not everyone likes icecream and this is a big lesson to learn. The lesson being, we are not all the same. Not bully those who are different from us. On some level, everyone is different to us and so why waste a life-time battling them?
In summary, the first and second order effects of government, school, feminism and the rest are basically sound. Unfortunately, each has a flaw. The higher order effects are not beneficial to the creation and development of a humane civilisation. The higher order effects are to create exactly what we have and this is not as good as it gets.
At this point it does not matter if the heads of thirteen families are deliberately attempting to control six billion of us or not. At this point the system / society would run as it is without them. Simply realise the truth, the system / society does act against your own best interests. Believe in yourself, not what someone in 'authority' tells you to believe of yourself. Just be you.
In the UK, Brexit is a good example of Government action. Spend years telling us how bad brexit is. Have 50% of the population arguing with the other 50%. Release fear story after fear story. Fear being an effective mind killer. Fear being able to easily suppress the humanity within each of us. Then if we begin to question the point of having such an ineffective government, release news stories saying that we have nearly got a good deal. All the while, our governments will be carefully monitoring social media and the rest. Or rather, listening to what the billionaires who control social media are telling them is happening. Or, perhaps, listening to what the carefully selected and groomed CIA assets are telling the governments. It all gets rather preposterous quite quickly. Yet, this is what the few billionaires and the CIA are attempting to do, all without letting the public in on the truth. This truth being that we are far more powerful than them and that this nonsense stops as soon as we say it stops.
We live in a 'real' world that is so far removed from reality that it is utterly insane. We can let our animal instincts create that which it fears the most. Or let our humanity shine through. These are individual decisions that immediately change the world around us.
Silly example. I drove my car down a one mile long straight road behind two women drivers. The lead car got muddled whilst turning right and inconvenienced the woman behind her and me. I simply accepted the situation and waited. The woman in front of me went into a rage of arm waving. Within a few moments the woman in front of me got muddled in exactly the same way, inconveniencing me for a second time. I just laughed, the enraged woman doing exactly the same thing as the other woman a few hundred yards earlier. Fearful members of society are easily triggered into rage by the most inconsequential of inconveniences. We really ought to accept such inconveniences as simple probable events.
The above paragraph is a silly example of how easily our view of the world impacts upon our experience of the world. The second woman viewed the first woman as less than human. As some sort of idiot that cannot or shouldn't be allowed to drive. The second woman then behaved in the same manner. Her ability to think being compromised by her rage. Now, if we all simply accept that we are all different, then the second woman need only believe that the driving skills of the first woman are not as honed as her own. The second woman would naturally and instinctively allow the first woman more time to complete her right turn. Naturally, I already knew both the drivers were woman and had expected them to have poor driving skills relative to my own. I wasn't surprised by either of their actions. I also accept that I get muddled from time to time and that this is not a 'real' problem. I will inconvenience others, from time to time as we are all sharing the same road network. Recently, I thought I was getting out of the way of another motorist but as he slowed and shouted 'dick head' at me I realised that he thought differently. Which I simply accepted. I did not much care for the level of aggression he showed me but he did not wait around for my response.
I am perhaps drifting a little off topic, in your opinion. In mine this and everything else are all connected. My root cause analysis is that by not encouraging our own and others humanity we make our own lives far more difficult than they need to be. Far, far more difficult. In fact, mostly, we simply believe that we are human without ever contemplating what being human means or if we ought to attempt to improve our own humanity, over the course of our entire life-time. This is not taught in schools for a reason people!
There you go, take care and have fun because life is fun
***************************************************************************
extra bit
For those of you unable to believe in yourselves or perhaps your fellow man, you are simply slaves to your fears and perfect examples of so-called 'members of society'. You will not allow yourself to entertain any of the concepts introduced in this blog post. You, effectively, force your children to be slaves to their own fears. Not just your children but your friends, colleagues, parents and others you are not even aware of. A few billionaires cannot hope to control us all, so you do it for them. This control of the many (billions) by the few (13) is all done, quite subtly, by and through fear. Fear is rapidly destroyed by love, just as darkness is chased away by light.
By making a conscious decision to chase away your fears, to embrace your own inner humanity, you will in time neutralise the efforts of the many who unknowingly perpetuate fear and the few who do so deliberately. You will then be part of the development of a humane civilisation, founded not on fear but love. You will create a better life for yourself, your loved ones, your children and everyone on the planet. Upon your death, you will have made the world a far better place.
You have free will and you have choice. Real choices. Your own choices. Choose to remain a slave if you wish. Choose to become that which you are. It really is up to you.
*************************************************************************
Higher order effects / unintended consequences
In Engineering terms, you control a first order system with a second order control system
You control a second order system with a third order control system and that is about it.
A system with two components capable of storing energy are second order
A system with only one component capable of storing energy is first order.
A person can be considered to be capable of storing energy
A system is not just a collection of inanimate objects. It can also include people. Government is basically a control system. Govt attempts to control its population. Govts make up laws and rules governing property ownership and how much tax is required and how much needs to be borrowed. For this government / 'control' system to function, its population has to be homogeneous. The millions of people need to be fairly similar. Perhaps with just two basic types of people, the public can be modelled as a second order system which can then be effectively 'managed' / 'governed' / 'controlled' by government using third order control.
I hope Control Engineers can understand this as well as ordinary members of the public. None of this has ever been taught publicly, not even to politicians.
So a basic population of 300 million people can only be effectively governed if they basically fall into two types of person - Republicans and Democrats, perhaps. In control terms, 150 million people or things with the same characteristics can be consider as one unit.
This is very advanced mathematics but not magic or witch craft. It simply means that governing large numbers of people requires that the people are basically the same or of two basic types.
Now let me tell you what happens when you try to control a third (or higher|)| order system with a third order control system. With absolute certainty, it will go bang. Or in Engineering terms, control will be lost. Moments before control is lost, the energy requirements of the system become infinite. In other words, the control system requires more and more power to maintain control.
I hope you have an inkling of how this effects you. I hope you realise what this means for our society?
Let me back track a little. Practically all Engineers, even Control Engineers, will never have considered the govt as a control system and the public as the system under control. It isn't how most Engineers think and it most definitely is not taught. Now, do ordinary members of the public consider the govt to be a system of control? Govt give us rules, laws and guidelines: so I hope you can get a sense of them being a controlling group of people. I used the word 'control' in the Engineering sense and the control can be brutal or gentle. The control can be beneficial and just but remember that it forces us into two basic types of people for the govt to be successful.
Hopefully, you have a general feel for the concepts I am attempting to convey. One very basic concept is that the controlling system has to be more complex than the system it is controlling. In terms of govt and the public, the government must be a collection of near God-like humans - otherwise it will end badly - eventually.
Another concept is the massive amount of energy a control system consumes when it tries to control a system of equal or greater complexity. In terms of a govt control system, they will need more and more of our wealth in order to provide a control system that is certain to fail catastrophically.
An easily understood example of control in the manner described above is a Shepherd and his well trained dog. This is a second order control system. It has two components / actors capable of storing energy. the Shepherd is one and the dog is the other. Now the sheep may well outnumber them but this is unimportant. What is important is that the sheep behave the same, thus they can be considered to be a single order system. Control is both effective, easy and sustainable. The sheep can be herded wherever the Shepherd wants.
Now, imagine the same second order control system of one man and his dog but exchange the first order system of sheep with two cats. Each cat is fiercely independent, so they are a second order system. Control of the cats is never really going to work. Two cats are not going to be controlled by one man and his dog. Controlling three or more cats is beyond our imagination to concieve as even possible. If there was only one cat, then yes control would be achievable.
Now you can use these concepts however you see fit and think of our world however you choose too. I personally believe and this is a belief, that government only functions if it continually exerts a force attempting to turn each independent human being into the role of 'member of society'. I believe that this is a bad thing. A dehumanising thing. A thing which brings out the worst in us. A thing which exchanges our own sense of justice and morality into that which the govt of the day says it is. My inner sense of morality and justice says that this is wrong. That this allowed method of government control encourages our animal instincts at the expense of our humanity.
Anyway, unintended consequences are what happens when you try and control a system of equal or greater complexity than the controlling system. In other words, not only is our societies adherence to a government system wrong but that it doesn't and cannot ever work anyway. The human race is simply wasting its finite resources by running ever faster for less reward. It is beyond stupid.
Perhaps you want an alternative. How about you do as you please provided your actions or inactions do not impact negatively upon others or their property? Repeated failure to adhere to this simple concept will see you struggle to positively engage with your local community. Good luck providing for all your needs without trading with others. No govt control is required. No local sheriff is required. All that is needed is a community deciding to live without external control.
Anyway, you don't need anyone else to agree to this simple concept. You needn't explain it to them. Just live it. For example, I have agreed to work for someone else. So I do. I have a car which needs to be taxed, so I tax it. I am happy to make a contribution to the roads. The fact that most of my payment is squandered elsewhere is just how govt 'works'. I know this. I understand this. I have tried to explain this to the public. The public are, mostly, not interested. Good luck with that. Perhaps you will recall that only govts can start world wars but you have perhaps forgotten about World War One and World War Two and will be surprised at a World War Three?
Finally, those who say that without govt we have anarchy. Have you ever considered that without govt we have Heaven on Earth?
It is all down to belief and currently our humanity is suppressed. Only our humanity can create Heaven on Earth. Our animal instincts, currently brutally stimulated, will create that which it fears the most - anarchy.
Take care, nurture your own humanity and everything good will flow from that
I won't be editing this piece. I ought really have staff. Have fun.
I trust you are all well.
Our western world is based upon a great many unspoken assumptions and some very uncomfortable unacknowledged truths.
This is the point where I list them and then you 'decide' how you feel about my credibility in these areas. Unless, you are a critical thinker, in which case you spend a few hours contemplating my ideas and then revise your own but only if you believe that this is necessary.
Let me take a different route. Let us imagine that I am very wealthy and I wish to use my wealth to make sure that my family stay very wealthy for generations. I have two very potent enemies, public (opinion) and government. Public opinion could go against me and government could tax or imprison me based upon 'classified' and non-public 'facts'. Would you expect me to nothing?
So, what would I do? You already know. Let us face the reality that you always choose to not acknowledge. I would set up 'charities' to promote a public agenda but the 'unintended' consequences would be my personal and very real objective for that charity.
Better still, I would not foot the bill for these acts of self preservation, I would spend a small sum, a few million, lobbying the government and by advertising with a few media outlets, get a few stories in print to help sway government perception of public opinion. In this way, the public would pick up the bill and suffer the 'unintended' consequences - a far bigger bill.
Eventually, you end up with a population believing a reality that simply does not exist. In other words, you end up with what we have. Is this as good as it gets? No.
Your entire life, from cradle to grave, is based upon the 'real world' which is completely un-tethered from reality. Obviously, rather than face the possibility of this, it is much easier to label me as insane. Deluded. Or whatever.
I'd suggest that most people have no idea whatsoever on how to achieve this almost complete manipulation of billions of people. However, all it takes is time.
Currently, several billionaires are attempting to do this. The CIA have been attempting to do this for close to one hundred years. Yet, no-one seems to be comfortable even accepting that this is happening or even possible.
Let me make up a silly example. In order to stay wealthy and powerful it makes sense to weaken your enemies. It makes even more sense to set your enemies against each other. To remain wealthy, it is even better to get your enemies to pay for this very real battle. As mentioned above, the enemies are government and public opinion. How would I set up and maintain this battle? Easily. Very easily.
It is far easier to corrupt something that exists than to create something. I would corrupt education. I would corrupt the feminist movement. I would corrupt the 'Human Resources' movement. By corrupt, I am not talking about first and second order effects. I am talking about higher order effects. These higher order effects / 'unintended' consequences can only be seen by those who are able to critically think about higher order effects. Or by normal people who can instinctively realise or know that these higher order effects exist but without, currently, being able to be identify the source.
This isn't conspiracy theorist stuff. It is (un)common sense. As a wealthy person you will promote or give money to any group or movement that has higher order effects that benefit you and yours. Provided, of course, that you have high order critical thinking skills or someone on staff that does. if all else fails then 'trial and error' is a good fall back position.
Well done on reading thus far. This should be food for thought rather than 'trigger' you into an emotional state such as fear, hate, annoyance or whatever. Your emotions are yours and yours alone. In the context of reading this, if you are having an emotional response then these emotions are hindering your ability to reason and to think.
So, what is my high order critical thinking about the trifecta corruption of schooling, feminism and 'human resources'? Well, simply put, it has already happened. We live in a world where this corruption is not acknowledged. The public pay the ongoing bill and the far larger price for the effects of this corruption.
I ought to charge around one million currency units for this next paragraph.
Are you ready for the truth?
Can you handle the 'truth'?
Of course not. Allow the truth to slowly infuse your body and soul.
Now, my difficulty is in selecting the correct level for my million currency units explanation.
1) Always attempt to homogenise the population.
- feminism attempts to homogenise men and women
- schooling attempts to homogenise the children
- human resources attempts to homogenise the work force
This creates internal tensions in the public. Thus the vast power of the public is turned in upon itself.
If you recall, I stated that my two enemies were government and public (opinion)
2) Always support increases in government power
This does not make sense in either first or second order thinking / effects. However, it becomes obvious at higher levels / unintended consequence level.
- powerful government can exert massive forces to help further both goals of homogenising the population and to make this homogenisation incredibly difficult.
- in terms of feminism, create lots of new laws
- in terms of schooling, make it free and available for all, Discourage homeschooling. Make it all the same - the very definition of homoginisation.
- make all companies over 100 staff members employ a human resources person, this person to have government approved credentials.
There you go. I have described the world to you. Your real world. An unnecessarily harsh world. A world where internal struggles are (unnecessarily) intensified and government is artificially made increasingly powerful at our expense. Have I described this simply enough for you to grasp my basic point and for you to independently identify areas where your life is made harder, simply to guarantee the wealth of one in five hundred million of us?
There are consequences for ignoring the content of this blog post for the human race.
You might wonder at what this achieves for the wealthy few? Or perhaps, how this enables the wealthy few to stay wealthy?
- the internal stress created within the population stops them from being able to critically think. Their human responses are diminished and their animal responses amplified. Thus creating a perceived / very real need for far stronger government to protect us from each other.
- a more powerful government can more easily enforce laws to create a self reinforcing cycle of dehumanisation created by enforcing homogenisation.
This is not a doom and gloom end of the world post. Yes, we are heading down a very dark path. We have done for hundreds of years. No, this post hopes to explain why the world is as it is and how it can be changed in a heart beat. Deep breath in. Accept the truth. Don't accept lies.
The truth is we are all different. Men are different to other men. Women are different to other women. Children are different from each other. Men, women and children are not the same. People from other cultures are different. Even our friends and neighbours are different. There are six billion of us and we are all different. We have different skills, abilities and preferences. At eight years old we learn that not everyone likes icecream and this is a big lesson to learn. The lesson being, we are not all the same. Not bully those who are different from us. On some level, everyone is different to us and so why waste a life-time battling them?
In summary, the first and second order effects of government, school, feminism and the rest are basically sound. Unfortunately, each has a flaw. The higher order effects are not beneficial to the creation and development of a humane civilisation. The higher order effects are to create exactly what we have and this is not as good as it gets.
At this point it does not matter if the heads of thirteen families are deliberately attempting to control six billion of us or not. At this point the system / society would run as it is without them. Simply realise the truth, the system / society does act against your own best interests. Believe in yourself, not what someone in 'authority' tells you to believe of yourself. Just be you.
In the UK, Brexit is a good example of Government action. Spend years telling us how bad brexit is. Have 50% of the population arguing with the other 50%. Release fear story after fear story. Fear being an effective mind killer. Fear being able to easily suppress the humanity within each of us. Then if we begin to question the point of having such an ineffective government, release news stories saying that we have nearly got a good deal. All the while, our governments will be carefully monitoring social media and the rest. Or rather, listening to what the billionaires who control social media are telling them is happening. Or, perhaps, listening to what the carefully selected and groomed CIA assets are telling the governments. It all gets rather preposterous quite quickly. Yet, this is what the few billionaires and the CIA are attempting to do, all without letting the public in on the truth. This truth being that we are far more powerful than them and that this nonsense stops as soon as we say it stops.
We live in a 'real' world that is so far removed from reality that it is utterly insane. We can let our animal instincts create that which it fears the most. Or let our humanity shine through. These are individual decisions that immediately change the world around us.
Silly example. I drove my car down a one mile long straight road behind two women drivers. The lead car got muddled whilst turning right and inconvenienced the woman behind her and me. I simply accepted the situation and waited. The woman in front of me went into a rage of arm waving. Within a few moments the woman in front of me got muddled in exactly the same way, inconveniencing me for a second time. I just laughed, the enraged woman doing exactly the same thing as the other woman a few hundred yards earlier. Fearful members of society are easily triggered into rage by the most inconsequential of inconveniences. We really ought to accept such inconveniences as simple probable events.
The above paragraph is a silly example of how easily our view of the world impacts upon our experience of the world. The second woman viewed the first woman as less than human. As some sort of idiot that cannot or shouldn't be allowed to drive. The second woman then behaved in the same manner. Her ability to think being compromised by her rage. Now, if we all simply accept that we are all different, then the second woman need only believe that the driving skills of the first woman are not as honed as her own. The second woman would naturally and instinctively allow the first woman more time to complete her right turn. Naturally, I already knew both the drivers were woman and had expected them to have poor driving skills relative to my own. I wasn't surprised by either of their actions. I also accept that I get muddled from time to time and that this is not a 'real' problem. I will inconvenience others, from time to time as we are all sharing the same road network. Recently, I thought I was getting out of the way of another motorist but as he slowed and shouted 'dick head' at me I realised that he thought differently. Which I simply accepted. I did not much care for the level of aggression he showed me but he did not wait around for my response.
I am perhaps drifting a little off topic, in your opinion. In mine this and everything else are all connected. My root cause analysis is that by not encouraging our own and others humanity we make our own lives far more difficult than they need to be. Far, far more difficult. In fact, mostly, we simply believe that we are human without ever contemplating what being human means or if we ought to attempt to improve our own humanity, over the course of our entire life-time. This is not taught in schools for a reason people!
There you go, take care and have fun because life is fun
***************************************************************************
extra bit
For those of you unable to believe in yourselves or perhaps your fellow man, you are simply slaves to your fears and perfect examples of so-called 'members of society'. You will not allow yourself to entertain any of the concepts introduced in this blog post. You, effectively, force your children to be slaves to their own fears. Not just your children but your friends, colleagues, parents and others you are not even aware of. A few billionaires cannot hope to control us all, so you do it for them. This control of the many (billions) by the few (13) is all done, quite subtly, by and through fear. Fear is rapidly destroyed by love, just as darkness is chased away by light.
By making a conscious decision to chase away your fears, to embrace your own inner humanity, you will in time neutralise the efforts of the many who unknowingly perpetuate fear and the few who do so deliberately. You will then be part of the development of a humane civilisation, founded not on fear but love. You will create a better life for yourself, your loved ones, your children and everyone on the planet. Upon your death, you will have made the world a far better place.
You have free will and you have choice. Real choices. Your own choices. Choose to remain a slave if you wish. Choose to become that which you are. It really is up to you.
*************************************************************************
Higher order effects / unintended consequences
In Engineering terms, you control a first order system with a second order control system
You control a second order system with a third order control system and that is about it.
A system with two components capable of storing energy are second order
A system with only one component capable of storing energy is first order.
A person can be considered to be capable of storing energy
A system is not just a collection of inanimate objects. It can also include people. Government is basically a control system. Govt attempts to control its population. Govts make up laws and rules governing property ownership and how much tax is required and how much needs to be borrowed. For this government / 'control' system to function, its population has to be homogeneous. The millions of people need to be fairly similar. Perhaps with just two basic types of people, the public can be modelled as a second order system which can then be effectively 'managed' / 'governed' / 'controlled' by government using third order control.
I hope Control Engineers can understand this as well as ordinary members of the public. None of this has ever been taught publicly, not even to politicians.
So a basic population of 300 million people can only be effectively governed if they basically fall into two types of person - Republicans and Democrats, perhaps. In control terms, 150 million people or things with the same characteristics can be consider as one unit.
This is very advanced mathematics but not magic or witch craft. It simply means that governing large numbers of people requires that the people are basically the same or of two basic types.
Now let me tell you what happens when you try to control a third (or higher|)| order system with a third order control system. With absolute certainty, it will go bang. Or in Engineering terms, control will be lost. Moments before control is lost, the energy requirements of the system become infinite. In other words, the control system requires more and more power to maintain control.
I hope you have an inkling of how this effects you. I hope you realise what this means for our society?
Let me back track a little. Practically all Engineers, even Control Engineers, will never have considered the govt as a control system and the public as the system under control. It isn't how most Engineers think and it most definitely is not taught. Now, do ordinary members of the public consider the govt to be a system of control? Govt give us rules, laws and guidelines: so I hope you can get a sense of them being a controlling group of people. I used the word 'control' in the Engineering sense and the control can be brutal or gentle. The control can be beneficial and just but remember that it forces us into two basic types of people for the govt to be successful.
Hopefully, you have a general feel for the concepts I am attempting to convey. One very basic concept is that the controlling system has to be more complex than the system it is controlling. In terms of govt and the public, the government must be a collection of near God-like humans - otherwise it will end badly - eventually.
Another concept is the massive amount of energy a control system consumes when it tries to control a system of equal or greater complexity. In terms of a govt control system, they will need more and more of our wealth in order to provide a control system that is certain to fail catastrophically.
An easily understood example of control in the manner described above is a Shepherd and his well trained dog. This is a second order control system. It has two components / actors capable of storing energy. the Shepherd is one and the dog is the other. Now the sheep may well outnumber them but this is unimportant. What is important is that the sheep behave the same, thus they can be considered to be a single order system. Control is both effective, easy and sustainable. The sheep can be herded wherever the Shepherd wants.
Now, imagine the same second order control system of one man and his dog but exchange the first order system of sheep with two cats. Each cat is fiercely independent, so they are a second order system. Control of the cats is never really going to work. Two cats are not going to be controlled by one man and his dog. Controlling three or more cats is beyond our imagination to concieve as even possible. If there was only one cat, then yes control would be achievable.
Now you can use these concepts however you see fit and think of our world however you choose too. I personally believe and this is a belief, that government only functions if it continually exerts a force attempting to turn each independent human being into the role of 'member of society'. I believe that this is a bad thing. A dehumanising thing. A thing which brings out the worst in us. A thing which exchanges our own sense of justice and morality into that which the govt of the day says it is. My inner sense of morality and justice says that this is wrong. That this allowed method of government control encourages our animal instincts at the expense of our humanity.
Anyway, unintended consequences are what happens when you try and control a system of equal or greater complexity than the controlling system. In other words, not only is our societies adherence to a government system wrong but that it doesn't and cannot ever work anyway. The human race is simply wasting its finite resources by running ever faster for less reward. It is beyond stupid.
Perhaps you want an alternative. How about you do as you please provided your actions or inactions do not impact negatively upon others or their property? Repeated failure to adhere to this simple concept will see you struggle to positively engage with your local community. Good luck providing for all your needs without trading with others. No govt control is required. No local sheriff is required. All that is needed is a community deciding to live without external control.
Anyway, you don't need anyone else to agree to this simple concept. You needn't explain it to them. Just live it. For example, I have agreed to work for someone else. So I do. I have a car which needs to be taxed, so I tax it. I am happy to make a contribution to the roads. The fact that most of my payment is squandered elsewhere is just how govt 'works'. I know this. I understand this. I have tried to explain this to the public. The public are, mostly, not interested. Good luck with that. Perhaps you will recall that only govts can start world wars but you have perhaps forgotten about World War One and World War Two and will be surprised at a World War Three?
Finally, those who say that without govt we have anarchy. Have you ever considered that without govt we have Heaven on Earth?
It is all down to belief and currently our humanity is suppressed. Only our humanity can create Heaven on Earth. Our animal instincts, currently brutally stimulated, will create that which it fears the most - anarchy.
Take care, nurture your own humanity and everything good will flow from that
I won't be editing this piece. I ought really have staff. Have fun.
01 October, 2018
The basics - part three - Protecting yourself
Become a critically thinking mindful being who is-
Mindful of Self
Aware of Others
And awake to the
Demands of Society
Also the titles of the very short books I wrote. What a biziarre coincidence.
Mindful of Self
Aware of Others
And awake to the
Demands of Society
Also the titles of the very short books I wrote. What a biziarre coincidence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)