It’s very obvious that the government is a highlevel gang and criminal organization ran by an even more higher level criminal organization, the banks.
I merely corrected you buy saying the will of the government is the will of its representatives. You said “the will of the people” was the unwashed, powerless masses.
So the misunderstanding rests with you. The main point of the OP, is how people abstract and understand notions of power, control, authority, and then conceptualize “The Government”. Your definition, “a violent gang of deceptive criminals” is insufficient. It doesn’t say much of anything. I could call the Bloods versus Crypt gang wars in Los Angeles, “a violent gang of criminals”. Does that then mean that they are the united states central government? No.
So your definition is shallow, and doesn’t say, nor explain much of anything.
It’s kind of side-tracked the whole thread. My original intention was for somebody to offer more in-depth analysis of how individuals and groups come to form their notions of “The Government”, and how the myriad different forms of governments, around the world, and throughout history, represent (or do not represent) specific groups of people. For example, what is the nature of Democracy exactly, versus Fascism? What would those societies look like? Why would they manifest?
However the quality of this conversation has gone down hill.
How banks exist.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mII9NZ8MMVM[/youtube]
How banana republics exist.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgydTdThoeA[/youtube]
I am saying under any kind of government the majority of people have no power or real influence whatsoever where the will of the people as a political abstraction is empty, illusory, and basically signifies nothing at all. The people’s will represented in government is an illusory abstraction maintained in propaganda to satiate the largely idiotic masses that haven’t the slightest clue that they have been born into bondage and that their entire lives largely consists of a variety of slaveries. Behind every government is individuals that only work for their self interests only, I don’t care what kind of government it is the end result is always the same. Sure, they’ll put on a dog and phony show for the idiotic masses claiming they exist to serve them which is brilliant propaganda and occasionally they’ll throw the masses some bones or scraps to undermine unrest but throughout history it always repeats the same, only a handful of individuals within government see the benefit of its existence. There is so much criminal conspiracy of any kind of government against the common man and woman that makes up the majority of any given population that there is no other way to describe it other than criminal. The only difference between democracy and fascism is the differing level of propaganda in public relations maintaining social order. Ball is in your court now, looking forward to a response. Don’t give up on a conversation so easily!
You are saying “the will of the people” outside government.
I am saying the will of the people within government.
I’m saying that governments are comprised of people, with will. And those people who run government, are responsible for the country, a nation, a society, a tribe, whatever, also conceive of government in the ways I mentioned. So people basically conceive of power relationships, and then abstract those, to form understandings of “The Government”. And “TG” is merely a generalization.
For example, you’re talking about Western u.s. government and Democracy. There are other forms of government. Your definition of “TG” will not make sense, or be agreeable with, somebody who lives in Denmark, somebody who lives in a Brazilian rainforest, somebody who lives in Japan, somebody who lives in Russia, etc.
People who run the government have three primary wills - will to money, will to cowardice, and will to sadomasochism.
All of their political actions are decided by those three things.
Otti believes that everybody with power is an alien, and that aliens are evil and that he is a unique innocent person and deserves for other people to take care of him, but he doesn’t want to also have to take care of them.
Basically he is an infant.
I couldn’t argue with that.
I suspect a little equivocation going on there. The will of the people is utilized in the process of governing. That will is not the governing itself, else there would be no need to govern. To govern is to limit or restrict an otherwise choatic, dispassionate, or undesired emoting of the populace (the very meaning of “Ahdam” from Genesis, the first government). Thus the presence of a government requires a distinction between the governing agent and the governed mass.
So Otto is correct in saying that the majority of the populace is always relatively powerless. Whether the governing agent is “criminal” is more an case of being “typical” and recently “very typical”, rather than necessarily always. And it happens that way for a very specific reason that is extremely difficult to thwart. What inspires people to be strong is also what inspires them to be criminally dispassionate and manipulative. “Man”, the man-ipulator of the people must remain rationally disciplined from the random urgings and emotings of the populace, else governing into any form of harmony cannot be achieved.
Populations do not inherently, automatically, or naturally harmonize without a governing agent. Thus governing is required so as to bring cohesiveness and harmonious behavior. Civilization, science, technology, philosophy, knowledge are all accomplishable only because there was governing going on in different forms. The only issue is whether the good outweighs the bad. At times it does. At times it doesn’t.
Obviously the best governing excludes abuse of the populace but until that agent can be promoted into authority, its converse remains dominant - if you are not doing the right thing, you are doing the wrong thing.
Whether or not aliens are real has yet to be determined for me. Otto is a hard working man and your arguments against him are infantile.
Depends on the size and scope of the government.
For instance, I would like to make a philosophy facility, where I would govern the philosophers and make sure they debate following the rules of logic and sound argument, as well as coordinate the food, refreshments and beverages, and supervise and assist with the building itself.
This is the ideal government, simple coordination for a good cause, keeping things running smoothly.
The current government, is a dictatorship with no interest in making things go smoothly, in fact most politicians vote for city plans that destroy the infrastructure more than help it, like spending taxes to build broken roads and public transportation services that serve no function and inhibit progress, that is if their money isn’t spent into their new suvs and jacoozis waiting for them at home.
Let me rephrase: If you are not doing the SAM thing, you are doing the bad thing.
Sam thing?
People seem to separate “The Government” apart from “The People”, like the mind-body duality, claiming they are distinct and independent. This is false because governments are comprised of people too. Thus there is no real division. If there is a division then it is, as you mention, a division of labor and specialization. Those who ‘Govern’ are those who impose order over the chaotic general population. Thus the Governor does seem opposed to “The People”.
There is an element of Dehumanization implied here. When a Governor rises up, gains and holds power, then he is no longer part of “The People”. You and Otto are both presuming and implying this. Both of you probably perceive “The Governor” as not a person, or those who govern are not people. This is more obvious with christianity as christians perceive “The Governor” as not human at all, but an invisible sky-god.
Personally, I demand realism and reality. The u.s. government is more obvious. Congressmen, Supreme Court Justices, the President, all of these “governors” are people, who represent other people, within a democratic-republic system. Different systems and conceptions of government will result in different relationships and dynamics of power.
So to conclude this response, it’s invalid to separate “The Government” or “The Governor” from “The People” without a reasonable case or argument. Aren’t you implying that those who govern are “not people” at all? Did they lose their humanity, by becoming moral authorities, leaders, put into positions of responsibility?
How are they no longer “the people” like anybody else? Except that a Governor is presumed to be in a position of moral responsibility, on behalf of society?
Ah yes, I remember now.
Although not entirely independent, mind and body are, in fact distinct, as are the governor and the governed. A US State has a Governor. The governor is not the mass populace, but a single individual, distinct. Yet both parties are interdependent. The US Constitutional government, when it was in power, was an attempt to stitch the populace more strongly into the governorship process. And to a large degree, it succeeded. Although in the long run, due to some clever and illegal deceptions, the process was subverted and now remains only as a guise with little governing authority. The authority to govern diverted to those who control the money supply, the medical supply, and the media supply. And those are relatively very, very few people who have very little concern for the will of the masses because they know through experience that they can alter and dictate that will to conform sufficiently to their own wishes.
Surely you don’t think all of this trans-gender, save the whales, superiority of women, mass migration, Blacks on Blonds, Muslims on Frauleins is all just natural nor “the will of the people”? There is nothing natural nor the result of natural mass will going on in the world today other than the objection to the forced direction. And that force has a very poignant hand controlling it.
The Nazis and the Jews were people too, so there is no real distinction?
That is all that has been intended.
Actually, I think the intent has been that the governorship is in the hands of “only a few people” who are relatively ruthless concerning the mass of people. They literally bring about millions of deaths yearly through provoked wars for their personal profit. They lust to be God and control all of life everywhere. They are self inspired to believe it is their obligation, much like television programmers now fully accept that it is their obligation to hypnotize the masses into “proper” thinking.
Being “real” means considering the total picture, not merely a conveniently limited picture. It is true that such systems are a big part of the picture of governing. But one cannot leave out the relatively small, yet vastly significant hinge-pins swaying that system.
What is real is that you cannot see the larger portion of what is going on in a society. A society is much like an iceberg, 2/3s under see-level. Otto and I have been referring to a particularly powerful yet small element down there under the obvious part that everyone can see. And to the fact that such a small part does not represent the masses, but rather that the masses represent those few down there. The masses are somewhat insane because their leadership is somewhat insane. Such is a common reflection in every large grouping.
No. We are implying that those who are governing are not the “will of the masses”, but rather reign over the masses, largely in deceitful, thieving, and murderous ways (aka “criminal”).
Very largely, yes.
How did a murderer lose his humanity? You don’t believe there has ever been mass murderers? Those who create wars are murderers. They lose their “humanity” by believing that they are above it and special. Most of them believe that it is they who are the true humans (the hue-of-Man) while the masses are but animals and even crops in need of restraining, confining, and subduing. They feed off of the masses so as to gain more for their own ambitions in the exact same way that people often feed off of livestock.
That is how they lose their “humanity” - by believing themselves to be special and above, while in fact subduing from the dark below. “Those who reign in darkness rule the world.” - Paradise Lost.
Have you ever thought, that people just want to be transgender, and save whales.
And that women were treated as second-class citizens since the dawn of time, and are finally getting tired of it?
And that blacks and muslims are naturally attracted to white blonde women?
And that muslim countries suck, thus they want to move to America?
Though this last part was in fact a government conspiracy, since America wanted to ensure that muslim countries suck, in order to promote muslim extremism in order to give reason to expand the prison system and global panopticon.
Thinking is not an issue of quantity, but of quality.
Wait a second here… you, and Otto, are both presuming that somebody who becomes a moral authority and lives in a position of responsibility, for him/herself, or for society at large, are less human than others, or not human at all???
So you’re basically defining “humanity” as slaves here. Is that what a human is, a slave?
If you want to make a quality thought, you should not deliberately snip quotes to change the meaning of them and deliberately put them out of context, and instead stick to the discussion at hand.