An interesting take... I ponder this: "...anarchic loons..." Anarchy has been conflated with pandemonium most deliberately by the moneyed psychopaths in control on Our planet (by virtue of money). It is not that, but They want Us to believe that We cannot function without Their governmafias.
"Anarchy" means "no rulers." NOT "no rules." I am an anarchist. I seek:
Whoops, my bad there potentially, as I typed up this post very hastily, to my honest admission. The usage of "anarchic" in the context of this article is specifically to describe the currents of unrestrained, savage mob behavior, not intended as an umbrella smear term to describe legitimate libertarian-oriented critiques of inherent government dysfunctionality, In any case, I'll try to remember this distinction moving forward out of respect for people like yourself, and feel free to remind me on this in case I forget.
Love always, dear One. Perhaps I am a bit prickly over that issue. Because I am aiming to bring awareness that We can stand sovereign in an Ethical anarchy - FAR better than any ruler setup - and that really is My life’s work, the prickle is felt. Haha!
I see; understood. Perhaps that feeling of yours might strike a chord with Arabi Souri's ever-so-slightly-aghast reaction at my arguments when I've defended Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi Ba'ath in my conversations with him. 🙃 (unfortunately there haven't been ample opportunities recently to continue the meaningful dialogue with him on that specific debate, and if you have the time and opportunity, please do send him your best regards in case he's still in a difficult moment of life to endure through)
Perhaps my youthful age and accompanying zeal goes overboard sometimes, as this is a realm I recall the late TSJ (The Straight Juice) politely admonishing me over a long while ago. It can be difficult sometimes restraining my pure anger when beholding the sheer chutzpah of virtue-signaling depraved hypocrites, and my counter-polemic very well might need some curtailing lest I throw in too many "lumping" generic or ambiguous terminology that reeks of association fallacy.
Western renditions of democracy are rapidly showing their shortcomings.
I'm going to be completely frank here, brother: From an external lense, there are two partys in America:
1. Fascist White Right Ruling Class Party
2. ↗️Its Appeasement Party (necessary to quell the masses and prevent mass revolt)
Both are zio'nists.
The CPC, in cooperation with (I believe nine) other parties, work together and on common ground toward common goals for the people. Direct forms of democracy, largely involving sampling of quality of life and services, with a clear metric, are most heavily relied on.
A similar quality assurance feedback loop-type of mechanism is applied to quality of government/representives.
Coupled with strong safeguards against corruption, well... there are many alternatives to "Western Democracy".
American Democracy isn't even democracy; but it is perhaps, the hijacked child of its bastard child; I'll give it that. Words are semantical in these realms...
I think I understand where you are coming from, Cory, though I would gently advise against a No True Scotsman framing of "democracy" here, because the fact of the matter is that all inherent appeals to "majority representation" and "everyday people's will" as a raison d'etre for governmental legitimacy is always an inherent slippery slope that rewards anti-intellectual populist demagoguery and only allows the inherently anti-everyday-people, pro-laissez-faire-capitalist elite to set up a duplicitous front organization that co-opts the forms and trappings of "popular representation" using the slogans of democracy to elevate that controlled opposition fascistic fifth column front into power to achieve its own vested elitist ends.
Governmental legitimacy is not determined by whether the majority of the everyday people support it, but whether it as a government is capable of preserving order and stability to protect the upright, constructive, law-abiding citizens of its jurisdiction. Better for the sheep to be protected by an unelected lion fending off the wolves rather than for the wolves to dress up as sheep and vote in a "sheep's democracy" catapulting the wolves-in-sheep's-clothing into elected power for them to devour the sheep for lunch.
We assume all too often that "people's majority will = good," but that is all too often the exception, not the norm.
An interesting take... I ponder this: "...anarchic loons..." Anarchy has been conflated with pandemonium most deliberately by the moneyed psychopaths in control on Our planet (by virtue of money). It is not that, but They want Us to believe that We cannot function without Their governmafias.
"Anarchy" means "no rulers." NOT "no rules." I am an anarchist. I seek:
Ethical Anarchy (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/ethical-anarchy
Whoops, my bad there potentially, as I typed up this post very hastily, to my honest admission. The usage of "anarchic" in the context of this article is specifically to describe the currents of unrestrained, savage mob behavior, not intended as an umbrella smear term to describe legitimate libertarian-oriented critiques of inherent government dysfunctionality, In any case, I'll try to remember this distinction moving forward out of respect for people like yourself, and feel free to remind me on this in case I forget.
Love always, dear One. Perhaps I am a bit prickly over that issue. Because I am aiming to bring awareness that We can stand sovereign in an Ethical anarchy - FAR better than any ruler setup - and that really is My life’s work, the prickle is felt. Haha!
Thanks for Your grasp of My point!
I see; understood. Perhaps that feeling of yours might strike a chord with Arabi Souri's ever-so-slightly-aghast reaction at my arguments when I've defended Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi Ba'ath in my conversations with him. 🙃 (unfortunately there haven't been ample opportunities recently to continue the meaningful dialogue with him on that specific debate, and if you have the time and opportunity, please do send him your best regards in case he's still in a difficult moment of life to endure through)
Perhaps my youthful age and accompanying zeal goes overboard sometimes, as this is a realm I recall the late TSJ (The Straight Juice) politely admonishing me over a long while ago. It can be difficult sometimes restraining my pure anger when beholding the sheer chutzpah of virtue-signaling depraved hypocrites, and my counter-polemic very well might need some curtailing lest I throw in too many "lumping" generic or ambiguous terminology that reeks of association fallacy.
I do not doubt that You are sharp as a tack despite Your youth - the evidence is there!
Western renditions of democracy are rapidly showing their shortcomings.
I'm going to be completely frank here, brother: From an external lense, there are two partys in America:
1. Fascist White Right Ruling Class Party
2. ↗️Its Appeasement Party (necessary to quell the masses and prevent mass revolt)
Both are zio'nists.
The CPC, in cooperation with (I believe nine) other parties, work together and on common ground toward common goals for the people. Direct forms of democracy, largely involving sampling of quality of life and services, with a clear metric, are most heavily relied on.
A similar quality assurance feedback loop-type of mechanism is applied to quality of government/representives.
Coupled with strong safeguards against corruption, well... there are many alternatives to "Western Democracy".
American Democracy isn't even democracy; but it is perhaps, the hijacked child of its bastard child; I'll give it that. Words are semantical in these realms...
I think I understand where you are coming from, Cory, though I would gently advise against a No True Scotsman framing of "democracy" here, because the fact of the matter is that all inherent appeals to "majority representation" and "everyday people's will" as a raison d'etre for governmental legitimacy is always an inherent slippery slope that rewards anti-intellectual populist demagoguery and only allows the inherently anti-everyday-people, pro-laissez-faire-capitalist elite to set up a duplicitous front organization that co-opts the forms and trappings of "popular representation" using the slogans of democracy to elevate that controlled opposition fascistic fifth column front into power to achieve its own vested elitist ends.
Governmental legitimacy is not determined by whether the majority of the everyday people support it, but whether it as a government is capable of preserving order and stability to protect the upright, constructive, law-abiding citizens of its jurisdiction. Better for the sheep to be protected by an unelected lion fending off the wolves rather than for the wolves to dress up as sheep and vote in a "sheep's democracy" catapulting the wolves-in-sheep's-clothing into elected power for them to devour the sheep for lunch.
We assume all too often that "people's majority will = good," but that is all too often the exception, not the norm.
https://adversusbabylon.substack.com/p/12-8-lessons