Why Don't We The People Take Control Of Our Lives?

[jones jones]

I’ve been like thinking about real deep stuff for a while now and come to the conclusion that I’m an anarchist at heart. Okay, we all know about “majority rule” but if the majority stuff up their rule, what are we to do? Sit around on our asses and wait for the next election? And then the same assholes get re-elected into power for another five years or so.

Of course you can go the coup d’état way and allow the army to seize power, but what gives them the right to do so?

I can guarantee that if being a member of parliament or being a representative in any government world wide was totally voluntary with only a stipend paid, very few if any earthlings would be prepared to accept a post, whether they were elected by a vast majority or not.

Being elected to government means you earn a fat salary, get a good pension if you stay elected for a certain period of time and if you are corrupt like 90% of all parliamentarians are today, you can pocket a gazillion of folding stuff every month/year whatever.

Anyone naïve enough to think that the earthling they elect to represent them in government has their best interests at heart, needs to catch a big wake up. People are not like that. With very few exceptions, they do what is best for themselves.

So why don’t we the people, the workers, the tax payers seize control of our lives and our destinies? Take control of your suburb, borough, village and say: “From now on we will run our own affairs without any top heavy government of slackers sucking the life blood out of us.”

Seriously, could you and your friends do any worse than the earthlings you actually pay to stuff up your life?

I think not.

What do you think?

[Bruv]

Prefer your pretty picture threads..........................................................................they at least............are in touch with some sort of........virtual reality.

[LarsMac]

Gummints come, gummints go.

I figure that living in a country where you are free to complain about the gummint is probably the best you can hope for.

At least until we all evolve to a point where we can all get along without a gummint to "protect" us from each other.

[Accountable]

jones jones wrote: So why don't we the people, the workers, the tax payers seize control of our lives and our destinies? Take control of your suburb, borough, village and say: 'From now on we will run our own affairs without any top heavy government of slackers sucking the life blood out of us.'
Actually, that's the way the framers of the US Constitution originally set up the federal gov't, but the power mongers went to work on it to benefit themselves, slowly, so that we wouldn't notice.

"God forbid we should ever be twenty years without such a rebellion.

The people cannot be all, and always, well informed. The part which is

wrong will be discontented, in proportion to the importance of the facts

they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions,

it is lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty. ...

And what country can preserve its liberties, if its rulers are not

warned from time to time, that this people preserve the spirit of

resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as

to the facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost

in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from

time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

It is its natural manure."

Thomas Jefferson

and

I think then that the species of oppression by which democratic nations are menaced is unlike anything which ever before existed in the world: our contemporaries will find no prototype of it in their memories. I am trying myself to choose an expression which will accurately convey the whole of the idea I have formed of it, but in vain; the old words "despotism" and "tyranny" are inappropriate: the thing itself is new; and since I cannot name it, I must attempt to define it.

I seek to trace the novel features under which despotism may appear in the world. The first thing that strikes the observation is an innumerable multitude of men all equal and alike, incessantly endeavoring to procure the petty and paltry pleasures with which they glut their lives. Each of them, living apart, is as a stranger to the fate of all the rest—his children and his private friends constitute to him the whole of mankind; as for the rest of his fellow-citizens, he is close to them, but he sees them not—he touches them, but he feels them not; he exists but in himself and for himself alone; and if his kindred still remain to him, he may be said at any rate to have lost his country. Above this race of men stands an immense and tutelary power, which takes upon itself alone to secure their gratifications, and to watch over their fate. That power is absolute, minute, regular, provident, and mild. It would be like the authority of a parent, if, like that authority, its object was to prepare men for manhood; but it seeks on the contrary to keep them in perpetual childhood: it is well content that the people should rejoice, provided they think of nothing but rejoicing. For their happiness such a government willingly labors, but it chooses to be the sole agent and the only arbiter of that happiness: it provides for their security, foresees and supplies their necessities, facilitates their pleasures, manages their principal concerns, directs their industry, regulates the descent of property, and subdivides their inheritances—what remains, but to spare them all the care of thinking and all the trouble of living? Thus it every day renders the exercise of the free agency of man less useful and less frequent; it circumscribes the will within a narrower range, and gradually robs a man of all the uses of himself.

Alexis De Tocqueville

[jones jones]

I'm not to sure that I was able to grasp all that you posted citizen accountable.

However I do know this.

Come the weeks before General Election time in Africa, the smouldering giant, the party with the most folding stuff send the big guns out into the field armed with food parcels, tee shirts and promises.

They fill soccer stadiums everywhere they go. Most come for the food parcels which are soon exhausted, everyone comes for the tee shirt cos its free clothing which they wear until it is in shreds and some listen to the promises which are never kept.

They are told that their ancestors will be extremely angry with them if the do not vote for the ruling party. I forgot to mention that ancestor worship is big in Africa. When a relative dies a big meat eat is organized after the funeral in order to send the spirit of the deceased away.

A white ox is slaughtered and its horns are mounted on a pole in a prominent position so that at a later date the spirit of the departed can find his/her way back home again.

This usually takes about three weeks and another meat eating get together takes place to welcome the spirit home.

But I digress. Potential voters are also told that the "party" knows which way they vote and if they do not vote for the ruling party, there houses will be torched and burned to the ground.

This may sound far fetched but it isn't. A while back a lap top was stolen out my business offices almost while we looked on. My son went to the police services to report the theft so that we could claim from our insurance.

A black warrant officer (wo2) took his statement. When he stated that nobody had seen the thief, the warrant officer said:

"I know it that gang ... they are the "muti gang." (Muti is an African medicine dispensed by sangomas, a Zulu word for traditional healers.)

"What is the muti gang?" my son asked.

"This gang get muti from a sangoma which makes them invisible." the warrant officer replied in all seriousness.

So election after election they vote for the ruling party so that their house isn't torched.

Their reward? Come next election a food parcel, a tee shirt, more promises and hopefully their house remains standing.

Is it any wonder that the far right are coming to power in Europe with Britain next in line for a similar change of government?

[Bruv]

Bruv;1455136 wrote: Prefer your pretty picture threads..........................................................................they at least............are in touch with some sort of........virtual reality.


Exactly..........

[Oscar Namechange]

Bruv;1455590 wrote: Exactly.......... Why are you talking to yourself?

[Bruv]

Oscar Sellotape;1455596 wrote: Why are you talking to yourself?


Louder.....can't hear you for the voices in my head.

[Accountable]

JJ, it seems as if your post #5 is arguing with your post #1.

[jones jones]

Accountable;1455683 wrote: JJ, it seems as if your post #5 is arguing with your post #1.


Personally Captain, I don't see that. However we all interpret in out own way.

[Accountable]

jones jones;1455689 wrote: Personally Captain, I don't see that. However we all interpret in out own way.
Good. Then help me understand you on this, because I find it really interesting.

I believe the fat salary you mention, while being a good initial incentive, is really secondary to the appeal of political power and control that comes with the government position. It must be quite intoxicating, breaking through to a place in society where laws only apply to you if you want them to. It would be addictive.

So we have junkies, high on their own power, willing to do horrible things to keep that power, even torching their constituents' homes. It seems to me that getting such people out would require a response equally violent. I can't believe such a person would simply step down if he lost an election.

[jones jones]

Accountable;1455690 wrote: Good. Then help me understand you on this, because I find it really interesting.

I believe the fat salary you mention, while being a good initial incentive, is really secondary to the appeal of political power and control that comes with the government position. It must be quite intoxicating, breaking through to a place in society where laws only apply to you if you want them to. It would be addictive.

So we have junkies, high on their own power, willing to do horrible things to keep that power, even torching their constituents' homes. It seems to me that getting such people out would require a response equally violent. I can't believe such a person would simply step down if he lost an election.


Of course. So they probably rig the results, but not by what is euphemistically called committing "electoral fraud", but a la Robert Mugabe, they starve the electorate into voting for them. That coupled with intimidation like sending truck loads of thugs to break up opposition rallies, usually does the trick.

Most African governments only change after a coup and there have been 30 or 40 of these in the last 50 or so years with many countries suffering coups 4, 5 , 6 or more times.

[Accountable]

I credit George Washington for keeping us from going down the same road. He could have declared himself 'President For Life' if he wanted, but he somehow resisted the lure and set us on the better road.

[jones jones]

Accountable;1455750 wrote: I credit George Washington for keeping us from going down the same road. He could have declared himself 'President For Life' if he wanted, but he somehow resisted the lure and set us on the better road.


Well you so lucky!

[Saint_]

Pfft. We all live in a Plutocracy, everyone knows that. Besides...it's not so bad living in a split-class society where everyone is poor and the civilization is hell-bent for ecological destruction.

We have cable TV.

[AnneBoleyn]

Why Don't We The People Take Control Of Our Lives?

Because then we'd have to do something!

[Accountable]

Saint_;1455806 wrote: Pfft. We all live in a Plutocracy, everyone knows that.
Yup, whether or not they've ever heard of the word.