Dutch farmers outnumber the "elites" by at least 1000 to 1.
When you get down to it, there are less than 100 "elites" who are actually controlling the agenda... and the rest of them just go along with it. Find those 100 and chase them out of YOUR nation.
To be fair, yes, members of this society are profoundly retarded. This group would be the libtards. Liberals and leftists are the absolute idiots of this generation. They will go down in history as the dumbest, most retarded group ever.
Because the DS failed to reach their de-population targets with the vax, they are proceeding with phase 2, food shortages to starve the people. Climate Change is just another tyrannical hoax designed to justify government regulation of nitrogen, carbon, fossil fuels and anything else that will destroy the people that they are supposed to be serving.
Local government is a problem too. With Walmart came increased crime to our city, but the local government decides who may build a business or not. A city near us wants to bring in a Sheetz gas station near the turnpike. The people don’t want it. How much do you bet it will go in anyhow because palms are greased. Decisions should be made by the taxpayers, not the local government. Fix elections then 1-2 times per year taxpayers should vote on all issues: school, taxes, whether businesses are granted permits, major housing developments, etc. Hopefully this will stop payoffs. Any elected official must have open personal finances for themselves and immediate family. Then a panel consisting of citizens, an attorney, an accountant and city officials decide worthiness to run for office.
I think, not living in that city, the noise and congestion with the trucks, increased pollution/fumes. This is a more affluent, yuppie, probably liberal city.
They want the levels of fuel, energy, and food for the population they want, not the population we have. Does not take a scientist to predict what happens if all their plans are enacted. Maybe that's what it takes to wake up some of the sheep. I see a possible future wherein most people will personally know someone who has starved or frozen to death.
Government will always...like George Washington said...be an entity that is dangerous to freedom and needs to be kept in a cage via a constitution of some sort...but that constitution needs to be decentralized and specific to each province similar to what we had before 1787 in the Articles of Confederation. We in the US are in our current despotic situation because of our current Constitution NOT in spite of it! If people would take the time to read and digest the Anti-Federalist Papers (writings Patriots in this country have never read), they would realize that every fear the Anti-Federalist said would be realized if our current Constitution was adopted to replace the Articles of Confederation have been realized and much worse!!!! People need to understand this if we ever regain our lost freedoms. I'm for going back to the decentralized Articles and reverse the Rothschild backed coup that took place in 1787 that gave us our current Constitution. I know what I am saying is very foreign to most Patriots and may even cause some to become angry as if I am spewing information akin American heresy, but facts are facts. We have indeed lost all our freedoms have we not? Have things turned out exactly the way the Anti-Federalists said they would down to the last detail? You must read them to understand this and accept the truth of our horrific situation...
It's not just "land grabs," it's "the grabby hands of government" overreaching their boundaries.
What do we need any large government for anyways? We have local matters. Why do we need any government beyond that?
There's the "National Defense" issue that we are always told about. There's "strength in numbers." But in a world with plenty of food and easy lines of trade, there's no wars. Wars are, and have always been Cabal contrivances designed for the governments that they own, to grab land for them.
Fuck them.
Fuck all large governments.
They are all nothing but a fraud, and always have been.
I think the main reason for a "representative government" was that back in the day communication was much more difficult and thus if you wanted to have your voice heard where the decisions are made you need to pack up and start walking or riding on horseback all the way across the country to do so. So a "representative" actually had some type of reason to exist back then. Nowadays communication is instant and easy, it's available to absolutely everybody in the country. We do not need "representatives" to speak for us anymore because we can speak for ourselves to absolutely anybody in the world, and we can do it from even the most remote areas in the world. The reason for having a representative no longer exist, but for some reason we've kept the representative. Its long past time to get rid of the middleman. I'd argue that we don't even really need a government for local matters, I'm sure that something resembling a government might naturally form in a lot of areas, but truly the "need" to have somebody else make decisions for us no longer exist.
I think the main reason for a "representative government"
The main reason to have a large government at all was because the Cabal set up such governments to rule people. As far as I can tell, there has never been a time in recorded history where there was any government large enough to have been heard of that was not created by, and run by, the Cabal (or maybe in a couple cases created to fight against them?). Whatever, in every case they've always been a part of the scam.
We only needed "representatives" because we "needed" large government. We only needed large government because THEY had large governments. We needed "national defense" to defend against the Cabal. This isn't about "speed of communications," this is about the Cabal.
That doesn't mean I disagree with your assessment, I just like to put things into their proper scope. Our government was at best the choice of a lesser evil because the Cabal ruled the world. At worst it was their design, specifically to create Controlled Opposition, with the intent to create a One World Government 250 years later. "The Great Experiment" may have been their experiment to finally unite everyone, under a singular ever-lasting rule in their Utopia.
It would have worked too, if not for those meddling Qids.
the "need" to have somebody else make decisions for us no longer exist
Government doesn't have to mean "somebody making decisions for us." Originally it meant to steer the ship. The helmsman doesn't have to be the captain.
If people want to live in a town they are going to need laws to maintain cohesion. They don't have to be overreaching laws, but some sort of laws must exist on some level for any group. On someone's land, those laws should not apply (must not apply). If they do, then they are not legitimate laws, but illegitimate overreach. Government can't reach over onto your domain or it is fraudulent.
But still, there must be laws of cohesion. For example, you can't go around killing anyone. But that's just a Natural Law. I mean, you can go around killing whoever you want according to Natural Law, but there will be consequences BY Natural Law (you will get killed right back). But beyond the laws of "no direct infringement on another's inalienable Rights," there must be laws against endangerment.
For example, "you aren't allowed to come into town and start shooting off your gun because you might harm someone else." That's a perfectly reasonable law, but it also sets a precedence.. Such a law can easily turn into, "you aren't allowed to come into town unless you are vaccinated and are wearing four masks because you might harm someone else."
The necessity of such community laws (and the need for debate within those laws) shows why there must be some sort of "governance," even if that governance is purely democratic, or representative, or dictatorial, or oligarchic, etc.
In a truly Free Market of city planning, with a truly free market economy, any of those would be allowed, and the Market would decide. A free market provides options. If a dictator takes control, and they shut down the free market, but there exists a free market next door, the dictator loses the ability to shut down the free market.
You can't have a free market if you have a Centralized Authority and you can't have a Centralized Authority if you have a free market. They are diametrically opposed ideas. But their must be laws (i.e. rules with consequences) in town (or any other grouping of people), or people won't just feel unsafe, but they will die unnecessarily due to people shooting off their guns after tossing back a few too many Takillya shots.
Ok heres what you are missing, in any situation involving government you have people that are being governed. Change a bit of my post to "The main reason why people might go along with a", instead of "I think the main reason for a", and I think you'll get the meaning I was going for far better. I was talking much more about the reasoning of people going along with such a system then who might create and promote such a system and their reasons behind doing so. My point is that the reason that people had for going along with such a system no longer exist, and yet here we are still going along with things. You read way the hell too far into my post such that the meaning of my words went completely over your head.
You read way the hell too far into my post such that the meaning of my words went completely over your head.
I got that you were talking about that it was no longer necessary. I think you may have missed my meaning. I was talking about not just how we got here from a larger scope than you were talking about, but what we can do about it above and beyond just "not having representatives because they aren't necessary anymore".
I'm not sure why you felt the need to be insulting, but it doesn't help advance the conversation at all. Just because I expanded from your thoughts, doesn't mean I was attacking you. There was no reason to attack back, because I wasn't attacking you, or your thoughts, in any way. I even stated explicitly that I agreed with you, but was expanding the scope.
Perhaps "you read way the hell too far into my post such that the meaning of my words went completely over your head."
My response went over your head, so I pointed that out. I don't find it insulting whatsoever what I said, I don't get what you are trying to even say you are just rambling at this point. I didn't even disagree with your original post just added to it that the way the world is now we don't have any need to have somebody "represent" us, we can do it ourselves. I even said that some sort of government is likely to form no matter what! I was literally agreeing with you and adding to what you said and for some reason that went totally over your head man. No reason to get upset over it, reply if you want I don't have anything else to add because fundamentally we dont seem to disagree, just my original point went so far over your head I can't seem to place where it went.
My response went over your head, so I pointed that out
There is literally nothing in "my response went so far over your head.." etc. that is not insulting. Even if it were true, which I assure you, it was not, it would still be intentionally inflammatory rhetoric.
Since it didn't "go over my head" but I understood exactly what you were saying, what you pointed out was incorrect. Your response was fundamentally flawed in the premise, and thus the conclusion.
I didn't even disagree with your original post just added to it that the way the world is now we don't have any need to have somebody "represent" us, we can do it ourselves.
I KNOW that. I stated it in my original response, AND my follow up response. You are obviously not even reading what I'm writing.
You keep believing you understand everything though, I'm ok with that. I'm sure you are too.
I found this to be excellent red pill material and the data about the Netherlands exporting food was something I never considered.
I agree!
Makes me wanna go out and buy some more Dutch bulbs for my garden.
Dutch farmers outnumber the "elites" by at least 1000 to 1.
When you get down to it, there are less than 100 "elites" who are actually controlling the agenda... and the rest of them just go along with it. Find those 100 and chase them out of YOUR nation.
It's not nice to export your problems to the neighbors. Somethings just have to be taken care of yourself, however unpleasant it may be.
If we outnumber the cabal and the elites 100 to 1 and "these people are stupid" then what would that make us? Profoundly retarded?
To be fair, yes, members of this society are profoundly retarded. This group would be the libtards. Liberals and leftists are the absolute idiots of this generation. They will go down in history as the dumbest, most retarded group ever.
Because the DS failed to reach their de-population targets with the vax, they are proceeding with phase 2, food shortages to starve the people. Climate Change is just another tyrannical hoax designed to justify government regulation of nitrogen, carbon, fossil fuels and anything else that will destroy the people that they are supposed to be serving.
Not quite. Read up on Agenda 2030.
Local government is a problem too. With Walmart came increased crime to our city, but the local government decides who may build a business or not. A city near us wants to bring in a Sheetz gas station near the turnpike. The people don’t want it. How much do you bet it will go in anyhow because palms are greased. Decisions should be made by the taxpayers, not the local government. Fix elections then 1-2 times per year taxpayers should vote on all issues: school, taxes, whether businesses are granted permits, major housing developments, etc. Hopefully this will stop payoffs. Any elected official must have open personal finances for themselves and immediate family. Then a panel consisting of citizens, an attorney, an accountant and city officials decide worthiness to run for office.
What's the reasoning for not wanting a Sheetz?
I think, not living in that city, the noise and congestion with the trucks, increased pollution/fumes. This is a more affluent, yuppie, probably liberal city.
Hookers too!
[dutch secrets]
This was one of my favorite parts.
Their greatest fear, public awakening. Putin is right. They cannot stop what is coming.
They want the levels of fuel, energy, and food for the population they want, not the population we have. Does not take a scientist to predict what happens if all their plans are enacted. Maybe that's what it takes to wake up some of the sheep. I see a possible future wherein most people will personally know someone who has starved or frozen to death.
u/Donspectacularis, talk to this man.
Lord Jesus, I lift up these farmers and others worldwide. Stop government takeovers and help the people. In tour Almighty name I pray. Amen
[dutch secrets] KEK. Those dutch farmers! Number 6 food producer in the world and such a small country. Share the secrets Lol
Government will always...like George Washington said...be an entity that is dangerous to freedom and needs to be kept in a cage via a constitution of some sort...but that constitution needs to be decentralized and specific to each province similar to what we had before 1787 in the Articles of Confederation. We in the US are in our current despotic situation because of our current Constitution NOT in spite of it! If people would take the time to read and digest the Anti-Federalist Papers (writings Patriots in this country have never read), they would realize that every fear the Anti-Federalist said would be realized if our current Constitution was adopted to replace the Articles of Confederation have been realized and much worse!!!! People need to understand this if we ever regain our lost freedoms. I'm for going back to the decentralized Articles and reverse the Rothschild backed coup that took place in 1787 that gave us our current Constitution. I know what I am saying is very foreign to most Patriots and may even cause some to become angry as if I am spewing information akin American heresy, but facts are facts. We have indeed lost all our freedoms have we not? Have things turned out exactly the way the Anti-Federalists said they would down to the last detail? You must read them to understand this and accept the truth of our horrific situation...
“Nothing left to lose” ladies and gentlemen this is what a precipice looks like
It's just the start
It's not just "land grabs," it's "the grabby hands of government" overreaching their boundaries.
What do we need any large government for anyways? We have local matters. Why do we need any government beyond that?
There's the "National Defense" issue that we are always told about. There's "strength in numbers." But in a world with plenty of food and easy lines of trade, there's no wars. Wars are, and have always been Cabal contrivances designed for the governments that they own, to grab land for them.
Fuck them.
Fuck all large governments.
They are all nothing but a fraud, and always have been.
I think the main reason for a "representative government" was that back in the day communication was much more difficult and thus if you wanted to have your voice heard where the decisions are made you need to pack up and start walking or riding on horseback all the way across the country to do so. So a "representative" actually had some type of reason to exist back then. Nowadays communication is instant and easy, it's available to absolutely everybody in the country. We do not need "representatives" to speak for us anymore because we can speak for ourselves to absolutely anybody in the world, and we can do it from even the most remote areas in the world. The reason for having a representative no longer exist, but for some reason we've kept the representative. Its long past time to get rid of the middleman. I'd argue that we don't even really need a government for local matters, I'm sure that something resembling a government might naturally form in a lot of areas, but truly the "need" to have somebody else make decisions for us no longer exist.
The main reason to have a large government at all was because the Cabal set up such governments to rule people. As far as I can tell, there has never been a time in recorded history where there was any government large enough to have been heard of that was not created by, and run by, the Cabal (or maybe in a couple cases created to fight against them?). Whatever, in every case they've always been a part of the scam.
We only needed "representatives" because we "needed" large government. We only needed large government because THEY had large governments. We needed "national defense" to defend against the Cabal. This isn't about "speed of communications," this is about the Cabal.
That doesn't mean I disagree with your assessment, I just like to put things into their proper scope. Our government was at best the choice of a lesser evil because the Cabal ruled the world. At worst it was their design, specifically to create Controlled Opposition, with the intent to create a One World Government 250 years later. "The Great Experiment" may have been their experiment to finally unite everyone, under a singular ever-lasting rule in their Utopia.
It would have worked too, if not for those meddling Qids.
Government doesn't have to mean "somebody making decisions for us." Originally it meant to steer the ship. The helmsman doesn't have to be the captain.
If people want to live in a town they are going to need laws to maintain cohesion. They don't have to be overreaching laws, but some sort of laws must exist on some level for any group. On someone's land, those laws should not apply (must not apply). If they do, then they are not legitimate laws, but illegitimate overreach. Government can't reach over onto your domain or it is fraudulent.
But still, there must be laws of cohesion. For example, you can't go around killing anyone. But that's just a Natural Law. I mean, you can go around killing whoever you want according to Natural Law, but there will be consequences BY Natural Law (you will get killed right back). But beyond the laws of "no direct infringement on another's inalienable Rights," there must be laws against endangerment.
For example, "you aren't allowed to come into town and start shooting off your gun because you might harm someone else." That's a perfectly reasonable law, but it also sets a precedence.. Such a law can easily turn into, "you aren't allowed to come into town unless you are vaccinated and are wearing four masks because you might harm someone else."
The necessity of such community laws (and the need for debate within those laws) shows why there must be some sort of "governance," even if that governance is purely democratic, or representative, or dictatorial, or oligarchic, etc.
In a truly Free Market of city planning, with a truly free market economy, any of those would be allowed, and the Market would decide. A free market provides options. If a dictator takes control, and they shut down the free market, but there exists a free market next door, the dictator loses the ability to shut down the free market.
You can't have a free market if you have a Centralized Authority and you can't have a Centralized Authority if you have a free market. They are diametrically opposed ideas. But their must be laws (i.e. rules with consequences) in town (or any other grouping of people), or people won't just feel unsafe, but they will die unnecessarily due to people shooting off their guns after tossing back a few too many Takillya shots.
Ok heres what you are missing, in any situation involving government you have people that are being governed. Change a bit of my post to "The main reason why people might go along with a", instead of "I think the main reason for a", and I think you'll get the meaning I was going for far better. I was talking much more about the reasoning of people going along with such a system then who might create and promote such a system and their reasons behind doing so. My point is that the reason that people had for going along with such a system no longer exist, and yet here we are still going along with things. You read way the hell too far into my post such that the meaning of my words went completely over your head.
I got that you were talking about that it was no longer necessary. I think you may have missed my meaning. I was talking about not just how we got here from a larger scope than you were talking about, but what we can do about it above and beyond just "not having representatives because they aren't necessary anymore".
I'm not sure why you felt the need to be insulting, but it doesn't help advance the conversation at all. Just because I expanded from your thoughts, doesn't mean I was attacking you. There was no reason to attack back, because I wasn't attacking you, or your thoughts, in any way. I even stated explicitly that I agreed with you, but was expanding the scope.
Perhaps "you read way the hell too far into my post such that the meaning of my words went completely over your head."
Just a thought. Not sure where I got it from.
You guys engaged in violent agreement created a thread that would make for its own kick ass post.
We have the BEST ANONS!!
My response went over your head, so I pointed that out. I don't find it insulting whatsoever what I said, I don't get what you are trying to even say you are just rambling at this point. I didn't even disagree with your original post just added to it that the way the world is now we don't have any need to have somebody "represent" us, we can do it ourselves. I even said that some sort of government is likely to form no matter what! I was literally agreeing with you and adding to what you said and for some reason that went totally over your head man. No reason to get upset over it, reply if you want I don't have anything else to add because fundamentally we dont seem to disagree, just my original point went so far over your head I can't seem to place where it went.
There is literally nothing in "my response went so far over your head.." etc. that is not insulting. Even if it were true, which I assure you, it was not, it would still be intentionally inflammatory rhetoric.
Since it didn't "go over my head" but I understood exactly what you were saying, what you pointed out was incorrect. Your response was fundamentally flawed in the premise, and thus the conclusion.
I KNOW that. I stated it in my original response, AND my follow up response. You are obviously not even reading what I'm writing.
You keep believing you understand everything though, I'm ok with that. I'm sure you are too.
Problem is nobody has the balls.
Literally once instance in 100 years of insane government overreach.