Prove me wrong.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (21)
sorted by:
How it can be anarchy if anarchy means ‘no leaders’, and yet there are leaders? A country ascends into anarchy, not descends.
He is mistaking tyranny for anarchy, fren. Most do tbh, because they dont understand what anarchy is, or have been taught it is "chaos" rather than a self governance system.
Exactly.
I’m not sure which dictionary you use but I’m pretty sure descends is what I meant. Descend means to go down or deteriorate. And, what leaders are you referring to that we have who have any actual power or control. Respectfully.
Yes, descends means to deteriorate… and I know you meant descends. But anarchy is something we will ascend to. Whether a leader has power or control is neither here nor there. The fact is there are leaders, for example Trump and Biden, or if you don’t except them as leaders, then perhaps Soros or Rothschilds or the Pope or Lucifer. Anarchy means ‘no leaders’. You have misidentified by calling our situation ‘anarchy’.
I don't know what to call our current form of tyranny. They have Biden signing all these EOs, that would be tyranny except he doesn't know what he's signing so he's not the tyrant. His overlords are not tyrants because there are to many of them. Who the heck is running this clown show?
Lucifer.
Its called tyranny.
The most popular theory I've seen is that Barack Obama and his fellow globalist elites are calling the shots. I do think that Biden is, to the best of his ability, trying to influence events, though; this accounts for how much worse things are now than when the relatively more competent Obama was in office.