The concept of "every legal vote" is itself problematic. It's not just about every legal vote, but every legal vote that actually wants to vote (without prompting or incentives) and is informed on the subject of the vote.
Ballot harvesting is a huge problem, yet a harvested vote is still a legal vote. And that is a really difficult issue to address.
An "informed" vote is pretty much completely non-existent. Nobody knows what they are really voting for on the measures.
Nobody knows that their "red shirt" or "blue shirt" candidate is actually paid for by some corporation or other country's government. Nobody understands why we have "two sides" to choose from.
Nobody knows that there is no distinction between those entities. Nobody knows that it doesn't actually matter who wins, because EVERYTHING IS CONTROLLED OPPOSITION on every level of control.
"Voting" doesn't matter because the people you are voting for aren't real people. They are actors playing a role, acting against other actors playing the "opposing" role.
I will agree with you, but nothing states that the voter has to be informed on the subject of the vote. It would be nice to have that luxury, but alas no one thought no one who wasn't informed would vote, so I guess we are stuck with the system we have. The cheating has to stop whether the Left wants it to or not
nothing states that the voter has to be informed on the subject of the vote.
In the original Constitution the only people allowed to vote were land owners; people who were wealthy and invested into the system. Because of the laws designed to ensure that only the Aristocrats could own land, at the time (and for a few decades afterwards) that amounted to ~2-3% of the population.
Now, there are a TON of problems with that, because it also ensured that only the men of the Aristocracy had any power at all. But it's quite a bit worse than that because as an Aristocracy, it ensured that certain people were pre-selected to be at the top of the food chain, i.e. a smaller section of that 3%.
The more you dig into what actually happened; who they really were, how the family money flowed, who individually benefited from the "laws," what the other laws were (inherited from Britain and/or the City of London (a Banking Cabal), other regions of Europe through the HRE, from the HRE itself, and down to the Roman Republic and even further) in the beginnings of our "Constitution," the worse it gets. And every single Amendment or law made it worse from there.
But to say:
nothing states that the voter has to be informed on the subject of the vote.
or
no one thought no one who wasn't informed would vote
is the exact opposite of the truth.
And the idea that:
I guess we are stuck with the system we have
completely misses what is really going on here. We aren't trying to "fix the system."
The System is designed, from the beginning, to enslave all people through their Aristocracy, employ their population control systems and eugenics programs, employ hidden power systems, manipulate the fundamental fraud of "law" (what that word really means), and manipulate money itself as a manipulation tool to ensure the Aristocracy stayed in power. That's ALL IN THE CONSTINTUTION AND ASSOCIATED LAWS, from day one.
We can't live with "fixing the system." It must be completely rewritten with the complete understanding of the Primary Teaching/Knowledge. In this context (though there is a great deal more to say about it), that Teaching is that All People are Sovereign, we All have our own Jurisdiction (and what that word means), and that that Jurisdiction can't be infringed (by Natural Law). As an essential addendum, every persons Property is also within their Jurisdiction. This essential addendum was the primary fuckery intentionally omitted from the Constitution.
The right of property is not a part of Natural Law, but it is required for people to not go around killing each other all the time. Natural Law says you have the Right to Defend your property. The Constitution states (through coercion) that the "government" (which doesn't actually exist) has all property rights (which is a fraud, against Natural Law and/or an act of war). However, any reasonable social system that is founded on the Primary Teaching extends that to a right of property, so that we don't have to go around defending ourselves all the time.
From that START, any other system can be constructed. Because, quite frankly, once people understand what it means, it will automatically become what it needs to be.
yes huge difference.........
The concept of "every legal vote" is itself problematic. It's not just about every legal vote, but every legal vote that actually wants to vote (without prompting or incentives) and is informed on the subject of the vote.
Ballot harvesting is a huge problem, yet a harvested vote is still a legal vote. And that is a really difficult issue to address.
An "informed" vote is pretty much completely non-existent. Nobody knows what they are really voting for on the measures.
Nobody knows that their "red shirt" or "blue shirt" candidate is actually paid for by some corporation or other country's government. Nobody understands why we have "two sides" to choose from.
Nobody knows that there is no distinction between those entities. Nobody knows that it doesn't actually matter who wins, because EVERYTHING IS CONTROLLED OPPOSITION on every level of control.
"Voting" doesn't matter because the people you are voting for aren't real people. They are actors playing a role, acting against other actors playing the "opposing" role.
I will agree with you, but nothing states that the voter has to be informed on the subject of the vote. It would be nice to have that luxury, but alas no one thought no one who wasn't informed would vote, so I guess we are stuck with the system we have. The cheating has to stop whether the Left wants it to or not
In the original Constitution the only people allowed to vote were land owners; people who were wealthy and invested into the system. Because of the laws designed to ensure that only the Aristocrats could own land, at the time (and for a few decades afterwards) that amounted to ~2-3% of the population.
Now, there are a TON of problems with that, because it also ensured that only the men of the Aristocracy had any power at all. But it's quite a bit worse than that because as an Aristocracy, it ensured that certain people were pre-selected to be at the top of the food chain, i.e. a smaller section of that 3%.
The more you dig into what actually happened; who they really were, how the family money flowed, who individually benefited from the "laws," what the other laws were (inherited from Britain and/or the City of London (a Banking Cabal), other regions of Europe through the HRE, from the HRE itself, and down to the Roman Republic and even further) in the beginnings of our "Constitution," the worse it gets. And every single Amendment or law made it worse from there.
But to say:
or
is the exact opposite of the truth.
And the idea that:
completely misses what is really going on here. We aren't trying to "fix the system."
The System is designed, from the beginning, to enslave all people through their Aristocracy, employ their population control systems and eugenics programs, employ hidden power systems, manipulate the fundamental fraud of "law" (what that word really means), and manipulate money itself as a manipulation tool to ensure the Aristocracy stayed in power. That's ALL IN THE CONSTINTUTION AND ASSOCIATED LAWS, from day one.
We can't live with "fixing the system." It must be completely rewritten with the complete understanding of the Primary Teaching/Knowledge. In this context (though there is a great deal more to say about it), that Teaching is that All People are Sovereign, we All have our own Jurisdiction (and what that word means), and that that Jurisdiction can't be infringed (by Natural Law). As an essential addendum, every persons Property is also within their Jurisdiction. This essential addendum was the primary fuckery intentionally omitted from the Constitution.
The right of property is not a part of Natural Law, but it is required for people to not go around killing each other all the time. Natural Law says you have the Right to Defend your property. The Constitution states (through coercion) that the "government" (which doesn't actually exist) has all property rights (which is a fraud, against Natural Law and/or an act of war). However, any reasonable social system that is founded on the Primary Teaching extends that to a right of property, so that we don't have to go around defending ourselves all the time.
From that START, any other system can be constructed. Because, quite frankly, once people understand what it means, it will automatically become what it needs to be.
I agree, there are many steps to go and this is just the first step - but this first step itself would make a huge difference.
SO demonrats getting elected is as well as MAGA being elected??
When CA is proven fraud and Trump invokes National Security issue.
You can't tell people, you must show them.
So glad someone with a big following put that out. They like to play word games.