Granted. But, aren't we already 'in a hell of a mess'?Originally posted by norman
Granted. But, aren't we already 'in a hell of a mess'?
My rule of thumb says do not trust any entity that claims to be superior over other fellows. All those who claim to be royal or associate with superior species of any kind cannot be trusted to have our interests at heart
Well the obvious seems to escape most, should the Ambassador or any anonymous source for that matter fail to deliver, all you have to go on in terms of investigation/recompense is a voice.
Whether anyone likes the idea of a saviour/leader we all have one, be it ourselves, another human or intellectual ethos.
Last edited by monk, 28th January 2015 at 11:20.
This won't be a popular post but . . . .
There's nothing wrong with money as a system. It's the administration of it that's at fault. I could bet my life that, whatever system is introduced, it would turn out the same in the end because it's all of us - human nature - that needs adjustment.
Ditto self-rule. Look at the misunderstandings that arise here on this forum for instance. Given that we're the aware ones (so we think), can you imagine the shenanigans from Joe Public if everything was self-governing? My son wouldn't get out of bed all day for a start(don't know what I'm smiling for . . .
's better). At the first sign of any trouble at all in the UK, the first thing that happens is people start looting.
Realistically, there will be many zombie moments before there is heaven on earth.
Last edited by Calabash, 28th January 2015 at 11:27.
Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVjgY427qW8
This is the penultimate factor involved in keeping the gradual pace of our global shift from tryanny. Being given a bagload of money by some philanthropic Chinese Dynasty is not going to happen, more likely tax will be abolished giving the UK especially much cause to party like mad and spend like crazy.
No Looting required for transition.
A radical change in a society that has been in place for generations, is a ludicrousness thought, even though the intention may seem good/ good in theory.
Take Zimbabwe for eg. What a xxxxing mess. I do agree that change was necessary and unavoidable ,and i applauded that they wanted there country back in the hands of the people/there race,but the result of ''radical'' change and led by those that took advantage of the blindness of the masses. all things have consequences,They danced and danced in celebrations only to be imprisoned by even crueler landlords ,,,,,,,,,,, themselves.
Radical change , like some people are expecting will not happen, unless there is open war, global civil war.
This i do not believe will happen .
Change on the other hand I do believe will happen, just gradually in sequence with life and the planet itself . Step buy step , change by change piece by piece , From one open minded person to the next.
Yes it will take time , so lets suck it up and get started.imho.
Right. Still, there is a difference between being led and leading yourself. There's a difference between dependence and independence.
Don't even get me going on my so-called 'higher self'.
This won't be a popular post but . . . .
There's nothing wrong with money as a system. It's the administration of it that's at fault. I could bet my life that, whatever system is introduced, it would turn out the same in the end because it's all of us - human nature - that needs adjustment.
Ditto self-rule. Look at the misunderstandings that arise here on this forum for instance. Given that we're the aware ones (so we think), can you imagine the shenanigans from Joe Public if everything was self-governing? My son wouldn't get out of bed all day for a start
Realistically, there will be many zombie moments before there is heaven on earth.
Oh, for goodness sake. Don't bring up those damn zombies lol!
Again, I'm not the expert in this. I don't know if you've read all the material on the resource-based system and the contributionist system... there's loads of super-logical answers to dealing with questions such as, 'Without leaders, it will all fall into chaos!'*, 'Without money as a motivator, what will get people out of bed?'
For myself, I can say money has never motivated me. It's a different kind of value-system to want to wake up, roll out of bed, and do stuff just because you want to better yourself and help your fellow man. When all your survival needs are taken care of, you think differently.
*Having leaders/rulers means having slaves.
'Anarchy' means self-governance with rules (without rulers) we all agree to. That's freedom.
Last edited by Pris, 28th January 2015 at 21:28.
Bob (28th January 2015), Calabash (29th January 2015), dancing waters (29th January 2015), monk (29th January 2015)
I wanted to reply to Monk's post most of all, it was a killer line in logic and brilliance, but I'm a sado with a lazy brain chain and if it takes more than a 4/4 beat or a rhyming ooow ahhhh, I'm going to trip over my ingrowing Cross-nail before I can say 'wrong'.This won't be a popular post but . . . .
There's nothing wrong with money as a system. It's the administration of it that's at fault. I could bet my life that, whatever system is introduced, it would turn out the same in the end because it's all of us - human nature - that needs adjustment.
Ditto self-rule. Look at the misunderstandings that arise here on this forum for instance. Given that we're the aware ones (so we think), can you imagine the shenanigans from Joe Public if everything was self-governing? My son wouldn't get out of bed all day for a start
Realistically, there will be many zombie moments before there is heaven on earth.
So here I am replying to my cyber Calabashiness's working hypothesis that money is sound stuff and if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Here's my problem with that.
Money didn't come form nowhere. It was dropped into a pre existing system of miss trust and family protection by some very well rehearsed and practiced master crooks.
Even "Atticus", god bless him, refered to a time when his 'master' spent developing "money". He even told us the area in the world where he did it. The Sahara Desert area.
Now, I don't know about you, but, I find it interesting that the Sahara IS now a desert. Funny that.
It's sort of like something so gross went on there that the ecology collapsed and eventually it became arid desert, lost from useful purpose for at least millennia.
That kinda supports his story, for me.
Anywhoo, that's not even what I wanted say.
What pulls my bow about 'money' is that it's not orientated right, in my book.
It sort of 'says': " I don't trust you one bit to be a genuine contributor to the well being of OUR LIVING TOGETHER, so I'll do a guarded and careful thing with you to enable me to get what I currently think I need or want, and for that you may get likewise, but that's not any part of my responsibility.
To ME, that's exactly what money IS ( and "SAYS" - as an affirmation - if you like ).
I don't believe the human race will ever really get up off it's knees and get anywhere worthwhile without outgrowing this crippling practice.
A system of "bringing your best worth TO THE TABLE" is what's required of us to get free of this not only primitively unsuccessful, but also, criminally manipulated daft money-barter lead ball restriction on our long term well being.
Of course there are government "leaks" that inform us that galactic "trade" is commonplace. What else would you expect?
Even the idea of "black budget" "programs" is laced to the hilt with absolute bullblack bolox. The money system is heaving with impossible strain. Black budget secret programs should be the best way for most of us to snap out of the trance of it all, actually. That's when the sickness becomes it's most obvious.
I don't work in an office.
Last edited by norman, 28th January 2015 at 21:41.
Calabash didn't say money was sound, she said it wasn't necessarily unsound.
Oh, for goodness sake. Don't bring up those damn zombies lol!
Again, I'm not the expert in this. I don't know if you've read all the material on the resource-based system and the contributionist system... there's loads of super-logical answers to dealing with questions such as, 'Without leaders, it will all fall into chaos!'*, 'Without money as a motivator, what will get people out of bed?'
For myself, I can say money has never motivated me. It's a different kind of value-system to want to wake up, roll out of bed, and do stuff just because you want to better yourself and help your fellow man. When all your survival needs are taken care of, you think differently.
*Having leaders/rulers means having slaves.
'Anarchy' means self-governance with rules (without rulers) we all agree to. That's freedom.
I just wanted to add that anarchy does not mean chaos -- it means against authority. Have you noticed that our leaders/rulers consistently employ the tool of chaos to control the masses? I say that money is their most powerful tool to implement this.
I will even go so far as to say that money was invented for this purpose.
Last edited by Pris, 29th January 2015 at 04:09.
Even in an anarchist gathering people will gravitate to positions in which they are asked or volunteer to make decisions for the "good" of the community.
In those positions they take on a authorative/ruler type role.
If not the community will be debating topics of importance untill hell freezes over, as it is doubtfull there will always be concensus in those descisions.
Just my thoughts and experience from being part of an anarchist community.
With Love
Eelco
Have a great day today
We've gone rather off-topic here, so I thought I'd redirect this conversation to a new thread:
►http://jandeane81.com/threads/5391-M...#post841897704
Cunningham's Law strikes again..Calabash didn't say money was sound, she said it wasn't necessarily unsound.
Last edited by monk, 29th January 2015 at 08:35.
Ha ha - I had to look that up Monk.Cunningham's Law strikes again..
What I was trying to convey was that in my view money is as good a system as any other. It wasn't corrupt to start with: A token in exchange for goods/services. Before that it was goods/services in exchange for other goods/services, but somewhere along the line we started thinking that one thing was of more value than another and so we changed the system to make it more flexible and, unfortunately, after many twists and tweaks the system became corrupt. It was corrupted by us, or them (who are still us)
monk (29th January 2015)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks