So Ray, there is nothing more "grass roots" than Hereditary Original Peoples - (I'm not talking about the incorporation of Band Councils) I'd love to know your take on their stance, since the Robinson - Huron Treaty and the Tsilqot`in (BC Chilcotin) regional case and now the Haida case on claims to resources and unceded lands are moving forward in Intl Law courts...
How can you imagine this playing forward?
The Hereditary have know their land claims exist since the Tsilqot`in win in 2014 - so all the "they are coming for my land" fear porn is just that...and they are few (in numbers), compared to the numbers of 'settlers' so, they appear to want to work with existing land and resource 'ownership' (land ownership is not in their culture). Just the other day, the the Restoule appeal and its implications for First Nations across the country. (It's about annuities for the Treaty's and resources that were never endowed to the bands), this re-ignites the reconciliation due.
Just curious how deep you refer to when you say "deep rooted" and if you are interested in this avenue, I would love to introduce you to some "Chiefs" although that's a white man term for "headsman" but being a matriarch society, the clan mothers are the leaders, the men are their protectors and they carry out the matriarchs wishes.
Yes, I can see more on this, although feel that there is a 'shift' which has been initiated with Intl Law on territorial rights and perhaps it's naive to think that the Hereditary can begin to make and take a stance of measurable difference against the imperial globalist actions of the British Empire
Not necessarily. Allende in Chile was elected. After he introduced social reforms and nationalized copper mining, which hurt US companies, so he was slaughtered by the troops commanded by a general, Pinochet, who was supported by the CIA.
On the other hand, all governments are inevitably corrupt, but some are worse than others. A single ruler is always more transparent than an oligarchy, by a king has to reward his vassals and retainers, too, so eventually, the people always lose.
The way I usually put it is that no popular uprising, slave or peasant revolution has ever succeeded for more than a few years with the exception of the red terror of Mao, Lenin, or Pol Pot. The American revolution represented landowners. Hitler was elected and the vast majority of Germans supported him, because he restored the economy after kicking out the central bankers and raised living standards to never-before-seen levels. His government was probably one of the least corrupt ones in history:
Not sure what you mean. Propaganda is inevitable for the unthinking masses. They follow, no matter what, and usually amount to at least 70% of the population.
Well, until recently governments haven't had the sophisticated technology to enable effective control of public opinion, including military leadership - and personnel, who have arguably been one of the hardest hit groups, at least in your country.
What makes you think that the US was much better? Since WW2, it slaughtered millions as well, and experimented on its own citizens. It is a kleptocracy, a corporatocracy, and a globalist stronghold.
No, my point is that, with total control of the media by governments - effectively operating as their propaganda outlets - the 'people' are mostly unaware of being manipulated and are thus unlikely to support an oppositional grass roots rebellion. I'm well aware that millions were slaughtered in (eg) communist regimes or as a result of being sent to war under false pretences. These days it's different. For example, how many do you think are aware that the number of people killed by these so-called covid 'vaccines' is conservatively estimated at 20m. worldwide, along with possibly hundreds of millions of injuries?
Ray, what do you think about the video "Everything is a richman's trick"? It's still in YouTube. It says that the real nazis won the war, because the real nazis were the American and British ellites, who were the ones that fund Hitler.
The world wars were generated and financed by the same globalist interests that are now about to take over the world. I am planning to write an article about the use of the term "Nazi," because it's nothing but a cuss word these days. Hitler kicked out the central bankers, for which he had to go. The globalists used Stalin to eliminate Germany, and Soviet troops were preparing for an attack on Europe by the time Germany attacked the Soviet Union as a pre-emptive move; the Germans knew they would lose a defensive war that, they eventually did. In a first fatal mistake, they attacked Stalingrad instead of the oil fields of Baku and ran out of oil. Of course, they never stood a chance as long as the US was possible to goad into the war, which it was with provoking the attack on Pearl Harbor (Japan had no choice but attack, because the US placed japan under a naval blockade) and made sure it was not defended, so that enough casualties were produced for the masses in order to make them support the US to enter the war. The same tactic was used in the false flag of 9/11.
Hitler kicked out the central bankers, ok; but at the beginning he was funded and supported by those bankers and by the Western large corporations, that is, by the same Western capital that called him "the enemy" in public.
Just like the China case: China's succesful technocracy is a Western creation, just as the Bolshevics were the "puppet enemy" in the Soviét Union too.
Anthony Sutton, you know, made an extense and deep historical research and found out how the Western oligarchs used to create their own enemies in order to display false flags and to mantain ideological and political divisions among society. When the "puppet enemy" wasn't useful anymore or when he began to revolt against his masters, he was distroyed in a way or another.
And, we know, this strategy is still being applied.
Then, I don"t believe that Hitler was the devil that the allies told us (at least, he wasn't more evil than the allies themselves); but certainly he wasn't an authentic opposition neither when he was raised to power.
he gets it from jury nullification. A jury has the right to not only judge the facts of the case but also the law itself and exercise their own conscience. If the law is unjust a jury can nullify that law by finding not guilty.
We can agree to disagree on that. As long as elections don’t represent the will of the actual voters I think non violent making the bad guys scared will work. If elections weren’t fraud laden then you win what you want with logical arguments.
I do. Not with ten or a hundred people. With a few thousand. However do not touch their houses or set foot on their property.
These people go to restaurants and supermarkets and people fawn all over them. Make them feel the hate in a non violent way and they will reconsider.
In the past we could get by where out of control politicians would be reigned in by judges. That doesn’t happen anymore. We are up a creek unless we the people reign them in
If you extrapolate and consider the true methods of power, you might discover that all power over you has to be granted by the slave to the master. There are no masters if slaves refuse to be mastered. It is then possible to destroy the master's perceived powers and at most with the cost of your life.
Eternal slavery or death, which may not be eternal might be the two choices. There are no masters without willing slaves. And without someone to master, the control freaks (masters) will go insane because they can not have what they want. Remember, the masters are humans (well maybe) who have the greatest fear that they will be ignored and therefore they would serve no purpose.
When facing certain death by starvation, most people comply instead even if that means to become slaves... There is nothing spectacular about dying of hunger...
To me, it looks like human nature works in a way that all civilizations follow the same structure:
Yes, I am contradicting myself with this article. I also consider the traitors illegit, so respecting an authority that has been hijacked makes little sense beyond producing more evidence that the people are not represented anywhere:
The article was meant to inspire thinking. Personally, I never believed that the system can be changed from the inside. You have reached the same conclusion even before reading the article. :)
Somehow, I'm inclined to believe that those who entered the Capitol were government-insiders. Most of the 250 million obediently wore their muzzles. They are well-trained.
So Ray, there is nothing more "grass roots" than Hereditary Original Peoples - (I'm not talking about the incorporation of Band Councils) I'd love to know your take on their stance, since the Robinson - Huron Treaty and the Tsilqot`in (BC Chilcotin) regional case and now the Haida case on claims to resources and unceded lands are moving forward in Intl Law courts...
How can you imagine this playing forward?
The Hereditary have know their land claims exist since the Tsilqot`in win in 2014 - so all the "they are coming for my land" fear porn is just that...and they are few (in numbers), compared to the numbers of 'settlers' so, they appear to want to work with existing land and resource 'ownership' (land ownership is not in their culture). Just the other day, the the Restoule appeal and its implications for First Nations across the country. (It's about annuities for the Treaty's and resources that were never endowed to the bands), this re-ignites the reconciliation due.
Just curious how deep you refer to when you say "deep rooted" and if you are interested in this avenue, I would love to introduce you to some "Chiefs" although that's a white man term for "headsman" but being a matriarch society, the clan mothers are the leaders, the men are their protectors and they carry out the matriarchs wishes.
To put it simply, local initiatives might have a chance, as transient as they are.
One needs a tribe, a culture, a tradition for roots. Rootless people are easy to "uproot" (pun intended).
Not sure how to relate to the rest of your comment.
Yes, I can see more on this, although feel that there is a 'shift' which has been initiated with Intl Law on territorial rights and perhaps it's naive to think that the Hereditary can begin to make and take a stance of measurable difference against the imperial globalist actions of the British Empire
Isn't it true though that no corrupt government in history has ever been removed without the army's involvement?
Not necessarily. Allende in Chile was elected. After he introduced social reforms and nationalized copper mining, which hurt US companies, so he was slaughtered by the troops commanded by a general, Pinochet, who was supported by the CIA.
On the other hand, all governments are inevitably corrupt, but some are worse than others. A single ruler is always more transparent than an oligarchy, by a king has to reward his vassals and retainers, too, so eventually, the people always lose.
The way I usually put it is that no popular uprising, slave or peasant revolution has ever succeeded for more than a few years with the exception of the red terror of Mao, Lenin, or Pol Pot. The American revolution represented landowners. Hitler was elected and the vast majority of Germans supported him, because he restored the economy after kicking out the central bankers and raised living standards to never-before-seen levels. His government was probably one of the least corrupt ones in history:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/the-horror-the-horror
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/a-little-alternative-history
Yes, but in those examples, did the corrupt governments have control over 80% of their subjects' opinions via a corrupt media?
Not sure what you mean. Propaganda is inevitable for the unthinking masses. They follow, no matter what, and usually amount to at least 70% of the population.
Well, until recently governments haven't had the sophisticated technology to enable effective control of public opinion, including military leadership - and personnel, who have arguably been one of the hardest hit groups, at least in your country.
What makes you think that the US was much better? Since WW2, it slaughtered millions as well, and experimented on its own citizens. It is a kleptocracy, a corporatocracy, and a globalist stronghold.
The problem lies in human nature.
No, my point is that, with total control of the media by governments - effectively operating as their propaganda outlets - the 'people' are mostly unaware of being manipulated and are thus unlikely to support an oppositional grass roots rebellion. I'm well aware that millions were slaughtered in (eg) communist regimes or as a result of being sent to war under false pretences. These days it's different. For example, how many do you think are aware that the number of people killed by these so-called covid 'vaccines' is conservatively estimated at 20m. worldwide, along with possibly hundreds of millions of injuries?
You are representing the winners' history, and by now, you must have experienced that everything they say is a lie.
Ray, what do you think about the video "Everything is a richman's trick"? It's still in YouTube. It says that the real nazis won the war, because the real nazis were the American and British ellites, who were the ones that fund Hitler.
The world wars were generated and financed by the same globalist interests that are now about to take over the world. I am planning to write an article about the use of the term "Nazi," because it's nothing but a cuss word these days. Hitler kicked out the central bankers, for which he had to go. The globalists used Stalin to eliminate Germany, and Soviet troops were preparing for an attack on Europe by the time Germany attacked the Soviet Union as a pre-emptive move; the Germans knew they would lose a defensive war that, they eventually did. In a first fatal mistake, they attacked Stalingrad instead of the oil fields of Baku and ran out of oil. Of course, they never stood a chance as long as the US was possible to goad into the war, which it was with provoking the attack on Pearl Harbor (Japan had no choice but attack, because the US placed japan under a naval blockade) and made sure it was not defended, so that enough casualties were produced for the masses in order to make them support the US to enter the war. The same tactic was used in the false flag of 9/11.
Hitler kicked out the central bankers, ok; but at the beginning he was funded and supported by those bankers and by the Western large corporations, that is, by the same Western capital that called him "the enemy" in public.
Just like the China case: China's succesful technocracy is a Western creation, just as the Bolshevics were the "puppet enemy" in the Soviét Union too.
Anthony Sutton, you know, made an extense and deep historical research and found out how the Western oligarchs used to create their own enemies in order to display false flags and to mantain ideological and political divisions among society. When the "puppet enemy" wasn't useful anymore or when he began to revolt against his masters, he was distroyed in a way or another.
And, we know, this strategy is still being applied.
Then, I don"t believe that Hitler was the devil that the allies told us (at least, he wasn't more evil than the allies themselves); but certainly he wasn't an authentic opposition neither when he was raised to power.
How could I forget? They exported over here as well.
Excellent piece!👏👏👏👏👏
Localism. Localism. Localism.👏👏🎩🎩
#wearemany #wearememory #wewillnotforget #getlocalised
Legalman on The Quash Podcast talked about "Jury Nullification" a few years back.
https://fija.org/library-and-resources/library/jury-nullification-faq/what-is-jury-nullification.html
If the jury finds a defendant no guilty of breaking an existing law, the law is nullified.
https://ivy.fm/podcast/the-quash-874966 Legalman plays the role of Mr. Jones on the Jones Plantation Movie, he has an entertaining sarcastic personality. https://jonesplantationfilm.com/cast/
he gets it from jury nullification. A jury has the right to not only judge the facts of the case but also the law itself and exercise their own conscience. If the law is unjust a jury can nullify that law by finding not guilty.
It's the reasoning that matters. If the jury finds the law unfair and, consequently, the defendant not guilty, the jury has just re-written the law.
Protesting at a building is one of the weakest things we can do. Protest at their houses but don’t go in but that’s how you change minds
I hope, this comment is not about the article. I never said a word about protesting.
It is not. It’s a general comment
And it is on my list of useless/harmful non-comliance:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/do-not-comply-no-kidding
We can agree to disagree on that. As long as elections don’t represent the will of the actual voters I think non violent making the bad guys scared will work. If elections weren’t fraud laden then you win what you want with logical arguments.
I do. Not with ten or a hundred people. With a few thousand. However do not touch their houses or set foot on their property.
These people go to restaurants and supermarkets and people fawn all over them. Make them feel the hate in a non violent way and they will reconsider.
In the past we could get by where out of control politicians would be reigned in by judges. That doesn’t happen anymore. We are up a creek unless we the people reign them in
If you extrapolate and consider the true methods of power, you might discover that all power over you has to be granted by the slave to the master. There are no masters if slaves refuse to be mastered. It is then possible to destroy the master's perceived powers and at most with the cost of your life.
Eternal slavery or death, which may not be eternal might be the two choices. There are no masters without willing slaves. And without someone to master, the control freaks (masters) will go insane because they can not have what they want. Remember, the masters are humans (well maybe) who have the greatest fear that they will be ignored and therefore they would serve no purpose.
no gods, no masters, no slaves.
As I also mentioned before, there would be no enslavement, if people agreed on the line beyond which it's better to die than to live:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/freedom-is-what-freedom-does-but
Yet people are irrevocably divided.
When facing certain death by starvation, most people comply instead even if that means to become slaves... There is nothing spectacular about dying of hunger...
To me, it looks like human nature works in a way that all civilizations follow the same structure:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/apocalypse-now
feudalism never went away.
Social strata have always been the same, irrespective of the societal setup:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/apocalypse-now
When those who don't comply will die, so nobody really has much of a choice.
I ponder consenting to the psychopathic legal/governmental system. For they are one and the same.
Yes, I am contradicting myself with this article. I also consider the traitors illegit, so respecting an authority that has been hijacked makes little sense beyond producing more evidence that the people are not represented anywhere:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/hijacked-governments
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/what-about-democracy
The article was meant to inspire thinking. Personally, I never believed that the system can be changed from the inside. You have reached the same conclusion even before reading the article. :)
To borrow Woody Allen's joke in an analogy, I haven't even seen everything. :)
And you are seeking out contention, instead of appreciating the joke...
Somehow, I'm inclined to believe that those who entered the Capitol were government-insiders. Most of the 250 million obediently wore their muzzles. They are well-trained.
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/who-wudda-thunk
The muzzle was only the next link in the 100-year-long comliance training:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/a-brief-history-of-compliance-training