Revolution ongoing in Europe?

[BCEmporium]

speeder,

That where my "theory of Aristos" kicks in.
I consider Aristos those "able to rule", obviously uneducated people is unable to rule, they can't be considered "Aristos".
The trend of power is then relying on the amount of Aristos as society has, if a society has many people with education enough to rule, then Democracy is the right way, Democracy alone doesn't imply "more" or "less" state, implies more participation of the population in common issues.
Democracy can also work under stages, the first stage, to a society with less "Aristos", the Representative Democracy. People just choose who will take the decisions but don't take any decision themselves.
As the second stage, the one Spain is now trying to go to, and which is already ongoing at Switzerland and Iceland, is the "Participative Democracy". In this model people not only choose the rulers but also is heard over more decisions through referendums and can vote directly into representatives rather than parties. This model assumes that more people is actually able to rule, or even a majority of the population is able to do it.

Achieve the third stage, "Direct Democracy"... I really don't think I'll live to see it around.

There's a correlation between "Power abuses" and "Aristos", the fewer the "Aristos" the bigger the edge of the "Power" to commit abuses, as they're harder to replace for that population, on the opposite situation, a population has no need to "eat Power abuses" as who's in charge can be easily replaced.

[1713906903]

1713906903

[1713906903]

1713906903

[1713906903]

1713906903

[unspy]

There will always be "someone's tyranny", everyone wants to be the tyrant himself and call such as "freedom" (to himself that is). Democracy has the advantage that no one in particular is the tyrant, thus also not give that "one-side-only freedom".
As we're a social animal, I'm ok with Democracy...

“Democracy is the road to socialism.” Can you guess who said that? It was Karl Marx.

My ex-wife thought socialism just meant people being social, it seems you have the same mistaken idea. Can't say I blame you for being misinformed, nearly every politician, teacher, journalist and citizen believes that our Founders created a democracy, it is absolutely not true. The Founders knew full well the differences between a Republic and a Democracy and they repeatedly and emphatically said that they had founded a Republic--not a democracy.

A Republic is representative government ruled by law (the Constitution). A democracy is direct government ruled by the majority (mob rule). A Republic recognizes the inalienable rights of individuals while democracies are only concerned with group wants or needs (the so-called "public good"). As the world’s most popular Congressman (Ron Paul) has said, “Our country’s founders cherished liberty, not democracy.“ And we should too, if we really knew what was good for us.

At about the time our original 13 states adopted their new constitution, in the year 1787, Alexander Tyler (a Scottish history professor at The University of Edinborough) had this to say about “The Fall of The Athenian Republic” some 2,000 years prior:

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world’s greatest civilizations from the beginning of history has been about 200 years. During those 200 years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith;
From spiritual faith to great courage;
From courage to liberty;
From liberty to abundance;
From abundance to complacency;
From complacency to apathy;
From apathy to dependence;
From dependence back into bondage.

We have just made the transition from complacency to national apathy ~ which will surely be followed by dependence on the state and eventually bondage by the state. Deny a people the freedom of the Bill of Rights, and security becomes slavery. We are seeing this now with the TSA agents at airports, greyhound stations, malls, and sporting events.

Article IV Section 4, of the Constitution “guarantees to every state in this union a Republican form of government”…. Conversely, the word Democracy is not mentioned even once in the Constitution. Jefferson said, “A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.”  Madison warned us of the dangers of democracies with these words, “Democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths…”

So here we are today in a state of apathy as Obama gives more power to the Federal Reserve, our path toward socialism is almost complete. If you’re doubt it, read Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto. Published in 1848, he lists the ten essential steps to communism. Step five was:  “Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.”

Look at America today, it is not an exaggeration to say that – while we want government of the people, by the people and for the people – we’re getting government of the banks, by the banks and for the banks. As Dennis Kucinich said:

We ought to be really concerned about a bank takeover of the country because we borrowed money from the banks to give to the banks, the banks give us toxic assets or hoard the money, or they use it to buy other banks. I don’t think the Founders envisioned government of the banks, for the banks and by the banks

.

While our Founders may not have envisioned this for America, Karl Marx did. What most people don’t know is Karl Marx was being financed by International bankers, and the Bolsheviks enjoyed the support from the same coalition of super-capitalists. The big question has always been why? And answer is simple: they shared the same vision for America’s future. A future which we are faced with today: Karl Marx’s America. (where the bankers rule)

The International bankers wanted to create a New World Order in which they would control the wealth of the world. The question for them was how to bring about this global socialism–that answer is found in the Hegelian dialectic (the system upon which Marx based all his writings). The Hegelian dialectic formula is as follows: A (thesis) versus B (anti-thesis) equals C (synthesis). First, the bankers knew they had to turn our Republic into a democracy, and knew this was the formula to follow: Capitalism vs Communism would result in the synthesis: socialism. And under their careful planning this synthesis would grant them total control of the world. All they needed to do is follow the formula.

Today people are saying “Marx was right! Capitalism has failed” but what they don’t know is the same International Bankers who supported Marx now stand to gain what they have always wanted: total and complete control of the entire world’s money system. How did we get to this place you ask? Simple: we the people let our guard down as our Republic was turned into a democracy. As a result we can expect global dictatorship to follow as surely as night follows the day. Unless we as individuals, and then as a nation, conquer fear and apathy we are doomed to dependence and then bondage by a state ruled by the wealthy oligarchs and their henchmen.

Welcome to Karl Marx’s America.

“When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes… Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain.” – Napoleon Bonaparte, 1815

“I sincerely believe that banking establishments are more dangerous than standing armies, and that the principle of spending money to be paid by posterity, under the name of funding, is but swindling futurity on a large scale…. Government big enough to supply everything you need is big enough to take everything you have … The course of history shows that as a government grows, liberty decreases.”  –Thomas Jefferson

“Capitalism should not be condemned, since we haven’t had capitalism…Our country’s founders cherished liberty, not democracy.“ –Ron Paul

[JA37]

Welcome to Karl Marx’s America.

So ... you use your bitcoins to buy tinfoil?

[BCEmporium]

unspy... you're a bit too "Amerocenter" in your arguments, like if the entire World was in conspiracy against USA or if there were a rule "who gets USA wins the World".
By the time of Marx and up to the end of WW2, USA wasn't more important than, for an instance, Brazil, nor by the time of the Soviet Revolution. Calm your horses... the "ages of the American Empire" will eventually come to an end; nothing is eternal.

Democracy is a way to choose, not a form of state by itself, and not "mob-rule". It's the only way to choose and where Pluralism (more than one idea/ideology) can live together. All currently Democrat countries are Constitutional.

Also to note that, unless uneducated people, everyone can understand that if you go get "your freeload" at treasury someone else's paying.

Democracy is like an "Operating System", the culture of the people where it is is like the computer. There's a demand for culture in order for Democracy to can be a good form of government.
You can't install Democracy (say Windows 7) in Afghanistan, for an instance, because currently that population is more or less a 486DX33 computer when it comes to culture. OTH, if you consider Dictatorships as Win 95, you'll have a lot of nags to run it in a system equipped with an i7 CPU.

[unspy]

Welcome to Karl Marx’s America.

So ... you use your bitcoins to buy tinfoil?

The fall of the Republic is complete. It happened by design, while keeping the social animals entertained, drugged, and dumbed down. Our brave men and women in the military have been used and abused as the Globalist bring "democracy" to other nations at the barrel of a gun. Is that, is that not a fact?

As far as I am concerned, that "democracy" word means nothing good, it is just a cleaver mind-stopping slogan that keep the masses in blissful ignorance as the globalist rape and pillage other nations for the natural resources they covet. Now the chicken are coming home to roost, as the IMF and world bank will be used to make debt slaves of us all--time to wake up!

[eturnerx]

Sovereign debt is at crisis levels in Greece and Portugal. Other countries are not far behind. If the people on the street get into power what will they achieve once they see the empty coffers?

[BCEmporium]

Sovereign debt is at crisis levels in Greece and Portugal. Other countries are not far behind. If the people on the street get into power what will they achieve once they see the empty coffers?

I wonder why everyone seams to take people as freeloaders, expecting only to scratch the coffers a bit and see what can still be taken from there...  
The need for action is to prevent us from work to pay the debt, get it done and after we stay with the same "enter poor and get richer than rich" sort of guys in the power... which would mean; if we don't get it done, we will have the same parasites generating endless debt.

i.e.;

Here in Portugal, at a time everybody was already speaking of the overwhelming government debt, the state-running water company decide to expend several millions to buy new cars for the management (no, not working fleet or trucks, "nice cars" like top-edge BMW, Mercedes and so on).
If we don't do nothing what we will expect after pay the debt?! More of the same?! No way! If it doesn't go by improving Democracy, then we rather start thinking about hanging some bastards.

[realnowhereman]

These friendly societies were growing in popularity and solving a real social problem, without intervention from government.  Can you guess what happened next?  The government stepped in and legislated for publicly provided welfare, and being a monopoly provider killed the friendly societies pretty quickly.

So, the government saw something good, wanted to extend it to everybody, did so and ... what? Outlawed friendly societies? Or were they just made obsolete? Could you not just start one with your neighbours and friends today?

I could, but since I'm already paying for it in taxation, why should I pay for it again?

The government monopoly on force crowded out the little guys.

[realnowhereman]

«The Singapore health system is universal and is state funded, but is provided 100% by private contractors.» = This isn't even near US's reality, which is both private and non-state funded.
We've however those too, "Private State Funded Hospitals" around, and the result so far is a disgrace... we're not under Fascism, the Fascist State of Singapore has that advantage of being more repressive... also its size allows more repression with less expense. For a "libertarian" you're taking examples of the opposite...

Where did I say the US system was good?  The US is widely acknowledged as having one of the most expensive health care systems in the world.  The reason it's bad though is entirely down to government regulations limiting who is able to provide and where purchasers are able to obtain it from.

Singapore is hardly fascist; it's got a parliament and holds elections.  The same party gets in every time; but I would argue that the same is true in the UK and the US: the government always gets in.

You couldn't squeeze a razorblade between the policies of the two major UK parties; and the same is true in the US.

[unspy]

unspy... you're a bit too "Amerocenter" in your arguments, like if the entire World was in conspiracy against USA or if there were a rule "who gets USA wins the World".
By the time of Marx and up to the end of WW2, USA wasn't more important than, for an instance, Brazil, nor by the time of the Soviet Revolution. Calm your horses... the "ages of the American Empire" will eventually come to an end; nothing is eternal.

First, you're correct to say the "ages of the American Empire" will eventually
come to an end. Indeed, nothing is eternal. However, the founding fathers
of this nation never intended that we should become an empire. This is my
whole point, one you seemed to miss.  They did something Brazil did not
do, they wrote a Constitution that placed limits on the Government, and
not of the people. Indeed, building on the Magna Carta they hoped to be
a light to the world for new experiment called LIBERTY. They delivered
not a democracy, but a Republic, Bill of Rights and a model for others
to follow in decentralized government.

Now if you consider this argument is too "Amerocenter" for your taste
you are welcome to dismiss it and move on, as I'm sure you will.
Personally, I have no problem being a patriot and lover of the
Constitution, or this once great Republic, or LIBERTY.

Yes, I do believe in the conspiratorial view of history, and in my view
the bankers have been working in concert with such groups as the
Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission to bring
about a socialist-world system in which an elite composed of
intellectuals and bankers will rule over the entire planet.

You define it as "who gets USA wins the World" while I suggest it
is more correct to say "who destroys the USA, controls the world."
That is why our industry has been sent abroad, it is all part of
a well crafted plan to destroy the middle-class. Why? Because
the goal is to make us all debt slaves. How is you fail to see this?
From point of view, this is easy to see and has clearly been going
on sense the formation of the Federal Reserve System, in 1929.

How did this conspiracy get it's start? Glad you asked =)

If you study Cecil Rhodes, of the Rhodes/Milner Roundtable,
you will learn he had an ambitious goal for the extension of
British dominion, control and increased wealth. If a person
really wanted to know the origin of this conspiracy, I would
point them to Lord Alfred Milner who was Rhodes' mentor.

But clearly, you aren't looking to history for answers, you
seem quite content to invent your own world-view and
compare governments to software, and cultures to
hardware, the debate which came first.

Well, I have a theory of my own, I call this kind of
avoidance of history and denial of conspiracy the
"artificial intelligence" conspiracy.

"None are more hopelessly enslaved, as those who
falsely believe they are free...."

[JA37]

I could, but since I'm already paying for it in taxation, why should I pay for it again?

The government monopoly on force crowded out the little guys.

I live in a country with free healthcare. Yet there are many people who buy private health insurance, including me. They provide services that are of value to me, so I pay double. So obviously the services that you described weren't valuable enough. Bluntly put.

[BCEmporium]

unspy...
1929 is after Marx's corpse was long rotten and the Soviets were already on power.

It's nice to look into History for a reason: Avoid mistakes of the past to happen again.
But don't mess it up by jumping dates and thereby reasons. The "global conspiracy" is the "Nationalism", all countries will seek for more income to themselves; I wouldn't say that's quite a conspiracy however... more of a "greed".

[realnowhereman]

I could, but since I'm already paying for it in taxation, why should I pay for it again?

The government monopoly on force crowded out the little guys.

I live in a country with free healthcare. Yet there are many people who buy private health insurance, including me. They provide services that are of value to me, so I pay double. So obviously the services that you described weren't valuable enough. Bluntly put.

The services I described were undertaken by the poorest, with the least disposable cash.  The friendly societies were not run by the rich.  Who had no need for it.

The idea that they would pay their additional tax and continue with their friendly society for the same safety net is ludicrous.

Just as today it is not the poorest who buy additional healthcare cover.

[JA37]

The services I described were undertaken by the poorest, with the least disposable cash.  The friendly societies were not run by the rich.  Who had no need for it.

The idea that they would pay their additional tax and continue with their friendly society for the same safety net is ludicrous.

Just as today it is not the poorest who buy additional healthcare cover.

So wait, what? Government saw that some of the poor did something good, copied that and extended it to everybody taxing the "rich" for it, and that somehow makes the government bad?

[Anonymous]

The services I described were undertaken by the poorest, with the least disposable cash.  The friendly societies were not run by the rich.  Who had no need for it.

The idea that they would pay their additional tax and continue with their friendly society for the same safety net is ludicrous.

Just as today it is not the poorest who buy additional healthcare cover.

So wait, what? Government saw that some of the poor did something good, copied that and extended it to everybody taxing the "rich" for it, and that somehow makes the government bad?

They used force to make it happen.

[eturnerx]

Sovereign debt is at crisis levels in Greece and Portugal. Other countries are not far behind. If the people on the street get into power what will they achieve once they see the empty coffers?

I wonder why everyone seams to take people as freeloaders, expecting only to scratch the coffers a bit and see what can still be taken from there...  
The need for action is to prevent us from work to pay the debt, get it done and after we stay with the same "enter poor and get richer than rich" sort of guys in the power... which would mean; if we don't get it done, we will have the same parasites generating endless debt.

i.e.;

Here in Portugal, at a time everybody was already speaking of the overwhelming government debt, the state-running water company decide to expend several millions to buy new cars for the management (no, not working fleet or trucks, "nice cars" like top-edge BMW, Mercedes and so on).
If we don't do nothing what we will expect after pay the debt?! More of the same?! No way! If it doesn't go by improving Democracy, then we rather start thinking about hanging some bastards.

I'm not saying the people are freeloaders - merely wondering what they would do differently. While a few million on new cars is indeed wasteful, it is a mere drop in the bucket compared to the debt being faced. I'm interested in the Portugal situation - just what are the govt's biggest areas of expense?

[JA37]

The services I described were undertaken by the poorest, with the least disposable cash.  The friendly societies were not run by the rich.  Who had no need for it.

The idea that they would pay their additional tax and continue with their friendly society for the same safety net is ludicrous.

Just as today it is not the poorest who buy additional healthcare cover.

So wait, what? Government saw that some of the poor did something good, copied that and extended it to everybody taxing the "rich" for it, and that somehow makes the government bad?

They used force to make it happen.

What is it that makes a rich persons "right" to keep their surplus triumph a poor persons right to medical care/food/other-social-benefit?

[BCEmporium]

They used force to make it happen.

So what? Everything in this planet is about force... from wildlife to humanity.

I'm interested in the Portugal situation - just what are the govt's biggest areas of expense?

Oversizing in public services, notorious corruption in public construction (say, if you would spend 1000 to do something, the government spends 1 million) - this extends to local administration as well, "Institutes of nobody knows what for", subsidies, "partnership with privates", oversizing in governmental infrastructure: too many ministers and staff... health care is also an expense, obviously, but so far more disastrous in the "Singapore-like" experience, those hospitals jumped from like 10 to 100 million debt.

You can access 2011 budget here: http://static.publico.clix.pt/docs/economia/PropOERel2011.pdf (it's in Portuguese)

Those cars are just a part of the issue, now multiply that kind of abusive behavior by several public-ran infrastructure along those years...

[unspy]

unspy...
1929 is after Marx's corpse was long rotten and the Soviets were already on power.

It's nice to look into History for a reason: Avoid mistakes of the past to happen again.
But don't mess it up by jumping dates and thereby reasons. The "global conspiracy"
is the "Nationalism", all countries will seek for more income to themselves; I wouldn't
say that's quite a conspiracy however... more of a "greed".

Communism has been known under different terms like ‘the Fabians’ in London,
so there is no doubt in my mind this conspiracy predates Marx. In fact, you
can track back to the khazars if you really want to get right down to it.

Yes, greed is at the root all kinds of evil.

I see this "Artificial Intelligence" all the time, it seems to runs through society
like a subroutine in a computer, always working, but never in plain view.

“Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members.
The virtue in most request is conformity. Self-reliance is its aversion. It loves not
realities and creators, but names and customs.” ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Emerson was quite right when he pointed out that there is conspiracy by society against itself. This is not the Bavarian Illuminati or the Elders of Zion from some past era or long forgotten age; this is the present day consensus reality. It is an ever so real plot against individual liberty by a connective human ego--or as you said greed.

This is what I call the Artificial Intelligence.

This is the real unseen hand of history, not those families with inter-generational pools of money, power and resources. Yes, a ruling elite does exist, that is an observable fact. However, is it more conceivable that this small cabal of men created the artificial intelligence (greed and pride) that effect the thoughts of every human being on this planet? or is more conceivable that this small gang of thugs know this force (of ego) has always been in operation and they are mere opportunist who position themselves to profit by riding the wave?

When we get right down to it, our world is nothing more than a collection of ego artifacts generated by the collective mind of man. This faculty of the human being which manufactures these artifacts is what I am calling the 'artificial intelligence'. It is understood that the ego is at the core of the individual, what is less understood is the artificial intelligence shared by the collective human consciousness. The existence of this so-called Artificial Intelligence is based on the fact that all minds are connected and share a non-local intelligence.

When one understand that the collective thoughts of humanity are shared, it becomes clear the consensus reality is accepted by the individual because it is the cultural norm. As such few find reason to question that which is deemed to be “normal” by so many others. Little thought is given to this default position by members of society, after all the status quo is normal, why should one question that which is normal? This is why the conspiratorial view of history is not a popular one.

So I see two forces at work, on is the conspiracy for a New World Order without God, and the other is Artificial Intelligence of the shared ego which refuses to see the conspiracy and actually supports it goals and agenda without being fully conscious of that fact. What distinguished the artificial intelligence from the individual ego is very little. In fact, many people live their entire lives unaware of these dual influences and so they remain unconscious of their own unconscious state.  Those few would do attain the consciously conscious state are said to have awakened, like the Buddha. In between these two states are those who have some insight into their ego condition but fail to see the artificial intelligence at work, they are what I would call the consciously unconscious.
  

[realnowhereman]

The services I described were undertaken by the poorest, with the least disposable cash.  The friendly societies were not run by the rich.  Who had no need for it.

The idea that they would pay their additional tax and continue with their friendly society for the same safety net is ludicrous.

Just as today it is not the poorest who buy additional healthcare cover.

So wait, what? Government saw that some of the poor did something good, copied that and extended it to everybody taxing the "rich" for it, and that somehow makes the government bad?

Erm... government solutions are universally more expensive than privately supplied solutions.  The factor is typically 1.5.

So... their taking over of it made it worse.

Also.. as I said originally, there were fewer instances of fraud because the people being defrauded were known to all, and it was easy to see you were stealing from someone as poor as yourself.