 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
MrRekoj,
Can I propose to discriminate human inter-action (specifically ‘inter’ action since the individual acting alone and without consequence to any other individual has little consequence or bearing on our current, mutual, concerns) into two obvious and opposite types as such:
A. Voluntary
B. Involuntary
I also propose to point out how any pre-meditated action designed to accomplish an involuntary association is further dissected into two obvious and opposite types such as:
A. Offensive (intending to injure innocent people)
B. Defensive (intending to secure against injury to innocent people)
I offer those distinctions in order to answer your first stated concern (from my point of view).
++++++++++
What is the difference between a National Bank and a Central Bank?
++++++++++
My suggestion concerning the accurate answer to the question is to find out what type of inter-action (association) are those labels which may appear on the front of the Bank.
If, for example, both types of Banks are involuntary/offensive types of associations, then, whatever other differences exist between those two banks are insignificant differences as far as I can see. In either case the power commanded by each (due to the involuntary/offensive nature of the association) will be absolute and no amount of lesser power will be able to contain or dilute that power from an external source. In other words the involuntary and offensive BANK will have the power to eliminate any competition at will. The exercise of that power will then depend upon the relative ‘benevolence’ of the people commanding that power. A benevolent dictator will spread the wealth about as compared to, say, an absolute tyrant who would, by definition, keep all for his own and starve, abuse, and enslave every other member of the association – and everyone within reach to the extent of the current STATE of that POWER.
We are considering specifically a power relationship or association, by definition, whenever human action is designed, on purpose, to be an involuntary association. I cannot stress the importance of identifying this design feature enough and I trust that you will not gloss over this distinction lightly. Furthermore there is also the subtle difference between a defensive (involuntary) and an offensive association where the division can become very clearly defined as threats become accurately identified as clear and present or the division can become almost imperceptible during conditions whereby no threat is obvious at all. I feel obligated to also state now that this part of my answer deals only with honest people inter-acting in an open, honest, and accurate manner. I do not intend to confuse the answer at this time with any intent upon the designer, the creator, and the operators of the BANK to disguise the true nature of the BANK behind a false front. In other words an involuntary and aggressive human association (naked oppression/slavery/coercion/ etc.) may be advertised as a voluntary association. That needs to be set aside for now to inspect the actual associations which are involuntary and aggressive where everyone involved are aware of the nature of the association.
A few tests may suffice to test the nature of the association and in the case of American History it may help to pick out specific times when these specific types of Banks existed (National and Central Banks).
Test one:
Can anyone within the jurisdiction of the BANK create a competitive currency for use by anyone without any prescribed penalty whatsoever?
If the answer is no, then, I suggest that the association is involuntary. In other words the BANK has the power to eliminate the competition and having that power will eliminate the competition even if the operators of the BANK are benevolent dictators.
I also propose that the BANK (if it starts out defensive) will become offensive. In other words; even if the BANK is created to finance (involuntary association) the power to defend against aggressive attack by another power, even so, it will develop into an aggressive consumer of as yet un-associated individuals. The nature of involuntary associations empowers the stronger to gain strength at the expense of the weaker and that is the natural flow of power resulting from involuntary associations – even when they begin as benevolent involuntary associations whereby the design is defensive.
Certainly the logic of creating the involuntary association when a powerful enemy is invading, torturing, and mass murdering fellow associates (not yet consumed by the involuntary association) is inspired by the destruction. People may demand from each other a rigid conformity or UNION of power whereby anyone not so inclined are seen as ‘aiding’ the enemy. Even so; if Thomas Paine’s Crisis is read there are ways around that impetus to degrade civilization with involuntary enforcement by law (institutionalized).
Perhaps I’ve gone too far in this response. I am patient.