 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
WHY TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY?
For well over a century, statisticians have known that predictions made by large numbers of people – over a thousand – are more accurate than predictions made by experts. This phenomenon was discovered by Charles Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton, who was a statistician. He did an experiment at a county fair. He asked a large number of attendees to estimate the butchered weight of an ox. There was a contest to see who could estimate it most accurately. He found that the average of the estimate was more accurate than the guesses made by livestock experts.
This phenomenon has been repeated for over a century. Again and again, the results are the same. An average of the guesses turns out to be very accurate. This fact and some of its implications were summarized in a best-selling book in 2004, The Wisdom of Crowds, by James Surowiecki.
Now look back at Patrick Henry's version:
What, sir, is the genius of democracy? Let me read that clause of the bill of rights of Virginia which relates to this: 3d clause:—that government is, or ought to be, instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community. "Of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best, which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of mal-administration; and that whenever any government shall be found inadequate, or contrary to those purposes, a majority of the community hath an indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to reform, alter, or abolish it, in such manner as shall be judged most conducive to the public weal."
This, sir, is the language of democracy—that a majority of the community have a right to alter government when found to be oppressive. But how different is the genius of your new Constitution from this! How different from the sentiments of freemen, that a contemptible minority can prevent the good of the majority!
If, then, gentlemen, standing on this ground, are come to that point, that they are willing to bind themselves and their posterity to be oppressed, I am amazed and inexpressibly astonished. If this be the opinion of the majority, I must submit; but to me, sir, it appears perilous and destructive. I cannot help thinking so.
When the majority has the power to abolish criminal governments by law while the majority does not have the power to enact and enforce law, please see this, the criminal governments will not require the majority, or the minority, to abolish criminal government by fraud or force.
Criminal governments will oppose the transfer, by law, of power to the majority for abolishing criminal governments while criminal governments favor transfer of power to the majority for enacting and enforcing law.
Please see this clearly. When the majority have the power to abolish criminal governments (Declaration of Independence, Bill of Rights, Magna Carta, Trial by Jury, Swiss Republic, and Articles of Confederation during the Revolutionary War 1776) that power is purely defensive. When anyone (Majority that is free from propaganda, brain washing, conditioned response, behavioral modification, false advertising, etc. or even a Majority that is SUBJECTED to propaganda, brain washing, conditioned response, behavioral modification, false advertising, etc. or Kings, or Parliaments, or Congresses, or Senates, or Judiciary, or Police, or Public Military, or even Private Military) if anyone has the power to enact and enforce law that POWER can be abused and that POWER can become a criminal POWER employed in the work of injuring innocence for profit.
Therefore, and henceforth, any power to enact and enforce law which becomes criminal must first eliminate the power to abolish criminal governments. Please answer this question: What were delegates sent to Philadelphia, behind closed doors, in secret proceedings, to accomplish? The end result was The Constitution. The stated reason, for public consumption, was to pay off war debt, and other things. The power of the Majority to abolish criminal governments ended with the removal of The Articles of Confederation and the enactment and enforcement of The Constitution.
Ever since then there has been almost no practical legal method for The People to abolish a criminal government bent upon injuring innocent people for profit. However some people did so anyway.
Example:
http://www.jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/battleofathensessaycontest.htm
More and more power flows from The People to the criminals as time goes by if the means by which that power flow is conducted will not improve. Here is where optimism can be found. In the first place the flow of power is intellectual. The People are finding ways to bypass the propaganda, the response conditioning, fear mongering, the brain washing, behavioral modification, and false advertising. Internet access is nearly in the air now. How long before phone bills are a thing of the past?
In the second place that conduit of power is physical and The People are finding ways around the Oil, around the coal, around the central processing units of old and costly power sources. Solar Panels, Wind Generators, Electric Cars, and cost-less energy sources like Fusion power may soon eliminate energy costs.
In the third place is money. This place is nearly lost already for the criminal governments. Combined with the other three powers above the power of money tips the balance into the hands of The People, the majority, and this power can abolish criminal governments even if you don’t like it.
Use your brain while you have one.