 |
PM |  | |
Quote | | |
Reply | | |
Full Topic | |
| Joined: | Mon Nov 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | California USA |
| Posts: | 6399 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |    |
Listening to Alex Jones.
I heard Alex explain the situation in Texas where the criminals running the Texas government are demanding payments or executing punishment when honest productive people intend to, and then accomplish home electric power production; solar panels, wind mills, etc.
Later Alex Jones claims that they blame capitalism for their crimes so as to pave the way for socialism which is their goal.
Who is they?
If they can be known, then it can be known if they want socialism or capitalism. If they cannot be known, then how can what they want be known?
If they are criminals, with badges, then they want organized crime, not capitalism, and not socialism, they want organized crime.
Why would anyone claim that they want capitalism, when they actually want organized crime?
Why would anyone claim that they want socialism, when they actually want organized crime?
Why would anyone claim that they want Federalism, when they actually want organized crime?
What do they want?
Now I hear Alex actually ask:
"What do they stand for?" as an introduction to a song:
http://www.cowboylyrics.com/lyrics/tippin-aaron/youve-got-to-stand-for-something-9063.html
If someone stands for an involuntary association, what do they stand for?
What is the word that will accurately communicate the desire for perpetual crime; whereby many people plan on injuring innocent people, and then many people execute that plan?
What is the word that will accurately communicate organized crime?
1. Organized Crime
2. Involuntary Associations
3. Master and Slave relations
4. Crime and Victim relations
5. Dictator and Subject relations
6. Fascism/Capitalism
7. Communism/Socialism
8. Nationalism/Consolidated Government
9. Limited Liability Corporate Legal Fiction
10. Dictatorship/Cult of Personality
11. Legal Crime
When "they" are ambiguous, on purpose, what does that confess? If asked, what does the answer confess, if the answer is an ambiguous answer?
A. Ignorance (as to who "they" really are)
B. Willful deceit (so as to keep who "they" really are unaccounted for, ambiguous, false, confusing, inaccurately communicated)
If "they" never answer questions, what does that confess?
I hear Alex saying:
"They were demonizing the Founding Fathers."
Which one's?
Alexander Hamilton was identified as an agent for the English Monarchy by some of the Founding Fathers.
There were two groups in the Founding Father group.
A. Nationalists (involuntary association, or, legal crime) posing as "Federalists" - using the good name of "Federalist" to cover their true color, which was Nationalist, or "consolidated (monopoly) government".
B. Federalists (who were falsely labeled by the Nationalists as "Anti-Federalists")
In whose best interest is it to keep the victims ignorant by manufacturing and perpetuating false language, false data, false "information", false-hood?
If bad people are collected into the same group as good people the result is that the bad people appear to be not-so-bad by close (and false) association with good people; while, at the same time, the good people appear to be worse by close association with the bad people - in a word: prejudice.
The thief yells "thief" and points to an innocent person. What happens? Will those who are good people, people who have the power to prevent crime, and prevent crime without violence, be misdirected by the "news" that purports to accurately identify a thief, be shunted, wasted, misdirected, grounded, short circuited, lost, wasted, and even be used in the work of helping crime perpetuate?
Back to the concept of home power production, with solar panels, or wind mills, or Modular Home Vertical Farming Units (making food or algae based gasoline for running any car currently running on petroleum powered gasoline), and going back to that viewpoint so as to accurately discriminate the differences between voluntary socialism, voluntary capitalism, involuntary socialism, involuntary capitalism, crime, legal crime, and honest productive employment of power, equity, freedom, liberty, and good political economy.
Is the idea to know? Is the idea to remain ignorant?
What is The Grid?
If The Grid is owned by one person then The Grid is an electrical connection owned by one person and if there is only one grid: then The Grid is a working monopoly electrical connection, then who can complain if that one person, with that monopoly, charges "that which the market will bear" for the use of The Grid?
Confused: do you have no idea why I'm pointing this out to you?
What is socialism (voluntary socialism and absolutely not involuntary socialism)?
What is capitalism (voluntary capitalism and absolutely not to be confused with involuntary capitalism)?
What is The Grid? What is the electrical connection running from sea to shining sea across the geographical area known as America?
What is the electrical connection running from sea to shining sea across the legal fiction known as The United States of America?
Who owns The Grid?
You, yes you, whomever is reading this, will not answer the question publicly, for whatever individual reason you have, but the answer goes directly into the definition of capitalism, and the definition of socialism, as both are defined by the very people who define socialism and capitalism.
What is The Internet?
Who owns it?
What is the network of roads that cars drive on in that place between the Atlantic Ocean and the Pacific Ocean whereby Canada boarders the north and Mexico boarders the south?
Who owns those roads?
Who owns sunlight?
Who owns air?
Who owns The Military?
You have to answer those questions before you can claim to command (or own) the understanding, the power, to accurately discriminate between that which is socialism and that which is capitalism (voluntary or involuntary). If you do not answer those questions, you fail to earn the authority to know the facts, you fail to be in a position to dictate the truth to anyone, and your claims, if you still claim to command the power of knowledge, falsely, amounts to either ignorant error or willful deception.
Once you have been challenged, to either produce the facts, or stop claiming to have that power, and you continue to ignore the challenge, and you continue to fail to produce the facts, and you continue to keep claiming to have the power of knowledge, despite being exposed as someone who fails to meet the challenge, then you choose to be deceitful. Why do you do that, if that is what you do?
There are a few possibilities:
1. You choose to produce and perpetuate lies, so as to reduce the power of the truth, and keep people ignorant, rendering them power-less.
2. You choose to produce and perpetuate lies, so as to eliminate the force of competition, to keep the power of truth competitively absent - less powerful.
3. You choose to produce and perpetuate lies, so as to profit from the knowledge you command over the victims that you intend to, and accomplish, perpetual ignorance, perpetual confusion, perpetual ambiguity, perpetual grey area, perpetual argumentation, perpetual division, so as to perpetuate your dominion over your hapless, ignorant, victims.
Knowing that accurate facts, such as the accurate factual identification, and accounting, of the criminals, accurately discriminating the difference between the criminals, and the victims, is possible, and once that power is gained, once that possibility becomes real, that knowledge can then be kept secret, and used, to perpetuate victimization, or that accurate knowing, that factual understanding, and that power can be passed on to other victims, given to them, or sold to them, to empower the victims, to help the victims, to be powerful enough to avoid further victimization.
Back to The Grid.
I am speaking about the electrical grid that connects anyone who needs electricity to anyone who produces electricity.
I am speaking about this connection because it, the connection, defines capitalism or socialism or both, or something new, something that is not capitalism nor socialism.
If you are in California, for example, and you want, or need, electricity, you can pay for it, or you can make it yourself, at home, and once upon a time there was an enforced law that perpetuated a monopoly power company power, and that law can be known, and it can be know truthfully, and it can be known accurately, and therefore it can be communicated to anyone as it truly is, in reality.
If The Grid is a private ownership thing, in California, or in your city, or on your block of houses in your city, or in your country area lot, or farm, or acre, or ranch, or valley, or river front, or mountain, then the private owners have exclusive control over that connection, that example of The Grid. That is what it is, in that case, wherever that fact is factual. A private owner owns The Grid.
What stops someone else as someone else offers a competitive connection to compete with The Grid?
If nothing stops a competitive connection to compete with The Grid, then competition will force the quality of The Grid up, and the cost of The Grid down, because that is how that works in reality, and it works that way if the people who choose to connect to the higher quality grid, and the lower cost grid, think that they are being capitalists, or if the people choosing to be connected to the better grid think that they are choosing to be socialists.
What power stops anyone from offering a better grid?
Why not make it personal, if you think that the questions now challenging you are stupid, and if you think that just maybe the questions that are now challenging you are, remotely, worth answering?
If you know that it is much cheaper to make your own electricity at home, if you do realize that you can no longer afford to pay "the going rate" for electricity flowing to you from The Grid, and that realization, that you suddenly realize, is one step to another obvious step, where you further your knowledge, and you suddenly become aware of the fact that you can, by your industry, begin "making a living", and you can begin increasing your "income", by expanding your cheap, inexpensive, competitive, home electric power production, to make more than you consume, and they having more power than the power you consume, you realize that you can sell that excess power, what do you realize at that point?
A. You gain power through The Grid.
B. You can use The Grid to gain even more power.
Who owns The Grid?
When The Grid is a monopoly power, as it was in California, as it may be in Texas, then The Grid is exclusive, it is a one way street, it is a flow of "profit" from the consumers going to the one, exclusive, producer, and if you do produce power at home, with solar panels, or wind mills, or tide generators, or algae powered internal combustion engine electric generators, then, you are outside the law, against the law, an out law, if you sell electricity to other people.
If The Grid is a monopoly, a single owner, a single legal fiction owner (if there is a "collective" ownership of more than one separate and sovereign human being), then how does it remain a monopoly despite all competitive forces such as yourself, as you begin to use the power you have to begin producing more power than you consume, and when you produce abundant surplus power, so much more surplus power over the power you consume, that you can begin to sell excess power to other people if there was no monopoly power preventing you from doing so?
Suppose, for example, that you are one farmer on a lot in the middle of the valley, and as a side product, in addition to corn, or wheat, or cattle, or all of those products, you also begin producing electric power with a movable Solar Panel rack, covering overused land that is then fertilized to reinvigorate, re-power, the soil, and you begin producing Algae for motor fuel in Modular Vertical Farming Units, and you begin to produce more power with wind mills, and you begin to produce more power with electric generators that run on algae fuel (generators that were made to run in diesel fuel but they now run on algae fuel instead), and to the east of you, to the west of you, to the north of you, and to the south of you, are farmers, like you, who pay more for electricity than your less expensive electric price - suppose you do that, or something similar.
Your neighbors north, east, south, and west pay a higher price for electricity from the one monopoly Grid and you can offer them electricity at half that "going rate", and so you set about to do so, and then what happens? You find out that The Grid is a one way street. You find out that you can get electricity from the monopoly Grid, but you find out that you can't sell electricity to your neighbors through the monopoly Grid, because the law say that you can't do that, to bad for you. You can make much more electricity, power, than you consume, but the law says that you cannot offer that power at a competitive price. You can make more power, but you can't make more power, because the law prevents you from selling power at a competitive price.
That was the law in California until just recently the law was changed, as far as I know at this time. What is the law in Texas?
If the same farmer decides to invest in wires that will by-pass the "private" owners of The Grid (one person "privately" owning The Grid, or a legal fiction "collective" ownership "private" legal entity, that is also "limited liability"), and the home power producing farmer makes his own Grid, and his neighbors to the north, east, south, and west will now consume power, at half "the going rate", half price, then who has a problem with that increase in power production? Who says no? Why does someone say no? Who sides with the "no" more power vote? Who has the power to stop someone from producing more power? Why does someone have an interest in stopping someone from producing more power?
If you now have a working understanding of The Grid, because you thought about it, and now you have a working understanding of The Grid, then use that understanding to help in the effort to understand money.
Use the more powerful understanding of power to know why some people choose to perpetuate lies.
Let me know how that goes for you.
Then tell me why someone feels the need to demonize (voluntary) socialism, or (voluntary) capitalism?
I have my theories.
They must reduce the production of power so as to keep the power supply down to a manageable level; failing to do so will allow the victims the opportunity to become powerful enough to avoid victimization.
They must destroy competition where ever and when ever competition arises; failing to do so will allow the victims the opportunity to become powerful enough to avoid victimization as competitors will be offering higher quality (more powerful) stuff at lower costs (more powerful by that measure too).
Money is no different, as a power, than electricity. Your mind has been stolen from you if you think that money is an exclusive monopoly power owned by someone other than you. You can know the truth, empower yourself - please.