"He's not MY president"

[MisterBeale]

It goes hand in hand with "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain"...

If we all agree to draw straws to see who get tossed into the volcano, and you draw short, how do you have a right to complain? You agreed to draw straws in the first place.

Of course he's YOUR president, you voted to have a president in the first place, and knew the nature of the game going in - corrupt elections and all. The only people who DO have a right to complain are those who reject the system outright and don't vote at all.

We squabble over the sword of power, clamoring around it like naked animals around a trough. But where is the voice of that noble minority who says "bury the sword"? Nowhere to be found in the mass media - that's for sure - and where they are heard, they are chastised without fail for daring to question the cultural indoctrination.

Are we so narrow in our vision that we cannot see the divide-and-conquer nature of democracy? Over every issue imaginable we are made to choose a side and hurl stones across the fence. All the while the richest and most powerful people in the world laugh hysterically on route to the bank. We picket outside the Capital, while the criminals inside peek through the curtains and grin... "Look at them begging... they still believe in our power".

They love to see you picketing. They love to see you on line at the polls. Voting is a census to find out how many people are still buying into the con of politicians' right to rule. You think those with the wealth and power to guide events are going to allow nature to take its course? You think they're just going to sit back and let the people choose their leaders? They are like the parent who offers the stubborn child a false choice: "You're a big boy now, Timmy, you get to choose for yourself - would you like broccoli or peas with dinner?" The child thinks he's made a choice, but the parent wins either way. Timmy is getting stinky vegetables, whichever way he goes.

With big money marketing and control of the media, they present you only with choices that serve their ends. So choose away and feel like you've actually done something. When one party has taken theft and injustice as far as the people can stand, the swing voters usher in the opposing party, which continues the relay race as far as they can until they've worn out their welcome, and it switches again. The left/right march into outright tyranny, with the spirit of revolution being vented by the false "change" of a switch in parties.

You are a joke to them, and this post SHOULD make you mad - but not at the messenger. You've been conned, and no amount of working within the con will free you from getting shackled and fleeced. He IS your president - they all are - because you've bought into the sham hook, line, and sinker. And we'll never get anywhere until we snap out of our stupor and realize that it's not the person sitting on the throne that's the problem, it's the throne itself.

IMO, Trump is the 'bury the sword" president.

You need to learn more and read more about Trump then.

 

[Thinker101]

If he's not your president then you can't impeach him

I'm not advocating impeaching him, I'm advocating ignoring him and the entire system that supports the existence of a president.

Sounds like quite a plan...good luck with that. If you end up in prison, do promise to write.

 

[Votto]

It goes hand in hand with "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain"...

If we all agree to draw straws to see who get tossed into the volcano, and you draw short, how do you have a right to complain? You agreed to draw straws in the first place.

Of course he's YOUR president, you voted to have a president in the first place, and knew the nature of the game going in - corrupt elections and all. The only people who DO have a right to complain are those who reject the system outright and don't vote at all.

We squabble over the sword of power, clamoring around it like naked animals around a trough. But where is the voice of that noble minority who says "bury the sword"? Nowhere to be found in the mass media - that's for sure - and where they are heard, they are chastised without fail for daring to question the cultural indoctrination.

Are we so narrow in our vision that we cannot see the divide-and-conquer nature of democracy? Over every issue imaginable we are made to choose a side and hurl stones across the fence. All the while the richest and most powerful people in the world laugh hysterically on route to the bank. We picket outside the Capital, while the criminals inside peek through the curtains and grin... "Look at them begging... they still believe in our power".

They love to see you picketing. They love to see you on line at the polls. Voting is a census to find out how many people are still buying into the con of politicians' right to rule. You think those with the wealth and power to guide events are going to allow nature to take its course? You think they're just going to sit back and let the people choose their leaders? They are like the parent who offers the stubborn child a false choice: "You're a big boy now, Timmy, you get to choose for yourself - would you like broccoli or peas with dinner?" The child thinks he's made a choice, but the parent wins either way. Timmy is getting stinky vegetables, whichever way he goes.

With big money marketing and control of the media, they present you only with choices that serve their ends. So choose away and feel like you've actually done something. When one party has taken theft and injustice as far as the people can stand, the swing voters usher in the opposing party, which continues the relay race as far as they can until they've worn out their welcome, and it switches again. The left/right march into outright tyranny, with the spirit of revolution being vented by the false "change" of a switch in parties.

You are a joke to them, and this post SHOULD make you mad - but not at the messenger. You've been conned, and no amount of working within the con will free you from getting shackled and fleeced. He IS your president - they all are - because you've bought into the sham hook, line, and sinker. And we'll never get anywhere until we snap out of our stupor and realize that it's not the person sitting on the throne that's the problem, it's the throne itself.

It has always puzzled me the saying, "If you did not vote you can't complain".

Complaining is an inalienable right, and for many, the thing that makes life worth living.

doesn't he mean about the outcome of the election?

Dunno.

 

[Brian Blackwell]

so we should change the process?? how?? not American?? !!???
not fair??
would you rather do it like Libya or Uganda does??

I would rather do it like self-responsible, cooperative human beings do it; not by creating a ruling class that claim fallacious "rights" the rest of us don't have, then back up that claim with violent coercion.

so don't have any government? can you be more detailed?

Yes, don't have any "government" (i.e. a class of people with rights others don't have). That does not mean don't have organization, cooperation, enterprise, etc. It merely means that all interactions should be voluntary, not coerced by threat of violence. Of course, all people have the right to defend themselves against outright aggressors, but self-defense is not the same thing as aggressive coercive violence. We can even hire a group of brave people to provide that defense on an ongoing basis, but their rights would be no different than our own. They're only role would be defense of the innocent, and if we think they're overstepping, we can stop paying them and hire someone else.

 

[Pogo]

Actually it sounds like legislative activities, whether they be excessive or not.
"Ruling class" would refer to people. Entrenched people. Entitled people. People who, say, get born into privilege and conclude from that that there must be upper and lower "classes" and they therefore belong to the former, and strive to keep it that way.

"Legislative activities" is a euphemism for "casting down dictates which the people must obey".

A ruling class is simply a class of people who claim the right to rule over others, regardless of how they got there or the cited origin of that fallacious "right". It does not necessarily imply any more than that.

Agree. "Ruling class" refers to who they are, not 'what they do'.

You could have (i.e. there could exist) a benevolent emperor who sincerely keeps the welfare of the people forefront --- but if he's an Emperor he'd still be the 'rulling class'.

 

[MisterBeale]

 

[Brian Blackwell]

If he's not your president then you can't impeach him

I'm not advocating impeaching him, I'm advocating ignoring him and the entire system that supports the existence of a president.

Sounds like quite a plan...good luck with that. If you end up in prison, do promise to write.

There's a difference between momentarily obliging a bully to protect your own arse, and acknowledging that bully's claim to rightful authority. The belief in rightful authority makes all the difference in the world.

 

[MisterBeale]

It goes hand in hand with "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain"...

If we all agree to draw straws to see who get tossed into the volcano, and you draw short, how do you have a right to complain? You agreed to draw straws in the first place.

Of course he's YOUR president, you voted to have a president in the first place, and knew the nature of the game going in - corrupt elections and all. The only people who DO have a right to complain are those who reject the system outright and don't vote at all.

We squabble over the sword of power, clamoring around it like naked animals around a trough. But where is the voice of that noble minority who says "bury the sword"? Nowhere to be found in the mass media - that's for sure - and where they are heard, they are chastised without fail for daring to question the cultural indoctrination.

Are we so narrow in our vision that we cannot see the divide-and-conquer nature of democracy? Over every issue imaginable we are made to choose a side and hurl stones across the fence. All the while the richest and most powerful people in the world laugh hysterically on route to the bank. We picket outside the Capital, while the criminals inside peek through the curtains and grin... "Look at them begging... they still believe in our power".

They love to see you picketing. They love to see you on line at the polls. Voting is a census to find out how many people are still buying into the con of politicians' right to rule. You think those with the wealth and power to guide events are going to allow nature to take its course? You think they're just going to sit back and let the people choose their leaders? They are like the parent who offers the stubborn child a false choice: "You're a big boy now, Timmy, you get to choose for yourself - would you like broccoli or peas with dinner?" The child thinks he's made a choice, but the parent wins either way. Timmy is getting stinky vegetables, whichever way he goes.

With big money marketing and control of the media, they present you only with choices that serve their ends. So choose away and feel like you've actually done something. When one party has taken theft and injustice as far as the people can stand, the swing voters usher in the opposing party, which continues the relay race as far as they can until they've worn out their welcome, and it switches again. The left/right march into outright tyranny, with the spirit of revolution being vented by the false "change" of a switch in parties.

You are a joke to them, and this post SHOULD make you mad - but not at the messenger. You've been conned, and no amount of working within the con will free you from getting shackled and fleeced. He IS your president - they all are - because you've bought into the sham hook, line, and sinker. And we'll never get anywhere until we snap out of our stupor and realize that it's not the person sitting on the throne that's the problem, it's the throne itself.

 

[Brian Blackwell]

Actually it sounds like legislative activities, whether they be excessive or not.
"Ruling class" would refer to people. Entrenched people. Entitled people. People who, say, get born into privilege and conclude from that that there must be upper and lower "classes" and they therefore belong to the former, and strive to keep it that way.

"Legislative activities" is a euphemism for "casting down dictates which the people must obey".

A ruling class is simply a class of people who claim the right to rule over others, regardless of how they got there or the cited origin of that fallacious "right". It does not necessarily imply any more than that.

Agree. "Ruling class" refers to who they are, not 'what they do'.

You could have (i.e. there could exist) a benevolent emperor who sincerely keeps the welfare of the people forefront --- but if he's an Emperor he'd still be the 'rulling class'.

In theory, yes, but what does it mean to have the authority of an emperor? Does he merely make suggestions, or does he back up his dictates with violent coercion? What could a benevolent emperor do without coercion? If all he does is come up with good ideas which we are free to refuse, then I'm all for it.

 

[harmonica]

so we should change the process?? how?? not American?? !!???
not fair??
would you rather do it like Libya or Uganda does??

I would rather do it like self-responsible, cooperative human beings do it; not by creating a ruling class that claim fallacious "rights" the rest of us don't have, then back up that claim with violent coercion.

so don't have any government? can you be more detailed?

Yes, don't have any "government" (i.e. a class of people with rights others don't have). That does not mean don't have organization, cooperation, enterprise, etc. It merely means that all interactions should be voluntary, not coerced by threat of violence. Of course, all people have the right to defend themselves against outright aggressors, but self-defense is not the same thing as aggressive coercive violence. We can even hire a group of brave people to provide that defense on an ongoing basis, but their rights would be no different than our own. They're only role would be defense of the innocent, and if we think they're overstepping, we can stop paying them and hire someone else.

what about all the government agencies/rulings/etc we need for the economy/borders/immigration/visas/maritime/consulates/embassies/etc etc??
...we would need a group to take care of government business per examples I mentioned??
what threat of violence?

 

[Pogo]

Actually it sounds like legislative activities, whether they be excessive or not.
"Ruling class" would refer to people. Entrenched people. Entitled people. People who, say, get born into privilege and conclude from that that there must be upper and lower "classes" and they therefore belong to the former, and strive to keep it that way.

"Legislative activities" is a euphemism for "casting down dictates which the people must obey".

A ruling class is simply a class of people who claim the right to rule over others, regardless of how they got there or the cited origin of that fallacious "right". It does not necessarily imply any more than that.

Agree. "Ruling class" refers to who they are, not 'what they do'.

You could have (i.e. there could exist) a benevolent emperor who sincerely keeps the welfare of the people forefront --- but if he's an Emperor he'd still be the 'rulling class'.

In theory, yes, but what does it mean to have the authority of an emperor? Does he merely make suggestions, or does he back up his dictates with violent coercion? What could a benevolent emperor do without coercion? If all he does is come up with good ideas which we are free to refuse, then I'm all for it.

I don't get why you keep wafting back to "what he does" when the definition is about "who he is".

A 'ruling class' is a ruling class, whether they rule well, rule badly, or fail to rule at all.

 

[Hossfly]

OK well then I'm off the hook --- I'm Liberal, so I don't support the notion of a ruling class.

My that was easy.

You don't support the notion of government?

"Government" means "ruling class" now?
Dooooooooooooon't think so.

Does Congress claim rights that you and I don't have, such as laying and collecting taxes, and making laws which we must obey or be punished by violence?

Despite all the Civics Class justifications and philosophical work-arounds, that sounds quite like a ruling class to me.

Actually it sounds like legislative activities, whether they be excessive or not.
"Ruling class" would refer to people. Entrenched people. Entitled people. People who, say, get born into privilege and conclude from that that there must be upper and lower "classes" and they therefore belong to the former, and strive to keep it that way.

"Legislative activities" is a euphemism for "casting down dictates which the people must obey".

A ruling class is simply a class of people who claim the right to rule over others, regardless of how they got there or the cited origin of that fallacious "right". It does not necessarily imply any more than that.

 

[harmonica]

so we should change the process?? how?? not American?? !!???
not fair??
would you rather do it like Libya or Uganda does??

I would rather do it like self-responsible, cooperative human beings do it; not by creating a ruling class that claim fallacious "rights" the rest of us don't have, then back up that claim with violent coercion.

so don't have any government? can you be more detailed?

Yes, don't have any "government" (i.e. a class of people with rights others don't have). That does not mean don't have organization, cooperation, enterprise, etc. It merely means that all interactions should be voluntary, not coerced by threat of violence. Of course, all people have the right to defend themselves against outright aggressors, but self-defense is not the same thing as aggressive coercive violence. We can even hire a group of brave people to provide that defense on an ongoing basis, but their rights would be no different than our own. They're only role would be defense of the innocent, and if we think they're overstepping, we can stop paying them and hire someone else.

who chooses these people that are hired? and who chooses to fire/hire? that sounds like elections

 

[Pogo]

OK well then I'm off the hook --- I'm Liberal, so I don't support the notion of a ruling class.

My that was easy.

You don't support the notion of government?

"Government" means "ruling class" now?
Dooooooooooooon't think so.

Does Congress claim rights that you and I don't have, such as laying and collecting taxes, and making laws which we must obey or be punished by violence?

Despite all the Civics Class justifications and philosophical work-arounds, that sounds quite like a ruling class to me.

Actually it sounds like legislative activities, whether they be excessive or not.
"Ruling class" would refer to people. Entrenched people. Entitled people. People who, say, get born into privilege and conclude from that that there must be upper and lower "classes" and they therefore belong to the former, and strive to keep it that way.

"Legislative activities" is a euphemism for "casting down dictates which the people must obey".

A ruling class is simply a class of people who claim the right to rule over others, regardless of how they got there or the cited origin of that fallacious "right". It does not necessarily imply any more than that.

Bravo Hoss. Found a picture of Rump where he's not making a vagina shape with his hands. Although it looks like you had to go back thirty years to find it. That's dedication.

 

[Hossfly]

It goes hand in hand with "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain"...

If we all agree to draw straws to see who get tossed into the volcano, and you draw short, how do you have a right to complain? You agreed to draw straws in the first place.

Of course he's YOUR president, you voted to have a president in the first place, and knew the nature of the game going in - corrupt elections and all. The only people who DO have a right to complain are those who reject the system outright and don't vote at all.

We squabble over the sword of power, clamoring around it like naked animals around a trough. But where is the voice of that noble minority who says "bury the sword"? Nowhere to be found in the mass media - that's for sure - and where they are heard, they are chastised without fail for daring to question the cultural indoctrination.





Are we so narrow in our vision that we cannot see the divide-and-conquer nature of democracy? Over every issue imaginable we are made to choose a side and hurl stones across the fence. All the while the richest and most powerful people in the world laugh hysterically on route to the bank. We picket outside the Capital, while the criminals inside peek through the curtains and grin... "Look at them begging... they still believe in our power".

They love to see you picketing. They love to see you at line at the polls. Voting is a census to find out how many people are still buying into the con of politicians' right to rule. You think those with the wealth and power to guide events are going to allow nature to take its course? You think they're just going to sit back and let the people choose their leaders? They are like the parent who offers the stubborn child a false choice: "You're a big boy now, Timmy, you get to choose for yourself - would you like broccoli or peas with dinner?" The child thinks he's made a choice, but the parent wins either way. Timmy is getting stinky vegetables, whichever way he goes.

With big money marketing and control of the media, they present you only with choices that serve their ends. So choose away and feel like you've actually done something. When one party has taken theft and injustice as far as the people can stand, the swing voters usher in the opposing party, which continues the relay race as far as they can until they've worn out their welcome, and it switches again. The left/right march into outright tyranny, with the spirit of revolution being vented by the false "change" of a switch in parties.

You are a joke to them, and this post SHOULD make you mad - but not at the messenger. You've been conned, and no amount of working within the con will free you from getting shackled and fleeced. He IS your president - they all are - because you've bought into the sham hook, line, and sinker. And we'll never get anywhere until we snap out of our stupor and realize that it's not the person sitting on the throne that's the problem, it's the throne itself.

My President is Trump. Who is your president? Mine won.

My President is whoever comes up with a Cliff's Notes for the TL;DR OP.

Btw OP -- I don't remember ever "voting to have a President". That's about the line where I stopped.

And it may be worth noting that most Americans eligible to vote ---- didn't.

 

[Pogo]

so we should change the process?? how?? not American?? !!???
not fair??
would you rather do it like Libya or Uganda does??

I would rather do it like self-responsible, cooperative human beings do it; not by creating a ruling class that claim fallacious "rights" the rest of us don't have, then back up that claim with violent coercion.

so don't have any government? can you be more detailed?

Yes, don't have any "government" (i.e. a class of people with rights others don't have). That does not mean don't have organization, cooperation, enterprise, etc. It merely means that all interactions should be voluntary, not coerced by threat of violence. Of course, all people have the right to defend themselves against outright aggressors, but self-defense is not the same thing as aggressive coercive violence. We can even hire a group of brave people to provide that defense on an ongoing basis, but their rights would be no different than our own. They're only role would be defense of the innocent, and if we think they're overstepping, we can stop paying them and hire someone else.

who chooses these people that are hired? and who chooses to fire/hire? that sounds like elections

It doesn't, however, sound like Presidential elections. In most places that elect a head of state it actually works that way but in two countries it doesn't. Those two would be the US and Pakistan.

 

[Pogo]

It goes hand in hand with "If you don't vote, you have no right to complain"...

If we all agree to draw straws to see who get tossed into the volcano, and you draw short, how do you have a right to complain? You agreed to draw straws in the first place.

Of course he's YOUR president, you voted to have a president in the first place, and knew the nature of the game going in - corrupt elections and all. The only people who DO have a right to complain are those who reject the system outright and don't vote at all.

We squabble over the sword of power, clamoring around it like naked animals around a trough. But where is the voice of that noble minority who says "bury the sword"? Nowhere to be found in the mass media - that's for sure - and where they are heard, they are chastised without fail for daring to question the cultural indoctrination.





Are we so narrow in our vision that we cannot see the divide-and-conquer nature of democracy? Over every issue imaginable we are made to choose a side and hurl stones across the fence. All the while the richest and most powerful people in the world laugh hysterically on route to the bank. We picket outside the Capital, while the criminals inside peek through the curtains and grin... "Look at them begging... they still believe in our power".

They love to see you picketing. They love to see you at line at the polls. Voting is a census to find out how many people are still buying into the con of politicians' right to rule. You think those with the wealth and power to guide events are going to allow nature to take its course? You think they're just going to sit back and let the people choose their leaders? They are like the parent who offers the stubborn child a false choice: "You're a big boy now, Timmy, you get to choose for yourself - would you like broccoli or peas with dinner?" The child thinks he's made a choice, but the parent wins either way. Timmy is getting stinky vegetables, whichever way he goes.

With big money marketing and control of the media, they present you only with choices that serve their ends. So choose away and feel like you've actually done something. When one party has taken theft and injustice as far as the people can stand, the swing voters usher in the opposing party, which continues the relay race as far as they can until they've worn out their welcome, and it switches again. The left/right march into outright tyranny, with the spirit of revolution being vented by the false "change" of a switch in parties.

You are a joke to them, and this post SHOULD make you mad - but not at the messenger. You've been conned, and no amount of working within the con will free you from getting shackled and fleeced. He IS your president - they all are - because you've bought into the sham hook, line, and sinker. And we'll never get anywhere until we snap out of our stupor and realize that it's not the person sitting on the throne that's the problem, it's the throne itself.

My President is Trump. Who is your president? Mine won.

My President is whoever comes up with a Cliff's Notes for the TL;DR OP.

Btw OP -- I don't remember ever "voting to have a President". That's about the line where I stopped.

And it may be worth noting that most Americans eligible to vote ---- didn't.

That will cost $130,000.

Actually that's what a woman gets, so I should get more.

 

[harmonica]

so we should change the process?? how?? not American?? !!???
not fair??
would you rather do it like Libya or Uganda does??

I would rather do it like self-responsible, cooperative human beings do it; not by creating a ruling class that claim fallacious "rights" the rest of us don't have, then back up that claim with violent coercion.

so don't have any government? can you be more detailed?

Yes, don't have any "government" (i.e. a class of people with rights others don't have). That does not mean don't have organization, cooperation, enterprise, etc. It merely means that all interactions should be voluntary, not coerced by threat of violence. Of course, all people have the right to defend themselves against outright aggressors, but self-defense is not the same thing as aggressive coercive violence. We can even hire a group of brave people to provide that defense on an ongoing basis, but their rights would be no different than our own. They're only role would be defense of the innocent, and if we think they're overstepping, we can stop paying them and hire someone else.

who chooses these people that are hired? and who chooses to fire/hire? that sounds like elections

It doesn't, however, sound like Presidential elections. In most places that elect a head of state it actually works that way but in two countries it doesn't. Those two would be the US and Pakistan.

so what if some think they are over stepping and some do not?? the idea is flawed

 

[Pogo]

I would rather do it like self-responsible, cooperative human beings do it; not by creating a ruling class that claim fallacious "rights" the rest of us don't have, then back up that claim with violent coercion.

so don't have any government? can you be more detailed?

Yes, don't have any "government" (i.e. a class of people with rights others don't have). That does not mean don't have organization, cooperation, enterprise, etc. It merely means that all interactions should be voluntary, not coerced by threat of violence. Of course, all people have the right to defend themselves against outright aggressors, but self-defense is not the same thing as aggressive coercive violence. We can even hire a group of brave people to provide that defense on an ongoing basis, but their rights would be no different than our own. They're only role would be defense of the innocent, and if we think they're overstepping, we can stop paying them and hire someone else.

who chooses these people that are hired? and who chooses to fire/hire? that sounds like elections

It doesn't, however, sound like Presidential elections. In most places that elect a head of state it actually works that way but in two countries it doesn't. Those two would be the US and Pakistan.

so what if some think they are over stepping and some do not?? the idea is flawed

It has nothing to do with "over stepping", whatever that means. The post was about indirect elections, which we call the Electrical College. And yes, it's very flawed. And not just because the only other country that does it is Pakistan.

 

[harmonica]

so we should change the process?? how?? not American?? !!???
not fair??
would you rather do it like Libya or Uganda does??

I would rather do it like self-responsible, cooperative human beings do it; not by creating a ruling class that claim fallacious "rights" the rest of us don't have, then back up that claim with violent coercion.

so don't have any government? can you be more detailed?

Yes, don't have any "government" (i.e. a class of people with rights others don't have). That does not mean don't have organization, cooperation, enterprise, etc. It merely means that all interactions should be voluntary, not coerced by threat of violence. Of course, all people have the right to defend themselves against outright aggressors, but self-defense is not the same thing as aggressive coercive violence. We can even hire a group of brave people to provide that defense on an ongoing basis, but their rights would be no different than our own. They're only role would be defense of the innocent, and if we think they're overstepping, we can stop paying them and hire someone else.

if we think they're overstepping, we can stop paying them and hire someone else.

WE--.......what if some think they are over stepping and some don't?