We first need the organized numbers behind us. We haven't organized yet because there are so many people that want to be the leader but none have learned to control the mob. The fuel is there, we just need one person to make the real action the media can't ignore. Our real enemy is the corporations not the government. They are the aiders and abettors of the crimes, but we need to catch the criminals first.

The people need to bring down every coproation doing us wrong. We can do this even with our hate and differences.

Joshua McHenry,

I didn't mean to say what the government is going isn't wrong or criminal they are simply not the ones we need to go after first. The corporations are the money supply for the government(cutting off the supply chain is the best way do defeat a great army, they starve), as in the governments members, for example to lobbyists in congress paying off congress people to get bills passed.

You are 100% right in your understanding of the law, except currently what the government is doing in interacting with the corporations is technically legal. More over the governments members are getting paid well to keep it that way. attacking members of government doesn't fix the problem because the corporations will just by them off too.

There are two layers two our government the legal layer they way things were intended to be that still exists(the government), however there is a second layer(corporations) intertwined with the first that allows this corruption. It is this second layer that is the problem. This second layer(corporations) in practice is the one in charge, not the real government they hold the money, they hold the resources, they tell the government what to buy and invest in. The government only exists to keep things legal and appear non-tyrannical in nature.

Even if we replace the entire government, these companies exist as they do now, The next government will be taken over in the very same way. The government is the many heads of the hydra and getting rid of the corporations is cauterization that needs to happen.

The government is extremely corrupt, but in riding the corporations of corruptive influence also rids the government of its corruption. If we wait for the government to fix the problem we are waiting for them to be bought out in actuality.

Lastly, If James S Saint's signature “From THIS age of sleep, Homosapian shall never awake.” is any clue he is referring to the individual as the problem. If it's not he should just explain him self and stop being cryptic and share his immense wisdom with us all.

Joshua McHenry,

“We” will take the initiative in "leading" but Id call it more of a suggestion. “We” need more than one person however, “We” need at least one per corporation. In a single well coordinated event that will be marked in history as the beginning step of world freedom.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dparrott,

Individuals do not have to wait for things to get any worse, that is the benefit of individuality. In fact it would behoove individuals to not wait till things get worse. Many do have the predicament of a boiling frog however. My advise to you is to stop asking the riddler questions if what you seek is answers.

dparrott,

Then you can wait until things get worse, until you do some thing, that is your choice as an individual. You are still always welcome to my advise.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Wooden shoe,

I'm not looking for the most shady. At this juncture anything but complete transparency is cause for some degree of alarm. Corporations are not people, plain and simple; they should not be given extra privileges. If their members want to change the scope of politics, they should be doing it like everyone else: vote by vote.

If you want to help the discussion, share what it is you think you know. Sitting on your ambiguous high horse, pretending to know something, and playing rider, while attempting to squeeze us into your way of thinking isn't helping.

I'll answer your question about money/government relations though, but no doubt you'll have some cryptic 4 line or so response about how I'm half right... Money is what governs, historically. Those with the money finance the government, and thus pay the government based on how well they serve their own needs. In USA case they decide how the constitution(your golden calf) is interpreted and what amendments will be added, with a few exceptions of course. Though later on we'll probably be discussing how the real golden calf is the aura of American supremacy, this is what were really talking about ultimately. We can't have world freedom if there is still a hierarchal supremacy support system via the corporate elite.

I'm not just blaming corporations, if you read post 7 I blame governments, corporations, and obviously the individual: we are all to blame by doing nothing. Obviously the colorations I'm speaking about aren't the penny stock corporations(though in some cases they are subsidiaries). I'm talking about the multinational conglomerates that have several names for them self for tax and legal purposes If you would like to single out banks (federal) reserves from within this group than so be it. Calling a corporation by its national origin is irrelevant, this only makes me think you know little about the scope of the problem. Please prove me wrong.

The constitution does have an amendment process by the way, but it is the lobbyists who really do this now, in practice. It is up to the people now to step in the 4th (judicial, executive, legislative, citizen) part of the governing body of the adolescent united states, that is what I mean when I speak of coup.

So step out of your proverbial clogs, sit on the proverbial couch, get comfortable and share your thoughts with the forum. Enlighten us Oh gentleman in the shoe.

Wooden shoe,
Clarifications....

Wooden shoe wrote:I see the underlying problem as being how the constitution deals with the individual, by giving all the rights to the individual without dealing with society.

What specifically do you mean? Could you site the constitution or the amendments you feel should be changed/abolished? What would you add perhaps?

Wooden shoe wrote:This along with making governing as difficult as possible, a great deal more so then any other developed nation.

Specifics please.

I ask because I'm tempted to disagree, but please explain the above.

Points of agreement....

Wooden shoe wrote:long difficult election process which has become almost prohibitively expensive.

I can agree here, at least in practice. There is no mandate that it must be a certain length however, only that certain criteria be met(ex: age, prior service in gov etc.). Most of the process is simply for the apathetic to recognize a name and maybe associate it with a common belief they hold.

Wooden shoe wrote:how do those wanting to serve acquire enough funds to run their race? The main contributor is big money!...most of the money comes from business and the wealthy...contributors want a return on their investment.

I can't agree more, this is a problem.

Wooden shoe wrote:So you end with the one and the ninety nine imbalance.

Agreed, despite vague argument.

Wooden shoe wrote:Now here comes the rights of the individual, which makes it virtually impossible to create a balance, because any limiting of the one percent will be struck down by the supreme court.
The supreme court has given the rights of the individual to corporations making them even more difficult to control.

Agreed.

Overall comments....
I really would have like to have heard your solutions, instead of problems that have been discussed previously in the thread.

My personal goal in participating in this thread is to see if it is possible to isolate a single point of attack, if you will, for the American people to act on. Thus far I stand by what I have said initially, to summarize: attack corporations while simply being more active politically. Do you agree with the premise of this strategy?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Joshua McHenry,

Agreed. That is the scenario with any growing problem.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

dparrott,

While I too share your ability, and desire to run from this mess. It's not a solution, just a band aid for a short time. Quite frankly, we are not alone in this ability or desire, and when things get worse there will be just as much competition for the free open space we seek, as there are for jobs right now.

We have to fix this, now, we have no choice. You realize that in the world there is some thing like 15 people per square mile*. The corpro-goverment is threating your life, no matter where you run, no matter where we all run. They have poised most places that were once pristine, and continue to do so for the sake of personal gain. Worse still people don't want to change, because it means a period of discomfort**

We must act now, this is literally, our last chance before we finalize our own self produced extinction, or at the least genocide of civil society. What do you think your odds are of surviving the apocalypse when you don't comprehend the simple math showing how the apocalypse will occur?

We have the numbers, this can be a blessing or a curse. If we unite and say no to the abuses or the corpro-goverment, then we can create a world in which we can slowly fix the damage done. If we continue to be apathetic we only accelerate our demise and be ever increasingly slaves to the powers that be.

*[personal calculation made by dividing wold population(which is most likely higher in reality, than official counts say) by square miles of land on earth and it is much worse because obviously large portions of this land are unusable or already densely inhabited] This calculation is the lowest possible population density, it is much higher I promise you.

**(eww the chemotherapy makes my hair fall out)[sorry to say, this is where you fit in]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To all,
So you see ladies and gentlemen of the forums, this is not something we can just talk about. We need real action, real solutions, we need tough talk -to the point, with no egotistical bickering.

I invite all discussion, but there is no debate, something must be done and fast, we must agree on the first step to be united.

dparrott,

These neighbors will most likely try to oust you by necessity if they don't try to kill you. You can't feed 15 people year round on 1 square mile of food without irrigation fertilizer and mechanical farm equipment, let alone more than that. Today's American farmer feeds about 155 people worldwide. In 1960, that number was 25.8.. The size of a average farm is a little over half a square mile. As I said the population density is most likely higher for various reasons, I think 30 is a more realistic/accurate count. You must realize that anyplace you run to to avoid these problems when they get bad, you won't have all the modern farming tools or infrastructure. You will be lucky to feed your self by farming. This is not my opinion, it is simple fact.

So, you will be a nomad most likely, following game, if you can keep up. Now a thousand years ago that wasn't so bad because the earth was a more hearty place, with lots of wild game and wild plants to eat. Now it's going to be much worse because of over hunting and habitat destruction. So if your plan is to run away when things get worse you better start practicing your nature skills now, because its going to get worse soon if the apathy keeps up.

I don't think you actually disagree, you just don't want to see the gravity of the situation because you know you would feel obligated to do something about it now. Essentially you're in denial.

I urge you to reconsider, or at least add your input to the discussion regarding..."My personal goal in participating in this thread is to see if it is possible to isolate a single point of attack, if you will, for the American people to act on. Thus far I stand by what I have said initially, to summarize: attack corporations while simply being more active politically. Do you agree with the premise of this strategy?"

One can't be sure they won't be part of the population decrease. If you wait to act on these problems you are betting your life, and the lives of future generations and any progress we have made technologically and socially.

Good luck.

Wooden shoe wrote:at present it is thought that population will top off at 9 billion and then start to drop.

From what sources did you hear this?

Wooden shoe wrote:On the rights of the individual in the US, when you look at the constitution, all the rights are given to the one, and none to the many...

Can you give specific cases of this in the constitution?

The style of government has never changed without major revolution. The style of business however changes all the time. We change corporations by interrupting their day to day actions at their offices. We must create chaos inside each corporation, people can protest outside. Have paparazzi constantly harass executives of major corporations, just as they do with movie stars. We interrupt their business until the change we want happens, we make them less rich by stopping them from doing their jobs, and the money goes elsewhere and leaves government. Then we can reform the government as citizens through the system set in place in each respective country.

If we make a corporation move to a different country the people have won. That is a sign of success.

This is a much more realistic approach than suggesting governmental change because ultimately as you said: “The interest with the most money usually wins.” We can't change government without controlling their funding(this is the idea on tax boycotts, except now they get money from corporations). Overhauling and entire government will occur naturally once the nature of their funding changes.

Wooden shoe,

Where does the UN state the population will stop growing? Does it give a reason?

The documents I have found(from a .pdf file released by the UN) from the UN state

UN wrote:To hedge its bets, the 2002 Revision includes alternative projection scenarios, particularly high-growth and low-growth scenarios, according to which world population would reach
10.6 billion or 7.4 billion by 2050

Being off by 3 billion people is a great discrepancy. What makes this data more alarming is that we have already reached the low estimate which means that it will probably be above the higher estimate by 2050. If we don't cause our own extinction before we reach that mark.Then theres all theses charts from the 2010 revision...


Do you have any specifics regarding the constitution?

The Preamble does specifically state "We the people..." not we the individuals.

I'm beginning to have my initial thoughts about you reconfirmed, you have a very tiny fragile idea of what's going on in the world socio-political sphere.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To any readers,

I urge you to comment on these issues raised in this thread, or contribute ideas of your own. We must continue this conversation, so that future generations do not pay for the mistakes of previous generations.

JIDDY20,

I agree, but it's going to be far more futile to try to convince every single person on the planet, rather than just coerce the most powerful with the voice of many the righteous people. My point is about where to start our attack on the worst problems in our societies. Please read through the thread and share your thoughts.

Shadowstruth,

Not sure if you are replying to the OP, or others, as you did not direct you post to anyone.

My suggestion does not necessarily mean the government will be over thrown; only restored back to its interned purpose.

[quot"Shadowstruth"]i am intrigued by the nature of which you have chosen and would like to know exactly what purpose that may be.[/quote]

I Think my previous posts answer your question. If you have a specific question feel free to ask.

To the dissenters of revolution,

JIDDY20 wrote:Coups may ameliorate mans circumstance but only a change of who we are being can truly alter our world.

The first step in changing the world is to have our current circumstances ameliorated, then change will be easier for all to change how they are.


The world chose democracy one revolution at a time, improving democracy will be no different. The goal of democracy is all the common bond we need. All societies now seek this goal. Compared to even just 300 years ago, look how much closer we have come to freedom. We started with true empires and slaves, we now have parliaments and middle class. Of course we are going to have to fight for freedom, it's not free, but it's worth the work. In democracies short existence we have made great strides in every area of human existence, this is not something people are going to just give up. For many people things will have to get worse before they do something to change the situation, so be it, but the revolution is coming.

People are not hopelessly superficial, that's just what promoted on TV for ratings. We care for the truth, however we are shown lies and are loosing touch with the truth, but we still seek it.

We don't all need to be friends, we just need to see to it that we all vote our own minds; and not what another person says.

Hopeless attitudes don't help, do something to change the situation, regardless if it's pointless or not, one can't know until they try, try, try again. If the world is so wrong by your account, do some thing to fix it. It does no good to mope around and feign hopelessness. We all die no matter what, we might as well choose to fight and die standing rather than curled cowering in a corner.

I didn't i just wanted you to speak more.

Sure. So what did you mean by "From THIS age of sleep, Homosapian shall never awake."?