Can you define what, 'To be free', actually means? Perhaps youv'e got a nice, pithy little homily that perfectly describes 'Freedom' in a couple of short sentences? If so then perhaps you could write it down and post it somewhere for us all to read.
I mean, when you refer to 'Freedom' are you talking about being 'Free', to do something that you aren't able to at the moment? Or perhaps you are talking about being, 'Free', of the impositions and obligations placed upon you by others?
When we talk about 'freedom', what is it – exactly – that we are talking about? Are we – all of us - even talking about the same thing?
Freedom – and how to define it – isn't as straightforward a concept as most people would imagine. Yet still some insist on using phrases such as: 'The Free World'. Indeed, there are those that believe themselves to be living in such a state of grace: 'In the land of the free'. But have these people ever taken the time – and expended the necessary intellectual effort – to examine what freedom is and so determine whether or not they actually possess it?
I think not.
Far too many of us have been persuaded - too many of us have accepted without question - that democracy: as it is currently constituted in the developed, western world, equates with freedom.
How can participating in a charade: called an election, every four years, and voting for people whom we wouldn't trust as far as we could spit, be considered, 'Freedom'? How, indeed, can it be called democracy?
Blair, Bush, Cheney and Condoleeza Rice, et al, lied to us about Iraq and over a million innocent people died as a result.
Tell me, when were we ever consulted about our participation in such hideous slaughter?
They also lied to us about Afghanistan and the bastards that succeeded them in office are still lying to us about Afghanistan.
When are they going to come clean and tell us that this war and occupation are being prosecuted on behalf of the energy corporations that need a pipe-line route out – across Afghanistan – for the natural gas that lies under the ground in Turkmenistan (a brutally corrupt shamocracy/dictatorship) next door? The pipeline that will bring this wealth out to the World has to transit Afghanistan. There are two other possible routes: one through Russia and the other through Iran. Neither of these is acceptable to America. America has to control the flow of this material so as to ensure that – when it is sold on the markets – the currency used for every transaction is the American Dollar. If America fails in this then the dollar: already weakened by the truly colossal amount of debt swamping the US economy - and already being abandoned by some of the emerging economies - will lose its status as the World's first reserve currency and the Great Dollar Empire will fall.
This perfectly illustrates the fact that – when it comes to the big issues – we aren't even told what those issues are. How can we as electors make informed choices when we aren't given the relevant information with which to make those choices?
And then, of course, there is Iran. It doesn't matter which of your country's political parties that you vote for at the next election – the banks and big oil want Iran to be attacked and brought to its knees so that they can plunder its economy and natural resources – and your government: whether of the left, right or center, is going to oblige them. And this despite the total lack of any credible evidence that Iran is pursuing a nuclear weapons program.
Now where in this grand scheme is your personal point of view being taken into account? Think carefully. In all liklihood war against Iran will spread to engulf the Middle East and then the entire World. Is this what you want? If not then how are you going to get that message across? By voting for some snake-oil salesman: that promises one thing, and then does the opposite, at the next election?
I don't think so.
And what about your current financial status? You might not, at the moment, have any unpaid loans outstanding with your bank but you still – nonetheless – owe the banking system tens of thousands of Dollars/Euros/Pounds (whatever). This is because your government indebted you with the privately owned, criminally corrupt banking cartel on your behalf. They did this: under the auspices of the bail-out regime, because the banks told them to do this. Now if our governments weren't allowed to exercise any other options in that situation, where did it leave us? What democratic options/choices were we allowed to exercise? Answer: zero, zilch. So we are now left in an impossible situation: trying to pay off our debts to the banks using money – created by the banks – that has interest attached at source. Ergo, the more money we pay back, the more interest we incur. Therefore: despite all the lies our governments tell us to the contrary, the national debt that we owe to the banks cannot – ever – be repaid in full. They've got us all going round in circles here: on a treadmill that we can never get off. So we need to ask ourselves: when was it – exactly – that we elected to place ourselves in this impossible situation?
Furthermore, it is this situation with the banks: the way in which they are now dictating economic policy – think austerity here – directly to our governments that reveals exactly who it is that exercises executive power over our economies. So what is the point of voting a government: of whatever cosmetic complexion (there aren't any real differences between political parties despite what their manifestos claim), into office when it is the banks that are running the show?
No, our personal points of view have no relevance for the elites that really control our World. And, by casting our worthless votes, we are just participating in the Grand Delusion. All that the usurers: the money lenders in the temple, want from us is blind obedience. Stay home, shut up and watch the TV. (I could have added: 'You dumb-ass, useless mouths', for this is what they sneeringly perceive us to be).
Now, if you are happy to continue deluding yourself that everything in the garden is hunky dory, you needn't read any further.
On the other hand, if you wish to explore ways in which we might circumvent the power of the elites, and seize back control over our own lives – then please – read on.
The concept that we really should be looking at here is devolution. Devolution involves the de-centralization of power from a central government to the regions that comprise a country. Here in the UK for example, we have seen the limited devolvement of power from London, with the setting up of parliaments in both Wales and Scotland. There are those in Scotland, though, whom deem this insufficient and actively seek secession from the United Kingdom altogether. (I say, good luck to them.)
Now what I have in mind is to take the concept of devolution: as described above, and apply its principles in a radically extreme fashion. Instead of just devolving power on a regional basis, we go all the way: we devolve soveriegn power directly to/upon the individual citizen.
If you want to be truly free, and take back control over your own life and future, you have to assume the responsibilities of governance. I know this sounds like a pretty tall order but you should bear in mind that politicians do not actively run countries. Virtually all of the work required to manage a country's day-to-day affairs is performed by civil servants/administrators. This will still be the case under a directly democratic system.
So how would we go about placing ourselves at the heart of the decision making process?
The key word here is consultation. We now possess the technical ability: made available to us by advances in computer technology, to collect, process and store enormous amounts of information. It is this ability that makes devolution-to-the-max possible, for with it we are now able to consult with – and register the aspirations of – an entire population.
This is, pretty much, how it will work. Everyone is given access to a computer. Throughout the calendar year: each month perhaps, a large tranche of electors will be selected completely at random. Those selected must then make themselves available to be consulted. This will involve sitting down and filling in questionaires on a computer terminal. They will also be given the opportunity to propose legislation of their own. Once an elector has been selected and consulted their name will then be eliminated from the selection process for the rest of that calendar year. In this way the random selection process will eventually require all those of electoral age to submit themselves for consultation.
Any interference with this process: such as the covert manipulation of the data collected, will be deemed treasonable and carry a mandatory ten year prison sentence.
Once the aspirations of the populace have been made manifest in this manner they will be passed into law and enacted/actioned by salaried civil servants/administrators who will be paid in accordance with their ability to deliver the wishes of the people. Should they under perform in any respect, we simply fire them.
However, we will need more than just a consultation process.
We are also going to need a Bill of Universal Rights that defines what it means to be a citizen. This will set out: what we are – and are not - free to do, what and whom we are protected from, and what our responsibilities are. One of the main reasons we will need this bill is to protect the rights of minorities from being infringed by a prejudiced majority acting against them. Under a directly democratic system there will be no persecution directed toward anybody. Everybody's rights will be held sacrosanct under the law. And no laws will be enacted that contravene this first principle.
Another thing we are going to need – and this by the shed load – is information. We cannot, ourselves, determine how to respond to any given issue if we are not even aware that there is a situation that requires our attention. This is how it stands at the moment. Our governments deal with 'issues' in secret: often using subterfuge to dress a situation up to make it appear like something else altogether.
Take Afghanistan for instance. Afghanistan - we are told – is all about spreading the democratic principle and ensuring that Afghan girls receive an education. But we already know the ugly truth of this situation don't we. Afghanistan – as we have already seen - is all about the natural gas deposits in Turkmenistan next door.Then there was the bullshit they told us about Saddam Hussein. We were told: amongst other things, that this guy had to go because he was a murderous dictator. And so he was. But they conveniently neglected to inform us that he had always been a murderous dictator. And that they have always known this. George Bush Snr knew this when he presented Saddam with a cake baked by his wife, Barbara. What changed things during G W Bush's tenure in the White House was Saddam's decision to reject the US Dollar in favour of the Euro in payment for Iraq's oil exports. (Challenging the supremacy of the World's numero uno, privately issued, debt based currency in this fashion has always proven fatal. Ask any assassinated American President or Gaddafi's ghost) In fact, our governments, and those they really represent: the banksters and corporations, have never had a problem with dictators per se. Check out the CIA's record for creating dictatorships – you'll see what I mean.
There is a valuble lesson to be learned here. That is: if we continue to place our trust in politicians that keep secrets – that keep vital information from us - and lie about the true nature of World events then we will, ultimately, be led into wars that only serve the interests of the 1%. So think about it, if we get rid of the politicians, we also get rid of the lies and secrets. Indeed, we might, if direct democracy takes hold and spreads around the globe, even put an end to war altogether. Now wouldn't that be something.
You will, I hope, by now appreciate that democracy cannot exist in the absence of information – in the absence of truth. This is why, under a directly democratic, totally transparent system, there will be no secrecy.
Finally, there is one last ingredient that we'll need to make direct democracy work and free us all from enslavement under a debt based monetary system controlled by the privately owned banks. (I have written about this subject at greater length in a previous article.) We need to exercise our soveriegn right to issue our own currencies that are free of debt. We need to take back the Money Power. At the moment the total amount of money in circulation within any given economy is controlled entirely by the banks. This gives the banks the power to hold us all to ransom. We either do what the banks want us to do: which is communicated to us via our governments (the semblance of democracy has to be maintained), or the banks will severely contract the supply of money and cause a recession/depression. They are also capable of upping the ante even further to bring about catastrophic financial collapse. This is the bottom line folks. This is the yoke that you currently wear around your neck. What is more, the banks are – at the moment – deliberately reducing the supply of money (see my last article). Why? Because they want to extend and entrench their power over us. They want us to go to war, and have us all live under martial law forevermore.
This is serious shit people. And we all need to wake up to the fact. (Please give the guy next to you a nudge.) The Money Power cannot be left under the control of the banks. It rightfully belongs to us, so we must set up our own monetary system and take it back from them.
To finish up here I would ask my readers to consider the events that are, right now, unfolding around the world. Specifically I would ask you all to ponder the significance of the many democracy movements that are emerging everywhere, with people taking to the streets in defiance of the brutal repression: coordinated at the highest levels of government, finance and industry, deployed against them. Ask yourselves: what do these people want? They march, and sometimes they are killed as they march. But still they march. What is it that these people believe in so passionately, that drives them to do this? They are obviously dissatisfied with democracy as it is currently constituted. Yet this is still their call: 'Democracy!' What kind of democracy is it that these brave souls seek? Perhaps they aren't that sure themselves. They just know there has to be another way.
Which is really all I've shown you here. Just another way. The thing is – if we are to live in a free and fair world – then it is probably the only way.
Peace, Love & Respect
This article is a companion piece to 'The Value of Money', which you will find by scrolling down this page.