Given that I have somewhat adopted Amaterasu's forum as a de facto space
for myself as well, I have decided to post this in the TAP forum. Although it
may not seem to be related to TAP directly, in a vague sense it is, because
it advocates overall liberty and a cessation of governmental abuse of the
public.
Not merely black people are endangered by militarised police. Whites, and in
fact all ethnic groups are.
The government has so far focused on minorities in order to convince the
majority of the population to allow militarisation/creeping fascism. Once
fascism is truly established, cops can then start bullying entire population
freely, not just blacks or hispanics.
This process capitalises on American racism and selfishness. Americans don't
care about what is done to other people, as long as they themselves are not
abused. Americans do not understand that fascism only discriminates for as
long as it takes to get established. Once established, all groups will be
abused and/or killed, including the majority who has consented to fascism's
development. Fascism has an incubation or gestation period, and like most
babies, is vulnerable during this phase of its' lifecycle. The gestation
period of American fascism is almost complete, and once born, the infant will
be much more difficult to euthanise, than it would have been to abort.
This allows abusive government policies to be introduced, with the lie used
that said policies will only effect others, and not white Americans.
Americans need to understand this process, and how it is used against them.
Militarised police have been a danger for a long time, but people have ignored
it. People have ignored police militarisation due to distractions; Game of
Thrones, Minecraft, other TV shows and such. The public needs to stop watching TV
and playing computer games so much, and focus more on the bad things that the
government is doing. If they don't start looking at what the government is
doing, then an entrenched totalitarian government will develop, as it largely
already does. Said totalitarian government will likely then be much harder
(if not impossible) to get rid of later, and much larger loss of life will
occur, due to government fortification and resistance. If there is an
American civil war against the current government, then it will result in an
extremely severe loss of life, because the government is expecting revolution
against it at this point, and has made preparations accordingly.
Police don't care about the law, because they don't need to; they only use the
law as a means of forcing civilians to obey them, and as a weapon. Law is
viewed as only being binding for civilians, and not for the police themselves.
American police have a condition of de facto legal immunity, and actually have
for some time now. No police officer experiences criminal charges for
committing murder while on duty, and in most cases, the most severe punishment
is administrative leave, which is a suspension with full pay. If a police
officer behaves honourably or with restraint, that is a result of his own
personal decision; but at this point he is under no binding legal obligation
to do so.
There are two reasons for the legal immunity of the police. One of them is
due to civilians, and one is due to the police themselves.
The civilian reason is that, because of the War on Terror, said civilians now
exist in a state of near constant fear, distraction, and extreme general
infantilism, and have taken to viewing the police as their de facto parents or
protectors. Within a parent/child relationship, it is only the child who is
subject to real rules or restraints. The parent is generally able to do
whatever it likes, and administer whatever punishments it chooses.
Civilian infantilism is encouraged in a variety of ways. The main one is the
promotion of technologies such as mobile phones, which make almost all tasks
easy, and minimise the level of real discipline that anyone needs to exert
over their lives. ICT technology is also extremely effective for promoting
collectivism and hive mentalities, due to the fact that if a mobile smartphone
is continually carried, the individual largely *is* constantly connected to a
group mind. The Common Core educational curriculum is also a vehicle for
Marxist mind control, the promotion of reverse racism, and a number of
other extremely pathological ideological elements in school children.
Television programs are also used as propaganda, to brainwash civilians into
viewing police as heroes. Both "reality," TV and procedural crime dramas such
as Law and Order depict the police and courts as embattled guardians of
justice, for whom deomocratic principles and the rule of law are supposedly
always obstructions in the way of them administering said justice. Because of
this, "bending the rules," attempting to forgo due process, and continually
seeking additional powers are depicted in a sympathetic light.
This is one of the most important points. Governments and the police view the
principles of liberty as obstructions to their ability to act; obstructions
which, at this point, have been almost completely removed. In this sense,
Jefferson is proven to be correct; that when the government fears the people,
there is liberty, but when the people fear the government, there is tyranny.
In contemporary America, the people fear the government, and the government is
bold.
The police reason for their legal immunity is because they believe in the
"thin blue line." The police view themselves as a seperate and superior
social caste to the civilian population. Civilians are regarded as helpless
and incompetent at best, and the enemy at worst. So in any investigation of
police brutality, the superiors of the guilty police officer will always side
with the officer rather than civilians.
Legitimate government is acceptable, and can be a good thing, but current
police behaviour is not in public interest. I am not inherently
anti-authoritarian, as long as said authority is just, which it can be.
The emergence of the sovereignty or "freemen on the land," movement is a
reaction or backlash against the illegitimate abuse of government power. If
the American government was not abusing the people, then the sovereignty and
related movements, (such as Anarcho-Capitalism) would not exist, and would
have no reason to do so. If the government is intelligent, it will recognise
this fact and respond accordingly.
Government authority is based on an exchange between the government and the
people. Most people lack self-confidence, and knowledge of how to strategise
sufficiently, in order to optimise their own lives. They therefore abdicate
their sovereignty to government, in exchange for government's assistance in
life optimisation. This exchange, by itself, is not an inherently negative
thing, but people should know about this exchange, and be able to make a
conscious choice about whether or not to do it. Those who do not wish to make
this choice, should not be forced to do so.
A beautiful, intelligent and effect post Petrus.
It's good to have you here.
Do you have any theories on an escape route from the catch 22? Meaning, 'they' are prepared for the '2nd revolution', and the 'Civil Unrest' ... I should imagine that the weapons and tactics deployed will be extremely difficult, if not imposible to counter. As you say, we do not have the protection of individual or collective rights.
How can we accomplise change 'democratically', if they openly refuse to comply?
Quote from: Sinny on August 16, 2014, 12:29:13 PM
A beautiful, intelligent and effect post Petrus.
It's good to have you here.
Thank you, Sinny.
Quote from: Sinny on August 16, 2014, 12:29:13 PM
Do you have any theories on an escape route from the catch 22?
Yes, I absolutely do.
The American federal government and military are conventional, centralised institutions; which are also accustomed to, and adapted for, fighting other conventional, centralised institutions.
The answer is to work on replacing them; to create new and alternative institutions, which actually work and meet people's needs, but to do it in a completely decentralised manner, so that the government and/or military isn't able to bring its' full force to bear against any one of them. There is a reason why the Department of Homeland Security is calling even peaceful groups "domestic terrorists." It is because the definition of terrorism has been expanded to include literally any attempt at creating alternatives to the government's authority.
The government knows that people do not like it, or want it. Except for the patriotism bubble immediately after 9/11, no American President has had a greater than 50% approval rating since Bill Clinton, to my knowledge. That's 20 years. So the federal government is very well aware of the fact that it is widely hated. That is a big part of the reason why it is feeling so threatened right now.
As for the forms those alternative institutions I mentioned should take; I think the co-operative movement is the answer in the nearest of short terms. We will start to see more forms developing as the transition gets further underway, but for now, I consider those to be the best bet.
Co-operatives are somewhat more Left oriented; they're basically the functional, decentralised, and non-psychopathic version of Communism. On the Anarcho-Capitalist side, however, we've also been seeing cryptocurrencies developing recently. I truthfully have a lot less faith in Bitcoin than I do in the co-ops, and the reason why is because money itself is literally a big part of the problem, here.
Money is essentially the lifeblood of the old, psychopathic organism. Money and its' anonymising, isolating side effects almost always work to recreate the kinds of pathological scenarios which psychopaths recognise and thrive in. This is the reason why we need post-scarcity so badly; because the sooner we get that, the sooner we break the entire cycle of psychopathic sustenance.
If you want to know more about why money in its' current form is a bad thing, then I'd recommend reading the online book here (http://sacred-economics.com/) when you have the time.
Psychopaths feed on elitism, psychologically. The only form of emotional gratification available to them, is when they are able to feel like Gods, when someone else is starving in the dirt. This is the entire reason why they hate the idea of economic equality so much. It is a primal, systemic threat to them.
If everyone eats, they can not feel superior if they eat while someone else does not. If there is no money, then they can not feel superior if they are billionaires while most others are not. So they will fight any form of economic equality tooth and nail, as hard as they can, because if they are to survive, then they must.
We have to create a multitude of targets. We have to create so many targets that they can not focus on all of them, or even most of them. We have to build urban farms (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jV9CCxdkOng) and Waldorf schools (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waldorf_education) and wireless mesh topology networks (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMoZNaftS9E).
We also need to keep holding raves, or parties with psytrance/electronic dance music, and we need to hold a very large number of them. If we all did this, then the police would get overwhelmed, and eventually they would stop attacking anyone, because it would be pointless. Right now we hardly do any of these things, and we do them timidly, so that when the police attack one of them, we get scared and stop. Then fewer and fewer people are doing these things, until eventually we stop entirely.
There is no sense of self-sacrifice for the wellbeing of the larger whole, any more. Ayn Rand claimed that that kind of self-sacrifice is morally wrong, but she was incorrect. The truth is the diametric opposite. We
should be willing to put ourselves at risk for the sake of a group that we are in. If we are willing to do this, then in practice there will be very, very few people who will actually need to anyway.
Yes, there will be a few. There are already a token few people who get sued by the RIAA for music file sharing today. There are already people who get bashed and shot by the police. Americans are already dying for their lack of freedom, right now, thanks to the government. Michael Brown of Ferguson is already a martyr. He just wasn't planning to be.
I'm not advocating martyrs in the form of suicide bombers, here. I'm advocating martyrs in the form of ravers who are willing to risk having their parties stormed by SWAT, as happened in Utah in 2005.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEKffL2g4Eo
I'm advocating urban farmers who are willing to risk having their properties raided by USDA goons because they are
daring to sell unpasteurised milk to people.
I'm suggesting that for every Bit Torrent tracker which gets shut down by the thugs in the FBI or ICE, we set up five, ten, or twenty more; and that we do it even if they catch us, even if they jail us, even if they torture us, and even if they kill us.
I'm actually not advocating armed civil war. Violence can be a short term solution, but it is only ever temporary. If we are going to have revolutionary wars, then we should very realistically expect to have them about once every three to four generations; because as soon as fascism is out of the public memory, the Lizard Hearted try again. It's been 70 years since WW2, now; a bit more than two generations. A lot of people think of Hitler as having been a misunderstood hero, these days, and so the psychopaths are trying again.
No more of that. We need to stop Hitler and his kind for good; and that requires four steps.
- Changing society without violence.
This is so that said transformation does not set up a cycle of hate and revenge, as the Treaty of Versailles did for the Germans at the end of WW1, which was a big part of the reason for WW2.
- Raising our children without violence. No more corporal punishment.
At 37 years old, I'm still experiencing nightmares about my father telling me to go to school. Part of the reason why I eventually left my ex-girlfriend, is because I've never been comfortable with intimate physical contact. She used to say that I would cringe whenever she tried to embrace me, when we first got together. I'm not a war veteran, but I've got the same symptoms. I was given a diagnosis of PTSD in 2002.
My experience with the education system, and a couple of other experiences after that, very heavily reinforced the message that the most important thing for me to learn to do, was run and hide. That is the single main reason why I've never accomplished anything major in life.
- Raising our children to read Mein Kampf and The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion at an appropriate age.
This might seem contradictory to the first point; but the purpose of getting them to read these books, would not be to encourage them to perpetrate said books' evil themselves. It would be to innoculate further generations against it; to teach them what said evil looks like, so that whenever an aspirant dictator makes the same appeals that Hitler used, they would know what was being done to them, and would not agree to go along with it.
- Getting rid of economic inequality, once and for all.
Nobody goes hungry. Nobody is elite. If we get rid of vertical hierarchy as much as possible, then the psychopaths will have no more incentive to run their games. They need to be elite. We need to take that away from them. If we don't, humanity as a species will not survive.
Gold for Your OP. Petrus.
The problem with any solution that retains a money system is that. invariably, the psychopaths will infiltrate, profit will again be the motive, not true help. I am unfond of any "institution" as this implies "laws" that all must follow.
Since 98% of the "laws" are commercially based, with no need for money, 98% of them become moot. The 2% that are left over are all based on the three Laws of Ethics, and if these three Laws are accepted, the 2% are also moot.
Surely We can work together to solve problems as they arise...without any "institution." Unless a central site on the web is considered an "institution..."
Quote from: Amaterasu on August 17, 2014, 01:41:18 AM
Surely We can work together to solve problems as they arise...without any "institution." Unless a central site on the web is considered an "institution..."
Centralisation introduces a single point of failure, Amy. Your web site idea is good, but I think a beneficial modification to the concept, would be to instead have something distributed like Usenet. That way everyone could still contribute ideas to the same degree, but if it isn't a single site as such, it becomes much more difficult for the psychopaths to potentially get rid of.
I see where You're coming from, but in order to structure it such that One only looks at local problems and any from other areas that have been elevated to regional (Their region), continental (Their continent), and planetary, it rather has to be a central site. There can always be mirrors and such, but without that structure, One may have no clue about problems that will effect Them in other areas, or be overloaded with problems from everywhere...
And there is no way to get problems that are unresolved out to be noticed by more People.
Though I do like as little structure as possible, still some structure does add to efficiency. And a structure on a site is better than a structure that puts one Human over another.