The world we have and what we should have.
Preface -
More of a warning than a preface as this document will be highly controversial. Some readers will not finish reading it, but will stop at the first point they disagree with. I ask all to read on, as many points will be followed with an explanation. Others will disagree with some points and I hope they read on to see if they agree with the majority, for if they do then it can be of benefit not merely to them, but to society through action upon that which they do agree with. Society is controversial, so please read this, as it will come up in both discussion and social action, even if you disagree, by reading it all, you will be aware of the stance taken by its supporters.
Introduction -
This document is an awareness of reality and a call to action, even merely by forwarding it on to others. It will bring enlightenment for those unaware of the reality behind the mask of this world. I will approach current world issues with answers that can be taken to avoid the pending trouble we face. It isn’t the only answer, there may be others, but as I’m unaware of any other practical answers, I present this for your consideration and in hope that you too will seek a better outcome than the one we’re heading quickly towards now.
Within this document you will find explanations and answers to current issues in; media, data security, finance, the environment, politics and sexual, religious, social and racial inequality. You can either fob them off or read on, the outcome of life on this planet is up to you. I will explain what we have now (obvious and not), what will happen with or without action and how we can have the best outcome (unless another has a better solution, that I’m unaware of).
What we have now
Firstly, we have highly biassed media and depending on its political bias, either highly supportive of the right or left. I don’t see any centre (none that offer both sides of the argument. Nor do I see a peoples media, giving the people's view). By being biassed the media is lying to you by nondisclosure (their message is; you must believe this or that), it’s not open and in some cases it really is fake news.
Second, we are facing growing numbers of data hacks and targeted scams, fraud and other crimes due to these. Also as technology now allows these fraudsters to create fake broadcasts, we have celebrity fraud. This is where they take video images of famous people and edit them into fake reports using edited audio and synchronised lip movement to make it look and sound like the famous person is sending a message that they never really sent (or released to the media). Be warned and prepare yourself for an increase in these and other hacks and scams.
Then we have severe social, religious, financial and political injustices accompanied with environmental issues, all of which have their own biases
So thirdly I’ll mention the financial.
The great majority of money in this world is controlled by a small few who have their interests in mind not yours. As a guess I’d think there are less than 1000 people that control the flow of 99% of money. At the top of them we have the old banking families, the reserve banks, major banks, the financially elite business people with enough billions to buy a small country (or at least control a government), after them our governments (especially the few members that have some economic control). Outside that 1000 we have the lesser billionaires, major business and minor banks, and your poor impoverished employers who only have less than 100 Million each along with the new elite (social influencers) and other slightly influential people such as lawyers etc. These are the people who tell you how to live your life, sometimes overtly, but mostly covertly. None of that top 1000 care about you at all. To them you are just a pawn for them to win the game of life. Like a government that sends its soldiers to war without provocation, just because they want more power. They don’t care for those who will die, just the land or resources they will gain personally. These are your puppet masters and some of you may consider them your enemy (an enemy to me or not doesn’t matter, as I am taking a great risk merely by mentioning it). The simple truth is they have the money and power to do anything they want to any of us and those of us that even mention their power and lack of concern for us pawns face some risk. Beware taking the greater risk of condemning them. They also do have the support of a large number of people who can’t see through their false messages that they’ve marketed to us. We are constantly told (by them) how wonderful they are and many of them really do have large followings of fools willing to do their dirty work because they’ve bought into those messages. Yet as I go on I’m going to get even deeper into the sewerage.
Now who owns that money in your bank account or pocket (for those of you who are still wise enough to not rely on plastic). Not you! The money you are granted to use isn’t yours. Sure you can buy things with it but you have no control over the money itself. Can you devalue the dollar? No but a politician can declare its value to change over-night. It’s happened in my country before (our dollar was devalued by 10% meaning that if I was to buy anything from overseas it cost 10% more than it did the day before). Can I intentionally scratch a coin? It’s illegal and called defacing currency. Why because it’s not my money (nor yours), we are merely granted the use of it. At any time (though very unlikely) it can be called back by governments. There are even laws protecting banks that can allow them in “extreme circumstances” to keep the money that we call ours. In this country if you wish to withdraw $10,000 or more from your bank account you must give a reason for doing so, which they will pass on to the tax department. It’s not your money! In just about all countries if there is a financial collapse the banks can set a maximum you can withdraw or refuse to give you (your?) money at all. It’s happened before and the way things are going it will happen again. Banks are the opposite of Robin Hood. They steal from the poor and give to the rich. I'll explain how to keep your money somewhat safe (and even grow its value doing so) later.
How does the flow of money work and what’s the problem if we all have a little and can get by in life? I’ll give you the very basics as I don’t want to write many pages on it which will only serve to confuse quite a few of you. Its value as mentioned isn’t what you think as this can be changed at the drop of a hat. Also it is not a real value due to the way it’s produced. Money is usually produced by a government asking their reserve bank to produce (print) $X Billion. There was a time where the amount produced was the same as the gold the government was holding in reserve, this is no longer the case (they can ask for any amount), in most cases this is done on a loan basis (the government doesn’t own the money either!) Whose signature is on the folding currency? The president or prime ministers? No it’s usually the governor of the reserve bank and secretary to the treasury or in the US it’s the Treasurer of the US and the secretary of the treasury. These people are usually appointed by the board of the treasury (not by the parliament) and the governor by the treasurer (government), but once in office has an all but autonomous role. In the US its governors are appointed by the president. But also have a great deal of autonomy. In many cases the governments that appointed them, then go and ask for currency to be issued by them (a little convoluted). How this is done varies with countries.
In the US they sell bonds and create the equivalent money, They then give it to banks and government. In all cases there are no backing assets (gold, sliver) as used to be the case. So what’s it really worth? A few quotes, bare with me as what they say is important. “Gold and Silver are money...everything else is credit”. - J.P. Morgan (an American financier and investment banker who dominated corporate finance on Wall Street). “Gold is the money of kings, silver is the money of gentlemen, barter is the money of peasants – but debt is the money of slaves.” - Norm Franz, Money & Wealth in the New Millennium: A Prophetic Guide to the New World Economic Order. “Gold will be around, gold will be money when the dollar and the euro and the yuan and the ringgit are mere memories.” - Richard Russell. “When paper money systems begin to crack at the seams, the run to gold could be explosive.” - Harry Browne. “O Gold! I still prefer thee unto paper, Which makes bank credit like a bark of vapour.” - Lord Byron. Now this is The main point >“A US dollar is an IOU from the Federal Reserve Bank. It's not backed by gold or silver. It's a promissory note that doesn't actually promise anything.” - P. J. O'Rourke
The value of the US dollar has lost more than 96% of its purchasing power since the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913. Consumer prices have gone up more than 30 times since 1913, meaning that a $1 bill from 1913 would have less than 3.4 cents in purchasing power today. Beware, the system will not last. The question from these people and probably hundreds of thousands of others is… When will the dollar collapse? Not when will be the next recession, like the great depression or 2008 etc (and recessions have been numerous between them). But when will it collapse entirely? Many have predicted it, as it can’t last. It goes like this; recession (pour in lots of fake money) growth, boom (beyond it’s true value), recession (pour in more fake money) growth, boom, far greater (and putting greater pressure on the value of the dollar), recession (fake money) growth, boom (greater again), pushing us even closer to an ultimate collapse, as the values continue to exceed true worth. We blow up the economical balloon some, then let a little air out, blow it up even more and let a little out, blow it up again to an even larger size (each time larger than the last boom). One day the balloon will explode. How many times can we go through this cycle? I expected that the recession we’re currently in would be the explosion, but I can see now that there will be another cycle, but how many more can the economy bear? I, like many, expect the explosion (the end of the dollar as we know it) to happen over the next 20 years, as other factors grow.
Our lack of foresight causes us to see life as servitude to capital. A life lacking satisfaction as the more we have the more we want, greed is seen as good. We ought to redefine our lives to resist this and live with affection, care, understanding, wisdom and caution to the outcome of greed. “There is no wealth but life.” John Ruskin
Fourthly, The environment.
Now this is highly contentious and before I get too deep into it, I’ll give my stance. We do have a serious problem, but maybe not as serious as some make it out to be. We have climate campaigners and climate deniers. If the deniers were 0% on a scale and the most ardent of campaigners 100%, I’d sit past the middle ground but not up at the top, say the 60-65% level. Let me explain why. We do have a problem, we are damaging the ozone layer. But unlike the extreme campaigners, I don’t expect it to be destroyed in the next 20 years if we don’t stop pollution now. First, what kind of pollution, for those unaware. Coal fired energy, vehicles and methane produced by animals and yes cattle are among the worst (that’s why they don’t like meat). But we are doing things about it, maybe not what we could and the complaints of many first world countries are moderately fair. The major polluters are third world countries like India. Climate deniers like to cite this and say “if there is a problem at all, we can’t do anything valid to deal with it because the major problem (other countries) is out of our hands.” But we can! Firstly the solar, wind and upcoming wave power solutions are not as hard or expensive as they make out. In many cases they propose Nuclear power, which does have advantages along with risk, but it’s not like Chernobyl, technology has surpassed that. The real problem with Nuclear power is how to handle the radioactive waste. For home owners I say install solar ASAP, for landlords why not install solar and add a power fee to the rent? As for the major problem, “other countries”, I propose inter-governmental support. World governance bodies don’t include many countries because they haven't joined. I have a lot of proposals for this which will also come later, as I’m focusing on the environment now rather than politics. The idea though is for other countries to build power plants; solar, wind and hydro-kinetic (wave/water wheels) in those countries and repaid by use (not just as gifts). On hydro-kinetic (maybe our oldest yet least utilised source), we haven’t even begun to consider many options, we are researching some like sea current generators, but I consider other avenues that are beyond my engineering skill that could be possible. I thought we could capture rain on our roofs (like a dam) and run it through miniature gutter turbines. It’s just an idea and would need hydro engineers to consider. But my point is that there are other ways we haven’t considered yet.
Now, when it comes to power we must consider Jevons Paradox which basically says. The more power we produce and the more we save by new technology (led lights etc) the more we will use again. As it will be cheaper and our lower use will encourage us to expand; eg. if a persons power bill drops $10, they may think I can afford a new 80 inch TV to replace my 50 inch. In doing so their bill is now $11 more and the end result is a $1 increase rather than a decrease and the total wattage use in their home is now a little higher. We don’t all run out and spend more when we save a little. But he wrote this in the industrial revolution on noting the power usage that accompanied it as an exponential. As a whole he was right, with each new innovation saving power, usage has increased. So even if you change to solar, try to also cut back use.
We also have a crywolf problem with the activists, when they stand up with their demands. The more they demand the more the deniers fight back and the more we get used to their outcries and become accustomed to them (we think - “yeah, here they go again, they’ve been saying the world will end in 10 years for the last 40 years now, it hasn’t happened, so they must be wrong.”). I implore the activists to be less radical and not risk losing our interest.
The environment is important but has been pushed on us, in some cases (especially political) as a diversion to our main issues. If a government or party can ask us to give them control due to their environmental stance they gain power (which is what they really want) and get to implement other controls over us that they didn’t tell us about. Also on the other side we have political kickbacks from the activist force. The Farmers party in Holland began only a year or two ago (I’m not going to look it up). They are a “one policy party" that stormed into office on just one agenda, stopping the control of the EU under the influence of activists which seek to stop their cattle farms. Here's the kickback effect and it’s dangerous… What do farmers know about governing? We’re about to find out as in a short time they took power in Holland!
That leads me into point number 5, Politics:
Politics isn’t about being open and telling us what they really want, it’s about telling us what they think we want to hear to gain power! What they actually do once in power is totally up to them! This has been said in one way or another by many and is true. I won’t give you a pile of quotes here (though I could) just one from Benjamin Disraeli - Prime Minister of Britain in the 1870s “There is no act of treachery or mean-ness of which a political party is not capable; for in politics there is no honour”.
I may have brought the other issues up first, however politics is the most important as it has the ability to control every other issue that I mention. Our governments are slowly but constantly taking away our freedom. Again I could give many examples however I'm only going to give one. About 5 to 8 years ago (I don't recall exactly when) the government of my country made online poker illegal. They did so by demanding that the major online poker companies cancel the accounts of our citizens to which they did and my accounts were cancelled. In doing so the government also included a clause which made it legal to play poker online with a company in my country only (of which there are none). Why did they do this? Obviously it was not to reduce gambling for multiple reasons. 1/ At the same time they increased the number of slot machines nationally and this is an area where many problem gamblers are losing their money. 2/ Also the prevalence of online sports betting increased primarily with companies that pay tax here. They recognised that they couldn't stop all gambling nor did they want to as they are gaining tax from companies that are registered in this country. So this brings up 3/ They didn't want people in this country spending money overseas with overseas companies that are not paying tax to our government. That was the real issue: they don't want money leaving the country without gaining tax. Why else would they make it legal to do so with a company that does operate in this country (even though there are none)? It was all about tax and their control of “our” money. Here's the other part of this issue; when voted in they did not present this agenda to the people (that this was one of their policies) they gave a big list of wonderful things they're going to do for the country (many of which they did not do) and they then went and did things like this which they did not mention in their campaign.
In this country we have had many entertainers and sports people enter politics quite successfully. I see two things here: they gain the vote because of their public recognition, people vote for people they like or they are aware of. Also those entertainers enter the two major parties; none of them run for a seat independently. Why? Because usually sportspeople don't know enough about politics. Which brings up the second point, why are we voting for people purely on that public recognition? Because we don't know the real issues, we don't know how to get issues into and through government, all we know is there are a few people running for a particular seat, one for one major party, one for the other major party, a few for minor parties and a few independents. Out of that group who do we vote for? We vote for the one we have an emotional tie to, the entertainer or sports person, even though as we know, entertainers and sports people generally know nothing of politics, they know nothing of governments, so we are voting for people who will do nothing about standing up for our issues but they will tow the party line of whatever party they are representing.
Parties have the run of politics; it’s quite rare that independents get voted in so basically in all democratic countries we are run by party politics, the agenda of a party as a whole. now the average person who agrees with more issues that one party presents and less issues with another party will vote for the party that has an agenda most suited to them and if that party has issues in their agenda which that person does not agree with, there is nothing that person can do about those issues as they simply must vote for one party or the other or maybe the third option a very small party or an independent, which is very unlikely to happen as we know it's usually two major parties that get the great majority of the vote. So what do we do when we agree with 60% of what one party presents and 30% of what another party presents? We vote in the party that we most agree with and we're voting in a party that will do 40% of the things we don't want. So no matter what if they do those things or not we are actually voting in people to supposedly represent us who are actually really representing their own party and not us! They will push through parliament things that we do not want them to and that hidden agenda (those things that the party was too afraid to even tell us about).
We should have the right to vote on the issues we have interest in and not some person that has their own agenda (or worse the forced agenda of a dishonest party). Would you like to vote on a poker law? Maybe not, if it doesn’t concern you, but I wish I had the right. Maybe there's another issue that you wish to be addressed by the government. Would you like to vote on that matter, rather than rely on a person who's just going to vote as their party tells them? All we can do is vote the other party in, once the one we voted for in the last election fails, because they said they were going to do X and didn’t do it! Then what happens? We’re faced with a new mess because the new government is going to do many things we don’t want them to do! But if we could only vote on those issues instead of a person. For one example you may have interest in how they spend the budget, maybe you’d like them to spend more (or less) on hospitals, military, education, environment, housing etc. whatever department. I’d like to vote on how the budget is broken up, but I can’t… or can I? We all can vote on every issue the sitting government does now, but to do so we need to change the way governments work! It’s very simple like pushing your car that has just run out of gas 1 block to the station (I’ve done that a few times, it’s simple), but it takes a lot of effort and that’s hard. Now I’m not pushing a car, it’s a bus! I need everyone to get out of the bus and help push! 30 people pushing a bus will get it there with little effort. I’ll explain this later too. I can’t change anything alone, but the majority rules. I will tell you all how, but I need the majority to see the benefit of this change and “help push the bus”. We can take the power given to a few deceitful people who sit in parliament and redistribute that power to ALL people within each nation.
There are also many other injustices that can be addressed by popular support. These are easier to address if we change the formation of government first, but can be addressed by other means like peaceful protest (rallies) etc. The first of these is…
Sixth, Sexual injustice.
Don’t get your back up before you hear me out. I know some are already thinking this will go bad. Some have not even got to this point, as there will be those who disagree with my earlier points. Bankers and members of parliament may have stopped reading by now (if they even started in the first place), as this is a threat to their control over you and they don’t want to lose the rewards they get from that control!
So, before I go on, that has brought up another warning. If you have the guts to support this, you will be opposed by those in power now! They have lots of money and political power. Maybe just maybe enough to shut this down (but I hope as was proven in Rome, the mob can take back the power, all the money can’t win against a nation with one voice!). It won’t be an easy road. As the author I’m at the greatest risk. I hope I live long enough to see this through. So back to Sexual injustice.
Please keep reading after these next few words. As I will explain, many read a few words and make up their minds before reading the proof.
We have 3 natural sexes, Yes 3! Women (who deserve to be first in this list as they did most of the work in giving us life), men and hermaphrodites (a person born with both genitalia). Yes, though it’s very rare, we have people walking amongst us born naturally with both sexual organs! Then we have other variations. I can hear the zealots clicking their mice to delete this document or leave the page, or screwing up the page and throwing it in the bin (if they had a printed version). Oh no, now I have the religious condemning me too. I will go on for the justice of humanity (and yes I’m more afraid of religious zealots than the bankers and politicians, these are the ones who make quick decisions to kill any who can bring a rational case that they disagree with). I’m talking of science here, proven fact and of course to them science is “a lie of the devil''. So anyway back to the sexes. Along with those 3 we have women born with testosterone in varying levels (they will by nature take on male traits) and men born with female hormones. Neither of these are hermaphrodites but have a lean towards the other sex by the nature of their makeup. I’m sorry for all of you whose bubble I’ve just burst and more sorry for those who don’t have a bubble, but hide behind a solid fortified wall that will never be broken. As they will never be wrong no matter how much solid evidence you provide. So we have 3 sexes and a rather large grey area between. If a homosexual says they were born that way, I can’t argue it as their genes may just support their case scientifically. I do know what the bible says about them sadly though. The only references I can find in the bible are that it’s an abomination, a sin and that they should be put to death and certainly won’t go to heaven but to the lake of fire. There are many verses, all saying this in one way or another, in both old and new testaments. The bible considers that there are only two sexes and nothing in between. But we know, contrary to those words, there are a lot in between, So do they have rights? Yes. However in some cases and with some vigilant promoters, they’ve gone too far. There is a desexing move that is growing. People who demand we stop using terms like male, female, he, she and gender neutralise all. They expect us to use neutral terms and some of which are silly, it’s been demanded by some that we replace things like “Male” with “sperm giver”, I consider that ridiculous. 1/ it still separates them from “sperm receiver” so it’s no different than keeping male as the correct term. 2/ It would change the delicate nature of slowly revealing the difference to children, who’d have to ask early in life “What does sperm giver mean, child bearer?” (as I’d expect, they’d now have to change Mum/mother to “child bearer”). 3/ If they use totally neutral terms instead like “person” or even maybe “them” language itself would become nonsensical. I’ll create a scenario to explain. Let's say two people were working down one side of a street and two people walking the same direction down the other side of the street. now coming towards the people were another couple which was a person a person, The people shout something suggestive out at the people on the other side and the person and person were quite upset as they were a traditional couple who may or may not have been partners and the people weren’t a couple because they showed attraction by what was shouted we would expect that the people were also not a couple as they didn't seem to mind and even though the people were disgusted, the situation was not a problem between the people and the people . Excuse me, imbalance in the equality of sexes should be addressed, however by trying to create equality by making neutral terminology serves as nothing but adding confusion to the issue and if anything making it worse. Even if we were to use their suggested terms we might have this. two sperm receivers we're walking down a street and walking in the same direction down the other side of the street were two sperm givers walking towards the sperm receivers were a sperm receiver and sperm giver couple the sperm givers shouted out at the sperm receivers and this upset the sperm giver and sperm receiver couple but the sperm receivers didn't seem to mind… I could go on however I think you'll get the point, in the first case it is totally nonsensical in the second case it is just adding words that make the conversation a little more difficult though the identity of the sexes are still clear at least to an adult, so changing these terms makes language more difficult but still understandable or totally nonsensical. I just consider them fools for suggesting such. So let's look at women's rights because, firstly I do respect them, they gave us life if nothing else they deserve our respect, our honour and to be treated equally as an absolute minimum. I also respect the rights of the LGBTQ+ community. however I think that community can go a little bit overboard. Let me start with “sperm receivers” sorry women's rights. If they do the same job as a man then they should have the same pay. Now I've actually been on the reverse of this situation. I've been in two jobs in my life where the pay was not equal, surprisingly in both cases it was women that were getting paid more than men. This is very rare but it does happen. Most commonly however, I’m aware that men are getting paid more than women in many occupations. Now if it's not an occupation that requires particular skills of men as in physical labour where a man can actually do more than a woman then it's unjust and needs to be addressed. women also have the right to walk down the street without being harassed verbally or in any other way. However, I must also include on this particular point that if those women are wearing highly sexually suggestive clothing then they will draw sexual attention (again don’t get your back up yet till I explain). I remember quite a few years ago when I was in a busy street and a woman walked down the street wearing very see-through lingerie and nothing else. Of course she was going to draw a lot of attention from both men and women. If that woman was raped the offender would get a very minimal sentence, some judges in this world are so biased they may even let the offender off. Which also brings me to judicial situations where judges will be a little unfair to women and in other cases favour them. In a divorce case it is more often than not that the woman will get the bulk of assets and time with their children, in this case the sexual injustice between men and women can actually benefit women, it is the men that have a disadvantage. Now let's look at total sexual equality. I'm not sure many really want this and certainly not women. In total sexual equality you would have to do crazy things like remove the signs in front of toilet doors that say men and women because that's sexual inequality that's not treating both sexes exactly the same. Shopping centres would have the right to create a single toilet for both men and women as there should be no separation between them. Also this is happening in British schools now, there are schools that have removed those signs and they have no single gender toilets. They’re also teaching very young students to not consider their genitalia and choose what they want to be from first entering school. Now if I was brought up this way I’d have chosen the opposite sex due to advantages I saw (not an attraction to my own sex). I’m very glad this wasn’t suggested to me, as in growing older I found a greater value in being who I am. Small children may notice that Dad is always at work and when home has to do the hard work (mowing, fixing things etc.) Where Mum may stay home and do fun things like play with them or choose what they will eat and the easier things like cooking. A boy may want to grow up to be a mum, not based on their sexuality, they know nothing of that, but based on what they see as lifestyle alone. Should children really make choices like that based on what they see as lifestyle from very limited life experience as they don’t really understand sexuality at such an early age?
What of a situation between a man and a woman who only just met that gets out-of-control and the environment erupts? Should a judge treat them as equals and say “you could both hit each other so I'm not going to do anything as you're equal”? I believe in women's rights and equality all I'm saying here is, don't let it go too far, equality can be dangerous. I do believe women should have the right to maintain some protections and that can only happen if they are considered less than equal in some ways (physically) and protected because of that lack of equality.
Let's look at the LGBTQI+ community and their rights. Yes I believe that they have rights as well, I also believe that in some ways they are already overstepping their rights and in other ways they are already turning their noses up at the community. I can't give you a percentage of people in the community that are LGBTQI+ so I'm just going to make one up, let's say that community is 30% of people then why is it, that it seems to me at least anyway, more than 50% of TV shows are geared towards them? it seems that at least 50% of advertising is geared towards them. In this way they already have an over representation in the community and yet they still feel the need to go on marches to push their way, I feel like even though they have the rights and even though I have no real problem with them, I’m just sick and tired of them screaming out for further rights, always having to be front and centre of everything. Also, as far as how they handle their community actions I see time and time again, in which they’re pushing themselves upon us. They are beginning to annoy me at least (I can’t speak for you). if I walk past a cafe I may see a lot of people groups of different kinds and many couples again 70% of those couples a male and female and they’re quite polite and acting in a normal way you can see the love and care in their eyes and conversation, but when you look at the 30% of LGBTQI+ couples in that cafe they are touching and kissing each other constantly and in a way that it's so constant and they seem to be trying to make it obvious to the entire community. I actually find constant physical affection in public socially unappealing (more the kissing rather than just touching), to me it's almost taking touch and kissing in public to a level where I'd maybe even support a ban on all touching and kissing in public So to that community I say; great, you should be who you are, don't be fake don't pretend to be someone else, but don't try and push it in people's faces as they will kick back, people don’t like having their nose rubbed in things. If there are ever anti-PDA laws, I know which community would have caused them. I live in a country that has an annual parade for them. Enough, they have the right to marry, adopt kids, maintain their lifestyle in any way, the same as others, fine and well. Maybe there should be an annual straight parade, I’m talking about equality, no more no less. I’m just saying when you gain that equality stop your protests etc. the LGBTQI+ community has got there, so stop pushing your existence before us (rather than your cause, as you no longer have one, you have the same rights as everyone else) or you run the risk of backlashes. What do people do when one is unequal they push their case and gain equality (with women it’s been too slow), but let's look at money between two people regardless of gender etc. one gets $20 an hour and the other $25 in the same job, the lower paid one complains and fights for their cause and gets $25, but if they don’t stop and the employer gives them $30 to shut them up (and believe me, they still wouldn’t stop). Then the other will shout “injustice, I need $30 an hour”. The only people hurt now are the employer and… there's still others who are now ready to complain… the customers, as they will have sharp price rises. So now we have everyone; employees, employers and customers complaining, and guess what, history has shown those workers equal or not are still not happy, we just have discontent amongst the whole community. So in the case of wages, if you reach the same as the rest, stop! Don’t cause a major upset by continuing your claims. Back to the LGBTQI+ community, you have equality now, so stop, please don’t cause anger towards you by seeking more than equality and don’t try to be in our faces. The whole community will get out of order. I don’t dislike you, but I’m starting to dislike the “in your face” attitude you display.
Now, many religious people have a conflict with the LGBTQI+
Unfortunately their religion has it inground in them, and there’s nothing we can do about that. Do they not also have rights? Do they have the right to believe the Torah/Tanakh, the bible or Qur’an? Remember these books condemn the LGBTQI+. Well I must say, yes they have rights too. I think the simple answer is to keep the two communities apart. Churches, Mosques and synagogues have the right to refuse them from entering. And all religions have the right to public display of their religion just like every other group has their rights to do so. Now what of politics in these areas? I see politicians going to both churches and LGBTQI+ rallies, firstly why do they do it? Remember politicians are lying to you they're a greater evil than religious or sexual orientation promoters. Those politicians are merely seeking votes. They claim the religions are right and good and they also say the communities that the religious communities have a conflict with, are also right and good. They merely want everyone to vote for them and in all reality they’re not standing up for any community. Politicians stand up for themselves and they tell you that they have your interests in mind but in doing these things they prove that they don't. I say all communities should be standing up against the politicians as it is the politicians that are the danger to all communities merely by lying to us and pretending that they support everything. I'm sorry it is not possible to support everything, if this was World War 2 you cannot be on the side of the Nazis the Italians the Spanish the Americans and the English you cannot support all sides, all you can do is be like Switzerland was during the second World War, totally neutral they would not say anything in support of any side and politicians should either take one side or be neutral by refusing to support any conflicting side. In fact as mentioned earlier I believe that we can govern the world ourselves without politicians.
Socially we have a fragile peace. There are some disruptions but the best way to deal with the disruptions and seeking a greater peace is to accept where you can the other societies (not by approving of them if that is against your particular belief system) but by staying separate from them. Religions have the right to refuse LGBTQI+ entry to their churches (but not the right to kill them as those foundation books demand) and the LGBTQI+ have the right to avoid Churches, Mosques and Synagogues and avoid public displays of the religious. There is no need to fight, just a need for separation. There are many factions within our society that I have not mentioned. Some of which present levels of danger, to what level of danger I am not sure, but we have things like the neo-nazi movement and we have others which have basically no level of danger like The Flat Earth movement. There are far too many to list them all and even consider what approach we should or should not have towards them. In fact I believe if we were to approach any issue it should not be my views upon those issues, but it should be your views upon those issues. The people should have true democracy, majority rules on every single issue rather than someone who “represents” them in Parliament, again I'll explain how to bring that about later. but I will mention again here that I cannot bring these things about alone. If you want the world to move in a better direction all I can do is inspire it. It’s you that needs to get the message out there and support a new movement in the world and there are other reasons to do so which again I will get to. Just remember as you read everything I say the action side of things is up to you. If you too agree with these things, any of them or all of them, nothing can be done without the support of the majority. We need this to go viral and to do so I need you to get as many people as you can to read these messages and ask them to forward the message on to everybody they know as well. To continue having the new group encourage a further larger group as these are how things go viral. Please send this message to as many people as you can. In some cases messages are viral within themselves, they’re highly entertaining and that factor alone will cause viral growth. This on the other hand if it’s not entertaining, it requires some effort. People don't like putting in effort, so if you want a better world then please not only prepare but commit to causing a viral expansion.
We also have racial prejudice, in most countries it’s white domination, in asia it’s not, and any prejudice there is minimal. Then we have a rare few where it’s now turning against whites. In New Zealand the original inhabitants, the Maoris (a darker polynesian group), have been given the respect at a level to give them a political advantage. A similar thing is happening in my country. I don’t like prejudice of any kind, though I must admit I do see differences especially in physical sport. In a football game the power positions (the forwards) are often big dark men (or women) and the leaders (the centre positions) more often white. Depending on the code (which type of football) the backs are also often dark as they require speed. What this tells us is when a position requires strength or speed whites don’t make the grade, but when quick assessment and passing precision are required they can be favoured. Why am I saying this? On the “field of life” we need everyone and should respect everyone equally for what they can bring to the “game of life”. Everyone deserves respect, we should admire all for what they can bring to benefit the world. Putting race aside I also dislike those who take from the world in their own selfishness no matter what race they’re from and I can’t say it’s more often the whites, but it seems to be. Do I have an answer for racial prejudice? Not really, all I can do is suggest to others that they judge not on race but on what an individual brings to the world. How much they give or take.
Too many people expect the world to keep going the way it is [if it does. the breakdown will be bigger] If we act now there will still be a breakdown but it will be less and the breakdown will be good because people have changed the methods of government and financial flow.
Other movements: Occupy, Black Lives Matter and Qanon:
Occupy was a good movement that all but fizzled out. It had two major problems, 1/ Its lack of single unified leadership and 2/ Its target of a single factor that missed the governing force of that factor being governments. It targeted financial inequality, however to do so you really need to target government control of that financial inequality, which it failed to do.
Black lives matter; yes they do, all lives matter. People of African origin do suffer a large amount of inequality however in some rare cases even whites can suffer inequality. It is also a good movement but it also fails in targeting one thing, the governments that influence that.
Q anon on the other hand has alerted us to some issues but actually creates a greater divide between people. Also it doesn’t answer the power balance nor does it give power to the people, it’s a reactive movement seeking to change those who tell us what to do, but still keeping the power out of our hands.
Questions
What can we do about media bias?
As far as mainstream media goes, very little. They support those who fund them. We can however pass by them and seek news and current affair information from other sources, if you have community funded TV media, watch it as it’s more likely (not assured) to give a more balanced view. You could seek this information from the net, but the issue here is the lack of fact checking (some of these sources are feeding you more unsubstantiated lies than the biassed mainstream media). A wide source is probably best, then compare them, get the left view from the left media, the right view from the right biassed media and then make up your mind having both views.
What can we do about data hacks?
We could use a centralised service (best created by the government) where all the information of its citizens is stored OFFLINE. It should have a large secure 24hr call centre. All banks and corporations etc. would get your name, a reference number and a code from you, when you apply for an account, they then contact the call centre to confirm those details to identify you and create the account etc. They then give you an account number and access code without recording any details about you. In doing this if they get hacked, there is no information about you available. What else will this do? It will create a large number of jobs in the call centre. You are safer and there’s more work.
What can we do about other scams like celebrity fraud?
Greater awareness through advertising is about all we can do. If governments spend more on this rather than some other things, the people will keep more money in the country and have more available to spend, which helps the economy and in turn pays for those ads by tax from that increased spending.
Can we have financial equality?
No. but we can create a more equal balanced economy. Why can't we? Total financial equality is unfair. Why? If you pay a person who does simple manual work that anyone can do the same amount as you would pay a doctor or other highly trained person it would be unfair to those who’ve spent many years learning their trade or profession. Those who’ve spent many years and usually many dollars getting their qualifications need to be paid more to pay for that time and money invested. So what can we do? Let me give you the example of a plastic surgeon:. Firstly some are better than others, do they get paid more because they're better? No. Some get paid much higher than others and it's not based on their capabilities it's based on their marketing and demand. If a plastic surgeon has an office in an extremely expensive area and has marketed well they can charge a massive amount for their service, whereas another plastic surgeon in a small city for example, cant charge nearly as much because of the income of the people in their area and probably also lack marketing reach. So some plastic surgeons may earn more than 10 times the amount of others. Is there anything that can be done about people who charge way more than they are worth? There can be suitable changes made both in regard to the different kinds of roles people have and the different amounts that you pay for goods and services in different areas. We could set particular income levels for example if unskilled person earns let's say $20 an hour then someone with twice the skill level should earn $40 an hour and someone at doctor level skill might earn $100 an hour this can also be factored with property costs and location so a plastic surgeon in Hollywood would also earn $100 per hour the same as one in a small city however the one in the expensive location would also gain a higher amount which will be equivalent to the extra rent and that is all. They would not have the ability to charge $10,000 an hour. Maybe with the extra rent they could charge $300 an hour. I would also suggest we have a governing body regarding incomes so that these people can't be unfair with what they charge. Remember here I’m not suggesting those be the actual figures, but merely the way services are calculated.
What about products? As far as products goes, I would recommend that products have set limited prices which are based on the cost of things that go into them, the labour costs to put them together and a reasonable profit. Once that is calculated a set price should be fixed upon those items (also with slight variations for location if need be). What about people or companies that create new products or have unique products that no one else produces? I would say in this case that they should also be allowed a development fee within the pricing. Yet the same process should occur so that the pricing of such becomes a set fee or amount. What about costs that are not services or products such as property rental? The same thing applies yet again, rents in country areas should be lower than rents in city areas and rent too should be set at set prices regarding their location and the building type. What else will this do? If all costs and prices within Society are set then there will be no inflation and there will be no strikes for people seeking more money (the only justified strike may be on working conditions). Which brings up another point. What about sweat-shops? If we seek these changes on a world-wide scale, then those underpaid employees will also gain more equality. Also we could seek bans (either governmentaly or publicly supported to enforce justice within those companies. Then, What happens if pricing for wages for certain groups or things seems to be unfair? Well those people can present their case to the government rather than strike or set whatever prices they wish and the government can rule on their case. In ruling on their case they will also affect the incomes of every other business, service and the like within the country or countries, so, it’s a difficult area to approach and I would suggest that the government makes very few changes in this regard, once a fair pricing system has been set. However if it is a government of the people ruled by the people democratically then the people will be voting on a fair wage for that group based on its comparison to the incomes of the rest of society. Once all costs and pricing becomes set requiring no change due to inflation, there will be no legal inflation and any organisation or person raising prices should be penalised by the government.
What will happen if we don't deal with financial inequality?
I think I’ve covered this -very quick total collapse
What should we do about probable financial collapse?
Join the movement, spread the word and buy physical gold and silver
What can we do about environmental issues?
Again, take back the power the government holds over you. Then address it with new technology and helping other countries in mind.
Can Modern government continue to exist as it is now?
It may, however, due to the right and left wing factions it is quite problematic. It serves itself and its own agenda far more than it serves us. It is unfair and maintains a greater advantage for the elite.
Why are so many seeking to replace one power with another that still keeps the power from the peoples hands?
They have no other way as they don’t know that there are other ways. Besides, it’s easy to just vote for the two sides that now exist, creating a more equitable solution isn’t easy as it takes effort and we, by nature, are lazy. Remember these changes can’t happen till they’re supported by the majority.
How do we change representative democracy to true democracy?
I ask anyone who supports these ideas that wants to stand up and run for a seat in any election to do so as a reformation independent democrat. This is not a party but rather a group of independents running with the same goal in mind. To reform representative politics into true individual democracy. Once in enough seats to gain power in a country, their mandated agenda is to set up a new system by changing their constitution to allow all people to vote on each issue (rather than a person who is supposedly going to represent them, by arranging internet voting on issues). At that stage anyone can vote on as many or as few issues as they like. What can we do if we don’t want to run for a seat? Vote for the reformation democrat (independant) running in your electorate.
How will these agendas etc. be managed once the independents have enough power to present constitutional change?
We will still need people in major government seats, though levels of government and the number of members will change dramatically. Most democratic governments have 2 levels of parliamentary power (two houses, one is usually the senate and the other has differing names with countries eg. congress or house of representatives), these will be removed except for those seats of senior office (the different department heads, eg minister of education, minister of defence etc.) So we have reduced hundreds of members to less than 50 (as many as there are departments) The president or prime minister would still be the senior role for this new governing board (It’s now a board of ministers, as they are not representing a constituency), any citizen may run for a seat on the board from anywhere in the country and will be voted in by the people (like a normal election, but can come from anywhere as they don’t represent a certain location, they’re just managing a department). However to run for a seat will require a level of experience - A person running for legal positions, must have legal qualification, defence should come from senior ranked military, finance from accountants, welfare from social workers (but also highly experienced) etc. A number should be decided as to how many can run for each department 5-10 would probably be best, and the top 5-10 applicants would then be registered for a vote. Once a person has a seat for a set period of time (5-8 years?) they then still don’t have the power to manage it merely as they wish, but are responsible to gather any concerns and ideas the public presents and create methodologies and systems to then present back to the public on the government website for a vote of 1/ if this change should occur at all and 2/ which model should be used if a change has been approved. This is just a basic format I’m offering here and I have more details as possibilities, which aren’t highly important as each government can be set up in whichever way their people see fit. I’m not offering an exact system, as the system must be chosen by the people once Reformation Independent Democrats have the majority. Why do I call them reformation independent democrats? They are independent of parties, seeking to reform representative democracy into real democracy (where the people set the agenda and systems of government).
Are there other answers ro deal with sex, religion, race and social injustices?
There may be, but as I’m unaware of them, this is all I can offer. If you know of a better way, please tell us, as the main point here is to implement the best methods to achieve the best outcome for all.
Can other movements like “Occupy” make a difference?
Occupy made some very small improvements, they at least made governments think of public concerns a little more. Occupy isn’t totally over, they do still meet and protest, but it is now so small that they only meet in Switzerland on the 17th of September each year. Because they’re so small now and never gained the interest of the majority, their effect is minimal.
Why did “Occupy” dry up and seem to disappear?
A protest of any kind can’t maintain a level, it will either expand till change is made by it, or it will diminish to a very small group (like occupy has) or non-existence. Occupy never really met its goals, but was facing a grow or die situation. The protests grew but with missing keys and without such keys was destined to diminish. To maintain growth they needed to be like the transformation of India with Mahatma Gandhi. What were the differences? Key 1 - In India there was a very common cause and goal (almost all Indians wanted the change), with Occupy more than 50% of the people didn’t care - they never became the majority. Key 2 - India had a strong mandate, there was a single issue with a simple answer, you need to promote, with a clear, simple agenda that doesn’t cover too many issues. Key 3 - They also had a strong leader and leadership team, there was a single voice “Gandhi” who had a team of other senior protestors who could stand up in his place if there was need.
So, the peaceful revolution of India only grew in momentum due to: it’s support of the majority, key 1. Common knowledge of its single goal key 2. And strong leadership, key 3.
Can we have this kind of momentum, like India?
Yes. Occupy drew a lot of attention, but didn’t have a clear vision, strong leadership or the support of the majority (especially as many weren’t sure of their goals). So, I propose the agenda of political change by both protest and vote and that political change be for real independant democracy which has a secondary set of lesser agendas being: unbiased media, security from fraud, an equitable financial system, and improved equality. I then propose a viral expansion by spreading the word (now that the agenda is set). Finally I propose a strong leadership team by election of their peers (all who want these changes). Now I will not demand leadership because I’m promoting this. I will seek to be elected as leader, with any others who also believe their leadership can bring these changes because… I may not be the best leader. I’m the founder by writing this and spreading the initial word. But there are others who are able to rally support better than me, which is the first thing a leader needs. However we can choose a leader at an appropriate time which I suggest should be the 17th of September 2023. Also I ask you and everyone interested to hold a rally in the most central park or square of your nearest city every year on the 17th of September from 2024 onwards (and that date is to honour the Occupy and previous movements, as they chose that date from previous movements also). Unlike occupy we will have a single voice as we will have nominated speakers promoting the same agenda (the many leaders of occupy all had differing opinions as there were no particular agendas or methods to choose a leader - it was too chaotic).
Can we have true freedom?
Mostly, But not total freedom where any person can do anything they want. That is simply dangerous for the world. Should anyone have the right to press a button and send out a nuclear weapon just because they want to? We don't have that kind of freedom and we should not have those kinds of freedoms, but should all people have the freedom to dictate the direction of the World by true total democracy where instead of voting in a person they have the right to vote on every single issue? Yes we can have the freedom of choice by democratic majority rule.
What’s happening now?
We think we have unlimited economic growth and technological development, driven by expanding material wants, but that growth has a breaking point. Banks are relying on the system as it is, and all the free money the reserves give them. It’s not actually free and the cost is greater than you’d think, as in all reality it’s based on growing debt, not growing resources or anything like that. Currency is losing its value quicker and is being propped up by constantly higher amounts being poured into the economy. People are starting to buy as much precious metals (gold and silver primarily) as they can, or they’re investing in crypto. Crypto has a life of its own and is mostly growing but has a similar issue (even greater) than the currency balloon. There’s little stopping the rollercoaster of crypto from bursting like the fake currency we use, it’s like investing in the mark instead of the dollar, it’s just another currency that has no substantial backing (in most cases). These are problematic and can’t last forever, it’s just a question of when one or another bursts, as it’s very likely that when one bursts there will be a very quick chain reaction and all fiat (fake) currencies will burst and be worthless overnight (like the German Mark early last century - everyday it was worth ½ of what it was the day before, at least it seemed that way as it only took a short while for people to start carrying it in wheel-barrows in large denominations and still the wheel-barrow was worth far more than the load of money it carried (which would only buy a loaf of bread). When that happens and in all but no time people are wheeling around barrows full of $100 notes and those thousands of notes can only buy a loaf of bread (as a loaf of bread costs $100,000+). Don’t stop here and say “No, it can’t happen”, again it has happened before and will happen. Every currency is likely to follow very quickly (including crypto), when it happens to one major currency (the dollar, the euro, the pound, the yen, or yuan) the rest will follow. Now there may still be one or two recessions (who knows four or five maybe) before total collapse, but many expect total collapse in the next 20 years. There are multiple reasons for this (the energy crisis etc), but it’s very likely that one form of currency will boom because of it - metals (gold and silver)! As fiat (fake) currencies grow weak, gold, silver (and these days some other precious metals), gain value at, at least the same rate. If a major currency causes a collapse in all and they reduce by lets say 50% a day, gold and silver will grow at least 50% a day (and likely more) as they are still the foundation of money and far more rare than you’d think (compared to the number of people in the world. If all the gold in the world (above ground) was divided into the people in China alone, they wouldn’t have one ounce each, in all the people in the world, just a couple of grams (maybe, as I don’t recall the exact figure). So when money is worthless, 1 ounce of gold or 60-70 ounces of silver is likely enough to buy a house worth $300,000 now. What about rare collectable coins? The metal value will be more than the collectability value, a rare $200,000 coin may be still worth $200,000 if that’s the value of gold or silver in it. What of other collectable items? Let’s say an authentic letter from George Washington, signed in this hand? It may buy you a car now, but as people won’t have money for bread, they’d give their car for a loaf of bread, then, it too, would maybe buy a loaf of bread! The only thing you can trust for sure, even in JP Morgan's eyes is gold and silver (and trust for sure? Well there is an ever so slight chance they too may fail - but 99.9% chance they won’t fail, when everything else has.).
The power balance isn’t being addressed and without doing so, we’ll keep heading down to a point when major chaos breaks out. This means the financial systems will continue as they are till they break. Equality will slowly change and those that deserve it more will be last to gain it and those who have fought for equality for a long time who now have it like the LBGTQI+ community will continue to gain more than equality (in many ways their already causing inequality in their favour).
In all the other areas where we face trouble, like data security, and environmental issues, things are actually getting worse not better. We even have a new trend of couples rushing romance and becoming partners quicker to avoid many bills. The rate of decline towards total chaos is increasing daily on all fronts. All these factors and others mentioned or not are causing each other issue to increase constantly quicker. If for example a person is suffering financially they carry their discontent with them and are likely to expel it in other areas, they may shout abuse towards a Black Lives Matter rally due more to their discontent rather than their disagreement, those at that rally face more abuse than if the first person had fewer financial troubles, and they then enraged even more, may become violent attacking white group which happens to be female, who then claim harassment even more and take their discontent to church which feeds off it and verbally attack a LGBTQI+ group and all of the discontent (now rage) in all these groups causes them to take actions with less thought and open themselves up to increased likelihood of scammers ripping them off etc. Discontent is infectious. Anger is far more powerful than love, issues spread virally not just within themselves but overflowing to other issues. The speed of which increases constantly. If nothing is done (to reduce this rather than propel it), total chaos is imminent, anarchy will rule.
What will we have if we don’t act?
We are heading towards extreme inflation and upheaval; social, financial, environmental, political and in most areas of our “safe” society. It’s like a machine, not designed to break, but by the nature of a machine it will break at some stage (again the majority of predictions from experts is in the next 20 years). If it takes longer then your children will suffer.
What happens when society breaks in any way (financial, political etc.)? Riots, violence and taking things by force, as has been the case in many previous social explosions. The dominating factors will be the most violent people and the most seductive voices. Nothing will be safe. Rioting has increased throughout history and these days a simple election can turn into a riot. There are those who encourage it and even though it always causes damage and hurt, they don’t care as they just want power. The more any person want’s individual power (their own control), the more they will encourage the destruction of anything in their way. This is growing, it’s the way things are going. At some time, something will cause a chain reaction, that will not be limited to itself (a financial collapse would cause social and political upheaval as well), when one ivory tower falls it will fall on others, they will all go, leaving nothing but pain, discontent and a desire to act in violence by many (riots etc). You won’t be safe in your own home! It will be a civil war without sides, everyone fighting for their own existence.
What we could have if we act??
Less biassed media, more secure data management, as well as; financial, sexual, religious and racial equality and self governance to assure a fair life for all rather than extra rights for the elite and less the further down your place in society is. Fewer riots through better systems to assist all. We could also have better environmental management, maybe even inventions to capture the methane emitted by cattle to use it as a power source rather than become atmospheric damage and other ways to use wasted resources rather than pollute. Maybe we could also enforce tax on the wealthy companies etc. that are avoiding it now. There are many beneficial things that would come about if we take suitable nonviolent action, even in things that I haven’t really mentioned here like better education. We would still have the need of policing, but if this became a worldwide stance then the problem of war would also have answers (soldiers would become police as there would be no need for national “defence”). However, if there was a country that didn’t destroy its military hardware we could maintain a worldwide peace keeping force though the UN (just in case). It won’t be Utopia, as discontent will still exist, not everyone can have their way, but we can have a world set up as a self-governed system with a mandate of majority rule. Unlike now, more people will be happier than not. What do you have to lose but your chains?
Life as we should know it.
We should have self governance with fair rational equality in an Egalitarian Society. This can’t come about by itself or trust in the current systems. If it could we’d have it now! We should have international peace and a focus on improving humane sciences rather than military hardware. We need to see the powers that be for what they are, rise up, take back what is ours and live in a just society.
How to get started
If you have read this far, then we are on the way, at least you are more aware and understand what can be done. However knowledge is just the first step in our journey. The second step is to promote this message to send it to as many people as you possibly can. Those who you know well, close family and friends, distant friends, those who you work with and anyone that you have some contact with. What can we do after that? Continue the process, as the second step has not been completed yet, you can still send it to more, send it to businesses send it to organisations send it to governments and media, send it to anyone or anything that can receive this information, if you see a website form paste a link with in it, if you comment on anything anywhere, include a link to this information ,so that second step is to spread it to everyone, not just those who you know but any possible source that can receive it. So what's the third step? As the information grows and more people are aware then the third step is to organise them in areas where they can help beyond the first and second steps of understanding the knowledge and getting it out. How can I help? Well the first thing is to take back the government. So the fourth step is for people to run for every political seat who will run as an independent and upon the policy of implementing these ideas and primarily the idea of true democracy. Their commitment must be to create new constitutions for countries based on pure true democracy rather than representative democracy where all ideas for political change or all things that governments normally deal with are sent to a vote and people who wish to vote on that particular subject are allowed to and it is set up as one vote per person no matter who they are. It’s a simple thing with my country as we already have a governmental department that has the ability for all citizens to register. It's simple and fair that if you want to share your opinion and have a vote or present new things for the government to act upon then you also need to register with this or a similar department in other countries. When this is set up the rest of these things can be implemented however as anything and everything will be implemented upon the majority rule system then if there are areas within this document that are not popular enough to be instituted then they won't be, as again people be able to vote on anything and everything including all the aspects of this document it’s not about me or this document as a whole. I don’t want power, I want everyone to share it - I would also ask you to start a rally in your area or join rallies that are promoted in your area as people power through the spread of information and documents is not enough, it needs to be obviously public by people in public areas coming together peacefully to promote a better way rather than the destructive outcome that will come about if we do not ACT. The occupy movement was in one sense the first to bring vision towards this regarding one of those areas being the financial inequality then I would show respect to that movement which has not totally died it does still exist and in Switzerland they come together every year on the 17th of september and meet as a rally as it work now I proposed the we honour that movement by also using that day for rallies, the problem they had and still have is the majority of the movement fizzled because they had long rallies at varying times and people grew a little tired of attending so I propose that our rallies should be one day a year only and everyone that can attend attends on that day being only one day at year it reduces the probability of the movement fizzling out. In writing this I have in a sense created a small snowball on the top of a mountain however at this point it’s nowhere near big enough to roll by itself, if we want The Snowball Effect where the snowball rolls down the mountain and grows in size and speed as it does, then I need you to help gather more snow to put into the snowball and help push the snowball, it's going to take effort from you as well not just me, after all I can’t create a snowball large enough to change the world just by myself, by telling you alone. However the Snowball Effect is a real effect. What will happen when you get this message out and they join in as well and they continue to get the message out? The Snowball will grow larger and larger and it will start to move under its own power, those that have been putting in the effort will see it moving by itself, it will become viral. Please I implore you to help, not for my sake as I am now quite old and I probably won't live long enough to see this even come to fruition and there is always the other point that I may die before my natural time. Also to add another factor to this picture that I've just drawn about the snowball on the mountain. Please consider this; if nothing is done and things continue the way they are, then that is like winter turning into summer in a single day. The sun will melt all the snow and instead of rolling down the mountain and knocking out “the powers that be”, there will be no chance to fix it. If it is allowed to continue the way it's going without people seeking and implementing change then those in power will continue in power and the situation will get so bad that we will have a devastating change. A flood that will destroy everything everywhere, we will all suffer. Please help this change to happen in a positive way rather than sitting back and allowing things to go the way they're going and drastic pain for everyone occurs. When the dollar collapses and our current ignorant governments don't know how to act due to this practice of doing more of what they’ve always done, calamity will occur worldwide… Unless we act Now! We must act very quickly, before that sun comes out!
Leadership
If you would like to lead in your town or city, I ask you to message me as at this time we don’t have any leaders, offices, management teams, money, resources like megaphones or sound systems, or anything else to help this movement. So until a time when a better leader is voted in I am taking the role.
What else is needed? What else can you do?
The more resources we have the quicker the message gets out, the more impact we will have. If you can offer anything beyond spreading this message (which is what I ask as the first step), then please contact me with anything of use; office/meeting space, sound equipment, printing (for leaflets and or t-shirts), money and most importantly your time (in leadership, office and leaflet delivery roles). Whatever you can give even if not listed here that may be of use.
What we can’t do?
Powerful people will still have influence, not direct power. For example, they could pay a lot of people to vote in one way or another, they have the money for advertising their point of view. There are a few other things their money can do to swing things their way, but all they need to do now, is maintain their control over just a few members of the government. These changes will make that a lot harder for them. As I’ve mentioned before, the greatest power is “the people”.
Summary
I’m not asking you to just trust this; research it! The truth is out there. These truths will be discovered either by research now, or by the collapse when it’s too late.
We need real democracy not pseudo-representation. Vote for issues not people. A government by the people for the people - you're right to set the government agenda [they want to hide this possibility from you]. In doing this we can then also deal with all those other issues. Only by your support can we take the power back and stop what will come if we don’t.
I have now enlightened you somewhat, it’s now up to you, do you want a better world? If so please act now.
I’ll finish with the words of Bill Murray “So if we lie to the government it’s a felony, but if they lie to us it’s politics.”
How do you contact us for more information or offer support?
Please click here www.howtogetthere.org/contact and fill in the box with your name, email and the words; “answers” (if you have answers to the questions below), “more future info" or “support for the future” (I don’t have a site specifically for this yet. I’ll create a page on this site soon with a better form, then given enough support I’ll create a website specifically for it.)
Could you also please answer these:
What if anything can be improved in either wording or concept?
Is there anything else that should be included? (other injustices etc.)
Would you forward this on and if not what changes would need to be made for you to forward this on?