Tweet
I voted once and it was my first, last and only time I voted, in 2000.
I have vowed to never vote, as all that I stand for in principle would be at stake.
Individuals are and have always been the enemy, whether of monarchies or empires, or governments of today be they socialistic, democratic, communistic, or fascistic, or what have you.
Hermann Goering had some insight:
"Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
Doesn't that sound awfully similar to the situation here in America? So tyrannical governemnts one can understand leaders garnering the masses to aid them for war, but in democracies? We literally vote ourselves for war, if you think about it. So what does this mean? This poses a problem for the politicos or statists who indulge themselves with the delusions that there are "different" political systems and if you don't like one you can choose another. But they all lead down towards the same path of destructiveness and haven't improved humanity. How have political systems benefited humanity or institutions for that matter? I still haven't gotten an answer to this aside from "public works" or "firemen".
There is only one other alternative but people are afraid for that, which would mean a total revolution of how they think. All too often people have revolutions of one political system being replaced with another, but the thinking never changes, just the outer workings of things, never inner workings.
I have vowed to never vote, as all that I stand for in principle would be at stake.
Individuals are and have always been the enemy, whether of monarchies or empires, or governments of today be they socialistic, democratic, communistic, or fascistic, or what have you.
Hermann Goering had some insight:
"Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."
Doesn't that sound awfully similar to the situation here in America? So tyrannical governemnts one can understand leaders garnering the masses to aid them for war, but in democracies? We literally vote ourselves for war, if you think about it. So what does this mean? This poses a problem for the politicos or statists who indulge themselves with the delusions that there are "different" political systems and if you don't like one you can choose another. But they all lead down towards the same path of destructiveness and haven't improved humanity. How have political systems benefited humanity or institutions for that matter? I still haven't gotten an answer to this aside from "public works" or "firemen".
There is only one other alternative but people are afraid for that, which would mean a total revolution of how they think. All too often people have revolutions of one political system being replaced with another, but the thinking never changes, just the outer workings of things, never inner workings.
Comment