15 Questions That Are More Useful Than “What Presidential Candidate Should Americans Vote For
Posted by freedomforall 10 months, 1 week ago to Government
Here are 15 such questions:
1. Why does nothing change no matter who we vote for?
2. Why does US foreign policy always continue along the same trajectory regardless of the president’s party or platform?
3. What keeps our voting population split right down the middle into two political factions of equal size, with neither side ever gaining enough of a majority to democratically change society in any meaningful way?
4. Why does the stalemate described in #3 always seem to benefit the rich, the powerful, and the war-horny?
5. Why is it that the most consequential US government policies like plutocratic influence, privatization, globalization, ecocidal capitalism and nuclear brinkmanship are never on the ballot? Why do these things keep happening, against our interests, without our ever voting for them or electing anyone who campaigned on the pledge to enact them?
6. If our federal government’s behavior never changes no matter who we elect, could it be that there are other bodies involved in government policy-setting whom we did not elect, and who remain in positions of influence regardless of the comings and goings of our official elected government?
7. If the above is the case, then who is it? Who’s really calling the shots in this country?
8. Could it be that everything we’ve been told about our country, our government, our political processes and our world is untrue?
9. If so, what are the implications of the fact that our schools and our media have been feeding us lies since we were small?
10. What forces would be responsible for keeping all these lies flowing throughout our society? What might keep an ostensibly free press spinning more or less the same lies throughout the western world day after day, year after year, generation after generation?
11. Is it possible that our entire electoral system is a sham designed to give the public the illusion of control so that they’ll let oligarchs and empire managers run the country undisturbed?
12. If the electoral system is a sham, then how do we enact the changes we so desperately need?
13. Is it possible that there are other ways to effect change in the United States which don’t involve casting a pretend vote in a fake election?
14. Could it be that those other means of forcing change are precisely what the charade of casting pretend votes in fake elections is meant to divert us from?
15. Should we perhaps spend less energy bickering about who should get sworn into the White House a year and a half from now, and more energy examining other possible avenues toward advancing meaningful change?
1. Why does nothing change no matter who we vote for?
2. Why does US foreign policy always continue along the same trajectory regardless of the president’s party or platform?
3. What keeps our voting population split right down the middle into two political factions of equal size, with neither side ever gaining enough of a majority to democratically change society in any meaningful way?
4. Why does the stalemate described in #3 always seem to benefit the rich, the powerful, and the war-horny?
5. Why is it that the most consequential US government policies like plutocratic influence, privatization, globalization, ecocidal capitalism and nuclear brinkmanship are never on the ballot? Why do these things keep happening, against our interests, without our ever voting for them or electing anyone who campaigned on the pledge to enact them?
6. If our federal government’s behavior never changes no matter who we elect, could it be that there are other bodies involved in government policy-setting whom we did not elect, and who remain in positions of influence regardless of the comings and goings of our official elected government?
7. If the above is the case, then who is it? Who’s really calling the shots in this country?
8. Could it be that everything we’ve been told about our country, our government, our political processes and our world is untrue?
9. If so, what are the implications of the fact that our schools and our media have been feeding us lies since we were small?
10. What forces would be responsible for keeping all these lies flowing throughout our society? What might keep an ostensibly free press spinning more or less the same lies throughout the western world day after day, year after year, generation after generation?
11. Is it possible that our entire electoral system is a sham designed to give the public the illusion of control so that they’ll let oligarchs and empire managers run the country undisturbed?
12. If the electoral system is a sham, then how do we enact the changes we so desperately need?
13. Is it possible that there are other ways to effect change in the United States which don’t involve casting a pretend vote in a fake election?
14. Could it be that those other means of forcing change are precisely what the charade of casting pretend votes in fake elections is meant to divert us from?
15. Should we perhaps spend less energy bickering about who should get sworn into the White House a year and a half from now, and more energy examining other possible avenues toward advancing meaningful change?
but he was surrounded on all side by traitors
dems
RINOs
the world was safer with him if office
The patently illegal and unconstitutional lengths they (the cabal) are going after to keep him out of office tells you everything you need to know.
Trump was/is different.
If we don't get him back in the big chair, we are well and truly screwed.
They always say: "this is the most important election ever" This time it is coming from Gods lips to your ears.
The permanent bureaucrats - elected officials come and go but the Anthony Faucis stay on and on and decide how you should live.
This quote by C S Lewis sums it up nicely:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. .."
It's obviously for the benefit of the tyrants and their conspirators.
I might say instead that the worst form of slavery is the one in which the slaves are brainwashed to feel they are free.
"... If you learn how to rule one single man’s soul, you can get the rest of mankind. It’s the soul, Peter, the soul. Not whips or swords or fire or guns. That’s why the Caesars, the attilas, the Napoleons were fools and did not last. We will. The soul, Peter, is that which can’t be ruled. It must be broken. Drive a wedge in, get your fingers on it – and the man is yours. You won’t need a whip – he’ll bring it to you and ask to be whipped. Set him in reverse – and his own mechanism will do your work for you. Use him against himself. Want to know how it’s done? See if I ever lied to you. See if you haven’t heard all this for years, but didn’t want to hear, and the fault is yours, not mine..."
To the dictator its the best form of slavery
About 70 years ago I was taught that this democratic republic could only last about 250 years. We're just about there. Either we accept it, or we do something drastic to fix it, like Trump, like it or not. I'm almost tempted to open the cellophane sealed, "Trump, The Game" that I have on my bookcase to see how it's all going to pan out.
So to give my view as an adherent to Rand's philosophy since roughly 1978 (and... my view, a.k.a. YMMV,) I'll do it by the numbers:
1. Because: Philosophy. The people pushed in front of us as "nominees" have, since election year 1988, been people utterly devoid of the most rudimentary grasp even of core Republican principles, to say nothing of a coherent underlying philosophy. So we get finger-to-the-wind pragmatists like GHWB, Robert Dole, GWB, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Donald Trump instead of principled political leaders with coherent philosophical foundations, or even coherent worldviews. Shorn of that absolutely essential philosophic foundation, they're invariably pushing pragmatists' agendas resting on intellectual quicksand, with varying and utterly unpredictable degrees of effectiveness, mostly on the negative end of the scale. Which of course the collectivists - who despite espousing gutter evil are typically far more consistent in their evil - make mincemeat of that pragmatic hash. And here we are, in what Dennis Prager correctly calls The Age of Stupidity.
2. See #1, above.
3. Because of #1 above, we have had no Republican Presidential "nominee" in 35+ years who even seems cognizant of the fact that our "educational" establishment is the single point source for the poisoning of roughly 50% - and growing - of the population with the fraud of Howard Zinn and the misanthropic snake oil of Albert Gore. To say nothing of having the faintest clue that maybe, sorta, kinda, it might be a good idea to, you know, have a little peek at the garbage that's been and is being shoveled into the unsuspecting heads of American students? Maybe? Trump was completely oblivious even to the existence of a problem until two months before his 2020 loss. So he tossed out a hazy, lame-arse nothing called "Patriotic Education," seemingly as a panicky afterthought. Thirty-five years is just a damn long time for the erstwhile Leader Of The Free World to go without a President worthy of the office. I'm surprised we've lasted this long, actually.
4. "Rich" is a consequence of rights and liberty, an indicator of at least a certain level of virtue, and therefore no automatic badge of this kind of unspecified allegation; "the powerful" of necessity refers to that which is political because there is no other legal "power" in existence, and enhancement of political power arising from an educationally-divided populace is... see the Republican default on dealing with the corruption of education as referenced in #1; and... "war-horny" is unintelligible outside of hippie-dippy pacifism. I don't think I've ever seen or heard this particular leftwing phantom, so the term begs exposition. I won't go into War & Peace because I already do a good job of emulating that in verbosity, but suffice it to say that recognition of National Defense as the #1 ichiban purpose for which governments are instituted at all, per the Declaration, is not "warmongering" or "war-horniness" or whatever other epithet anyone cares to spew. We either defend ourselves or we die. Period.
5. Aside from the jaw-dropping package-deal contained in the litany in this one, again see #1. Ballots can't deal with every issue. That's why we have - or are supposed to have - political leaders who can apply a cohesive underlying philosophical framework to all of these issues and provide concrete leadership and action on them. Instead we've had a 35-year clown-parade masquerading as "GOP Presidential nominees" and, sadly, Presidents. And to address a couple of the worst on the litany:
- The proposition "ecocidal capitalism" is, on its face, an ethical atrocity. No, the sky is not falling. No, we have not magically invented planetary terraforming... by accident(!) No, the planet does not need "saving" (see the classic George Carlin "Saving the Planet" routine on YT for pithy details - and then George Reisman's voluminous and far more consistent work on the subject.) No, we do not need to prostrate ourselves before the Glorious Socialists and tell them "Yes, EvilGreedyCapitalism is wrong after all and since only Glorious Socialism can save the planet and prevent the sky from falling and put us evilgreedycapitalist humans back in our humble places, yes, we agree that Glorious Socialism Is The Way To Go, huzzah!" Go watch Henrik Svensmark's "The Cloud Mystery" fer cryin' out loud. There's this big round hot thing that crosses the sky every day and it, along with the rest of the universe, is constantly spewing radiation at the Earth and the intensity varies dramatically over time. Which does stuff to the atmosphere and temperature. Several powers-of-ten greater in impact on planetary temperature than the infinitesimal blip that is the sum total of human industrial output over the last several millennia. But the Schneideresque "scary story" that "The SKY is falling! Auuggh! And we EvilGreedyHumans did it!" is an absolutely vital narrative in the post-Soviet-collapse conquest of capitalism and of the human race. a+b=x. Solve for X.
- Privatization is almost invariably a massive positive.
- "Nuclear brinksmanship," unless the criticism is directed at, you know, the (invariably collectivistic) aggressors who make nuclear weapons necessary in the first place, is also ethically contemptible. You do not blame a rape victim for shooting mace at her attacker or for carrying mace in the first place. Not if you want to be this side of morally obscene.
Geez, I'm likely already beyond the length limit for this form and I'm only 1/3 of the way through the list. I'll leave it at an even(?) five for now because I have a ton of other stuff I need to get done tonight.
But hopefully I've offered some things to think about. I really cannot stress enough the importance of delving into the work of Ayn Rand - because these questions cannot be addressed properly, much less answered, without that preliminary homework.
.
BTW, just ask yourself, who benefits?
That's the question.
Also, notice they NEVER dig in and TRULY investigate what WE WANT TO KNOW...
For example, did the Vaxx trials add the "Not vaccinated until 14 days after the second dose WHILE the study was going on, so they could claim the unvaccinated were dying/getting sick?"
Timing is everything.
Who, exactly, published that Rubbish Lancet Article that halted all of the HQC/IVM studies?
Who emailed them? Of those people, who got RENEWED Grants (from WHO and Gates, etc)
This stuff is KNOWABLE.
But so is every OTHER Camera of who came and left, and who spoke to whom around Epstein. We will never know, because "THEY" control who gets investigated.
We are officially enslaved. I wonder if we will work (or fight) our way out of it.
A Quote To Remember
Edward Mandel House
He said in a letter to President Woodrow Wilson [1913-1921]:
"[Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a National system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge-back for our fiat paper currency.
Every American will be forced to register or suffer not being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel, and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans; and, if by accident one or two would figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability.
After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the regstrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud, which we will call "Social Insurance (SSI)".
Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur, and in this manner every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption; and we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America."
Any questions?
Anything other than that is not money, but the fedgov passed "legal tender" law that forces
people to accept Federal Reserve Notes as legal currency for transactions.
That may give leeway needed to replace paper FRNs with digital FRNs or it may require
con-gress to act again to destroy the currency and to control all trade.
The Constitution’s Article 1, Section 10 prohibits the states from coining money, issuing
bills of credit, making anything but gold and silver coin a tender in payment of debts,
or passing any law impairing the obligation of contracts.
It seems that under the constitution a state currency of silver/gold would be legal, but the
(arguably unconstitutional) legal tender laws may disagree.
I don't know if that exiting law means that any non-FRN local currency is "illegal" for trade
transactions, but the fedgov has shown repeatedly that they have no respect for the
constitution if it impedes their power to enslave the people.
If the swamp really wants to see massive street violence and bloodshed, start messing with their right to buy and sell, well, anything.
I think most stores would shutter their shops rather than face hostel customers that refuse cbdc's and all the government spying and invasive control they imply.
Most of the rest are "yes." Talking about #13 will get you disappeared.
Unfortunately, it's still working well enough to prevent the People
from appropriately punishing the traitors and regaining some freedom.
― Abraham Lincoln"
Of course the liars and looters attack whether or not Lincoln said it, instead of address the main point.
No joke.
The two parties are simply marketing organizations competing with each other for contributions in hopes of winning political power that can be "sold" to current and future donors.
The problem is that we have allowed the government to have political power that can take from one and give to another. Onc that system is in place, the parties pick their platforms and their propaganda to "get" 50.1% of the people to vote their candidates in and satisfy their donors. Its a crooked as you can get, really.
The primaries are just to help the two parties to help finalize their selection of issues and candidates by "testing" how things would go using different candidates. Its a joke really. Of the people running on 2020 democratic side, biden and cackling kamala were the two least liked candidates, yet they got the democratic donor money.
the same people count the votes