I agree with your points on decentralisation being of paramount importance to reform power structures everywhere. The issue of states having the monopoly on violence is the trickiest part of how to effectively mount civil disobedience. I think the volume of people engaged in this has to overwhelm the enforcers to such an extent that their diminished moral compass would be reactivated if they were inflicting violence on unarmed peaceful masses hitting the streets.
I think at this stage the only option is try our utmost to not engage with the centralised authority's efforts to bait us, to ignore as widely as possible the bio-digital surveillance state, and rather than try to change any existing systems, we need to build our own and turn away from centralised institutions.
Across education, medicine, agriculture, finance, and community. Although it would be naïve to believe that state power wouldn't also move to pursue outliers and crush efforts to build parallel economies and decentralised communities. I accept that. We can but try.
Like Austrian Peter said, what's in your heart is most important. Sharing what's inside, what you really hold to be true, with others. Making people realise that all the polarisations are engineered, manipulated, and fakery. We cannot fight an enemy we cannot see with violence - ok, we know about WEF and multiple other three letter institutions, but they are embedded globally everywhere at local to national level, across all institutions and regulatory capture.
We can only turn away and build something new. And if they crush it. We'll build it again and again ad infinitum, until the NPC community is pushed far enough that they wake up and join us too.
This is a commendable ethos in the traditional of MLK Jr. Certainly direct, violent challenges to the current corporate state are not likely to end well for anyone given the abundance of nukes, engineered viruses and whatever else they have in their back pocket
The labels don't matter Ben. All that matters is what is in your heart.
But why did Paul say that this kind of love was greater than faith? He wrote at 1 Corinthians 13:2: “If I have the gift of prophesying and am acquainted with all the sacred secrets and all knowledge, and if I have all the faith so as to transplant mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.” (Compare Matthew 17:20.) Yes, if our efforts to acquire knowledge and grow in faith were to be undertaken for a selfish purpose, this would bring us no benefit from God. Similarly, Jesus showed that some would ‘prophesy in his name, expel demons in his name, and perform many powerful works in his name’ but would not have his approval.—Matthew 7:22, 23.
I do think the individual morality or "love" of the members of any system no matter the specific mechanics of it largely determines the outcome. Politics is downstream of culture.
They say that love conquers all, Ben. Let's see if it works against the WEF! But I have found this little book very helpful for my counselling clients:
Interesting stuff to ponder on, the idea of an anarchic society, because as a society, how would it grow and prosper? The very idea of any society which would work in a practical sense would of necessity require certain fundamental disciplines in order for it to have order. The world population is so large that, if we are all to survive and thrive we would be obliged to establish fundamental, universal rules, otherwise nothing would work. How do you organise and run energy generation and distribution? Food cultivation? Manufacturing? The anythings and everythings which make the world work currently? Most orderly systems require a chain of command, a working hierarchy to ensure that they work efficiently. If we are to maintain a world in which everyone can live comfortably and peacefully, it's not going to work organically, it's going to need leaders, organisers, most of the paraphernalia we have now. Somehow we have to construct a capitalist society run by benign, like-minded people who won't be pursuing self-enrichment above all else, although of course there will still be rich people, more successful people, that's human nature, we compete in almost very area of life. I have no idea how we build a money-based, non-communist philosophy from scratch, but I fervently hope that someone does!
What you are describing sounds like a globalized singular state, which i don't believe is possible without turning into a dystopian technocratic hellscape. I'm much more optimistic about more localized levels of organization.
My comment could be interpreted in that way, I was thinking more along the lines of Sovereign Nation States, a bit like what we had before the Globalists began screwing things up, but more benign, friendlier, mutually trusting and trustworthy, stuff like that. However you cut it, and however large or small these communities are, You still need people "in charge", I can't see a way round that. Plus we're all aware of the definition of a camel: "A horse, designed by a committee. "
I agree with your points on decentralisation being of paramount importance to reform power structures everywhere. The issue of states having the monopoly on violence is the trickiest part of how to effectively mount civil disobedience. I think the volume of people engaged in this has to overwhelm the enforcers to such an extent that their diminished moral compass would be reactivated if they were inflicting violence on unarmed peaceful masses hitting the streets.
I think at this stage the only option is try our utmost to not engage with the centralised authority's efforts to bait us, to ignore as widely as possible the bio-digital surveillance state, and rather than try to change any existing systems, we need to build our own and turn away from centralised institutions.
Across education, medicine, agriculture, finance, and community. Although it would be naïve to believe that state power wouldn't also move to pursue outliers and crush efforts to build parallel economies and decentralised communities. I accept that. We can but try.
Like Austrian Peter said, what's in your heart is most important. Sharing what's inside, what you really hold to be true, with others. Making people realise that all the polarisations are engineered, manipulated, and fakery. We cannot fight an enemy we cannot see with violence - ok, we know about WEF and multiple other three letter institutions, but they are embedded globally everywhere at local to national level, across all institutions and regulatory capture.
We can only turn away and build something new. And if they crush it. We'll build it again and again ad infinitum, until the NPC community is pushed far enough that they wake up and join us too.
This is a commendable ethos in the traditional of MLK Jr. Certainly direct, violent challenges to the current corporate state are not likely to end well for anyone given the abundance of nukes, engineered viruses and whatever else they have in their back pocket
The labels don't matter Ben. All that matters is what is in your heart.
But why did Paul say that this kind of love was greater than faith? He wrote at 1 Corinthians 13:2: “If I have the gift of prophesying and am acquainted with all the sacred secrets and all knowledge, and if I have all the faith so as to transplant mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.” (Compare Matthew 17:20.) Yes, if our efforts to acquire knowledge and grow in faith were to be undertaken for a selfish purpose, this would bring us no benefit from God. Similarly, Jesus showed that some would ‘prophesy in his name, expel demons in his name, and perform many powerful works in his name’ but would not have his approval.—Matthew 7:22, 23.
I do think the individual morality or "love" of the members of any system no matter the specific mechanics of it largely determines the outcome. Politics is downstream of culture.
They say that love conquers all, Ben. Let's see if it works against the WEF! But I have found this little book very helpful for my counselling clients:
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Love-Letting-Fear-Gerald-Jampolsky/dp/158761118X
Interesting stuff to ponder on, the idea of an anarchic society, because as a society, how would it grow and prosper? The very idea of any society which would work in a practical sense would of necessity require certain fundamental disciplines in order for it to have order. The world population is so large that, if we are all to survive and thrive we would be obliged to establish fundamental, universal rules, otherwise nothing would work. How do you organise and run energy generation and distribution? Food cultivation? Manufacturing? The anythings and everythings which make the world work currently? Most orderly systems require a chain of command, a working hierarchy to ensure that they work efficiently. If we are to maintain a world in which everyone can live comfortably and peacefully, it's not going to work organically, it's going to need leaders, organisers, most of the paraphernalia we have now. Somehow we have to construct a capitalist society run by benign, like-minded people who won't be pursuing self-enrichment above all else, although of course there will still be rich people, more successful people, that's human nature, we compete in almost very area of life. I have no idea how we build a money-based, non-communist philosophy from scratch, but I fervently hope that someone does!
There are no easy answers.
What you are describing sounds like a globalized singular state, which i don't believe is possible without turning into a dystopian technocratic hellscape. I'm much more optimistic about more localized levels of organization.
My comment could be interpreted in that way, I was thinking more along the lines of Sovereign Nation States, a bit like what we had before the Globalists began screwing things up, but more benign, friendlier, mutually trusting and trustworthy, stuff like that. However you cut it, and however large or small these communities are, You still need people "in charge", I can't see a way round that. Plus we're all aware of the definition of a camel: "A horse, designed by a committee. "