On the scam that is globalism and collectivism

[Andrew-Austin]

The supposed intent of collectivism is to pursue the "greater good".
The supposed intent of global government is to pursue "global interests", as opposed to the selfishness of "national interests".

What happens today when politicians claim to act in the "national interest"? Nothing good, and the same will apply when Congressmen and Prime Ministers fill in the blank that is "global interests". The results will be even more corrupt and outlandish because there won't be the slightest thread of representation going on whatsoever for "we the people". Think of the enormous diversity b/w countries, the diversity of cultures within countries, the diversity of regional states within countries, and the diversity of individuals in countries.


The idea of representative democracy itself is retarded, when "representatives" don't even need to vote in alliance with their constituent's views. There is no mystical mandate that just disappears when the next election cycle comes around. How can we call someone a Representative if their actions don't even represent the will of the majority? And if the majority does agree with them, what about the 40% that do not? It is still said that they have a Representative, even though that Representative might be doing the exact opposite of what they wish him to do. The same obviously applies to the individual constituent.

The "greater good" and "global interests" are unknowns, and they can never be known in the democratic sense.

If you and me (mere peons that we are) were to try and define what is in the interests of the entire planet, our definition of the greater good would be dismissed by those in power as selfish. They would say that we're failing to see the bigger picture.

If hypothetically a majority of Americans got together and wrote a platform detailing what they thought were in the interests of the entire planet, it too could be rejected by those with governmental power as failing to see the bigger global picture.

Only the elites can fill in the blank, only they can be right. For you see they have this mandate to be kings.

Its a big fucking scam on us, and its also a pipe dream that is going to fall apart.

Secession is the only way forward. Looking at how things are going, even if there isn't a global consolidation of power I'd say it is a likelihood. Its a certainty if the elites act upon their fantasies of global governance. Even if we the people initially don't resist it very much, the system itself will create the pandemonium that invites secession.

[Andrew-Austin]

I shamelessly bumping my own post, which was probably just preaching to the choir anyways, and adding Red Stripe's concurring post from another thread that is better than mine:


Damn. I wish I was smoking the fine herb, but unfortunately I'm limited to beer at the moment.



It's crazy how many people think that they really are the "leaders" or the instigators of social change (probably because the elites like to give the impression that they are so powerful), when in fact they are just parasites and reactionaries who are like midgets trying to ride on a wild bull. They are constantly being discarded because humanity is becoming increasingly difficult to rule over, which is great.



Think of "belief in the legitimacy of central political authority" as the modern equivalent of what primitive tribal societies believe about witchcraft and sun gods - in other words, it's just a stupid, superstitious phase we are going through (that may have served a purpose at some point, but is waaaay outdated). That phase is beginning to end.

The first major shift was the enlightenment period in Europe. The next major shift will occur when enough people realize that what we replaced monarchy with - democratic constitutional republics - are pretty shitty too, and that there is a better way of achieving social control.

Just as the development of the hard science undermined the moral authority of religion, the development of the social sciences, especially economics, undermines the moral legitimacy of the state. In addition, this entire transition to a stateless society has been taking place in a relatively short period of time. Shit. It took us thousands of years to master fire. To think that our attitudes about social relations could generally change in a matter of a few generations is a testament to how developed our information systems have become.

Some of the reaction against post-enlightenment forms of government has been to conclude that the solution is world government - but that solution isn't really 'new'. The idea of international institutions regulating the conduct of nation-states has been peddled by many establishment intellectuals for well over a century, but it has always had massive shortcomings. While the ideological foundation of the independent nation-state has been almost completely eroded, the ideological foundation of international political authority is quickly following. After all, the former is the logical basis of the latter.

As far as the U.S. Empire - er, Republic - goes, you have good reason to be concerned. The US will collapse in a similar manner and for a similar reason as the USSR collapsed. It should be no surprise. Every other over-extended empire in the history of the world has collapsed because their managers came to believe their own propaganda and made foolish decisions accordingly. Good riddance.

One thing I really like about Ron Paul is the fact that he understands that the bankruptcy of the United States (and ensuing financial/social chaos) is basically inevitable, yet he wants it to happen as peacefully as possible. The reason is, the more peaceful the collapse the better chances there are of establishing a new society that is founded on the principles of individual freedom.