The BREXIT vote is only a few days away and will have a profound impact on the future of the globe we are lead to believe.
Stalin's first criteria has been met - the illusion that the people are involved in the outcome suffices.
Those in power will decide when they count your votes.
To crack the illusion of those who cast the votes believing that their votes count, we need to establish where and how those in power claim their authority and legitimacy.
Authority is simply alluded to through the framework of international law which is controlled by those in power at any point in times -
From Wikipedia: In international law, a sovereign state is a nonphysical juridical entity that is represented by one centralized government that has sovereignty over a geographic area. ........ It is also normally understood that a sovereign state is neither dependent on nor subjected to any other power or state.
Legitimacy too is alluded through the same framework of international law which is controlled by those in power at any point in times -
A de jure government is the legal, legitimate government of a state and is so recognized by other states. In contrast, a de facto government is in actual possession of authority and control of the state.
From Wikipedia: De jure, or legal, sovereignty concerns the expressed and institutionally recognised right to exercise control over a territory. De facto, or actual, sovereignty is concerned with whether control in fact exists. Cooperation and respect of the populace; control of resources in, or moved into, an area; means of enforcement and security; and ability to carry out various functions of state all represent measures of de facto sovereignty. When control is practiced predominately by military or police force it is considered coercive sovereignty.
Thus de-jure sovereign is one who has a legal claim to sovereignty but does not possess it in fact while de-facto sovereign is one who has no legal claim to sovereignty but possesses it in fact and exercises necessary force to make and enforce its laws.
After the lapse of some time, when the de-facto sovereign shows sign of permanence and continuity and is able to acquire popular consent, either by democratic methods or by force, it will become de-jure sovereign as well and will be so recognized by other states.
From this, the source of power is purely based on international legal acceptance of other states governments or institutions exercising control over a territory. The illusion of legitimacy hence is purely one of who writes the rules and which team do you want to be in! So a legitimate government can be any form recognised by those in power of the club you want to be in! Nothing to do with the people who this legitimate government represents!
How is authority and legitimacy derived - through force and coercion of the club of international law...... from Wikipedia...
A number of modes of acquisition of sovereignty are presently or have historically been recognised by international law as lawful methods by which a state may acquire sovereignty over territory. The classification of these modes originally derived from Roman property law and from the 15th and 16th century with the development of international law. The modes are:
- Cessionis the transfer of territory from one state to another usually by means of treaty;
- Occupationis the acquisition of territory that belongs to no state, or terra nullius;
- Prescriptionis the effective control of territory of another acquiescing state;
- Operations of natureis the acquisition of territory through natural processes like river accretion or volcanism;
- Creationis the process by which new land is reclaimed from the sea such as in the Netherlands.
Limits of national jurisdiction and sovereignty
|national airspace||territorial waters airspace||contiguous zone airspace||international airspace|
|land territorysurface||internal waters surface||territorial waters surface||contiguous zone surface||Exclusive Economic Zone surface||international waters surface|
|internal waters||territorial waters||Exclusive economic zone||international waters|
|land territory underground||Continental shelf surface||extended continental shelfsurface||international seabedsurface|
|Continental shelf underground||extended continental shelfunderground||international seabedunderground|
full national jurisdiction and sovereignty
restrictions on national jurisdiction and sovereignty
international jurisdiction per common heritage of mankind
In Territorial Acquisition, Disputes, and International Law By Surya Prakash Sharma, he summarises it as follows;
"Territorial doctrines and dogmas at a particular time are the offspring of the attitude and conception of states and people at that time. As attitudes vary from time to time, so do the doctrines. In the process new doctrines emerge."
And from Wikipedia....
There exist vastly differing views on the moral basis of sovereignty. A fundamental polarity is between theories that assert that sovereignty is vested directly in the sovereign by divine or natural right and theories that assert it originates from the people. In the latter case there is a further division into those that assert that the people transfer their sovereignty to the sovereign (Hobbes), and those that assert that the people retain their sovereignty (Rousseau)
Are we ruled by claimed divine right, or our natural right, or have we transferred our natural right to the current sovereign?
Looking at the justice system will allow us something against which we can gauge international law and the sovereignty of the UK.
From the definition of a sovereign state is international law justly applied? The evidence and facts are that beyond a shadow of a doubt a resounding no. Many governments have been not only coercively, but even forcibly removed, to list but a few since 1990 - Bulgaria 1990, Albania 1991, Afghanistan 1980s, Somalia 1993, Yugoslavia 1999-2000, Ecuador 2000, Afghanistan 2001, Venezuela 2002, Iraq 2003, Haiti 2004, Somalia 2007 to present, Honduras 2009, Libya 2011, Syria 2012 to present, Ukraine 2014.......
So what is the value of international law? Without power to enforce it allows abuse and this is indeed happening.
There is some power greater than international law and the same applies to the UK, which by definition too is not a sovereign state as European and international law supersede British law.
There is simply no such thing as a sovereign state as power is derived through coercion and force by the biggest playground bullies!
It really does not matter if you are a conspiracy theorist of Illuminati, Bilderberg's, Rockerfellows, Goldman Sachs, 9/11 or 7/7 New World Order, Vaccinations, GMO, global warming, Fiat money or the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, if you understand how the illusion is played, you can start to see where the real power lies, but first.
What is power?
The degree of influence that an individual or organization has among their peers and within their society as a whole.
Read more: http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/social-power.html#ixzz4C1yDGj3C
Power very clearly is the ability to influence the behaviour of others.
Needs and wants
For this we need to go back to some basic realities. To physically survive we need food and water, and for the human race to survive a suitable environment to allow reproduction. That is it! Our instinct covers this as we will use whatever power we have to fulfil these natural needs. These are natural laws that an infinitesimally few of us can overcome. Everything beyond this is wants and NOT NEEDS.
We have the power physically to hunt and gather our food and water needs, and if limited in availability we may need to coerce others to fulfil this need. We must have a society for once we mature based on our reproductive needs, again we may need to coerce a partner to reproduce. Beyond this there is no need for power over others.
As we progressed from hunter gatherers and learned how to cultivate the land, society formed in a fixed geographic area and hence by today's international law met the criteria of sovereign states. Our needs had not changed, but as sovereign individuals we had to give up some of our natural right of doing what we wanted when we wanted how we wanted for the benefits of being in society as a means of managing conflict if any arose. The only possible area of conflict would have been if someone felt a natural injustice in the fulfilment of their needs. The benefits of being in society at this point could only be to overcome the fear of lack of needs - food, water and a suitable environment for reproduction.
Albert Schweitzer, noble peace prize laureate 1952, described this so well in his book "On the Edge of the Primeval Forest" based on his experiences in Africa.
" The negro, then, under certain circumstances works well, but only so long as circumstances require it. The child of nature -here is the answer to the puzzle - is always a casual worker.
In return for very little work nature supplies the native with nearly everything that he requires for his support in his village. The forest gives him wood, bamboos, raffia leaves, and bast for the building of a hut to shelter him from sun and rain. He has only to plant some bananas and manioc, to do a little fishing and shooting, in order to have by him all that he really needs, without having to hire himself out as a labourer and to earn regular wages. If he does take a situation, it is because he needs money for some particular object ; he wishes to buy a wife, or his wife, or his wives, want some fine dress material, or sugar, or tobacco; he himself wants a new axe, or hankers after rum or cheap spirits, or would like to wear boots and a suit of khaki.
There are, then, various needs differing in number with the individual, but all lying outside the regular struggle for existence, which bring the child of nature to hire himself out for work. If he has no definite object in view for which to earn money he stays in his village. If he is at work anywhere and finds that he has earned enough to supply his heart's desires, he has no reason for troubling himself any further, and he returns to his village, where he can always find board and lodging.
The negro, then, is not idle, but he is a free man ;hence he is always a casual worker, with whose labour no regular industry can be carried on."
How is power derived to influence others? By being able to fulfil a need for survival, or a want. There is no other way! Again from Albert Schweitzer's book...
" There is, therefore, a serious conflict between the needs of trade and the fact that the child of nature is a freeman. The wealth of the country cannot be exploited because the native has so slight an interest in the process. How train him to work ? How compel him ?
"Create in him as many needs as possible ; only so can the utmost possible be got out of him," say the State and commerce alike. The former imposes on him involuntary needs in the shape of taxes. With us every native above fourteen pays a poll tax of five francs a year, and it is proposed to double it. If that is done, a man with two wives and seven children will contribute £4 (100 francs) a year, and have to provide a corresponding amount either of labour or of products of the soil. The trader encourages voluntary needs in him by offering him wares of all sorts, useful ones such as clothing material or tools, unnecessary ones such as tobacco and toilet articles, and harmful ones like alcohol. The useful ones would never be enough to produce an amount of labour worth mentioning. Useless trifles and rum are almost more effective.
Just consider what sort of things are offered for sale in the forest ! Not long ago I got the negro who manages for a white man a little shop close to a small lake, miles away from civilisation, to show me all his stock. Behind the counter stood conspicuous the beautiful white painted cask of cheap spirits. Next to it stood the boxes of tobacco leaves and the tins of kerosene. Further on was a collection of knives, axes, saws, nails, screws, sewing machines, flat-irons, string for making fishing-nets, plates, glasses, enamelled dishes of all sizes, lamps, rice, tinned stuff of every variety, salt, sugar, blankets, dress material, muslin for mosquitoes, Gillette safety razors !, collars and ties in rich variety, blouses and chemises trimmed with lace, corsets, elegant shoes, openwork stockings, gramophones,, concertinas, and fancy articles of all sorts. Among the last named was a plate, resting on a stand, of which there were several dozen. " What is that ?" I asked. The negro moved a lever in the bottom part and a little musical box at once began to play. "This is my best paying article" said he. "All the women in the neighbourhood want one of these plates, and plague their husbands till they have earned enough to buy one !"
There really is very little on why people want power, and generally it seems to have its roots from needing control resulting from fear. That certainly is true when it comes to the application of gaining legitimacy of power to control. If we better understood it then possibly we could better control it.
Through history we can see this where needs fail to be met because of scarcity - either factually or perceived, which naturally would generate fear for survival.
In my experience a second source of fear is ego / pride where the fear is about losing face. This stems from a closed mind leading to lack of willingness to evaluate the best current knowledge and modifying ones behaviour to include best current knowledge. We are taught not to hurt others feelings in the things we say and hence as a society we do not learn how to deal with our pride. At the same time are taught to suppress our views and feelings through lying, and in growing up we see honesty does not pay!!! What a sick society.
Grossly simplified looking through history we can see how power has moved to those who generate fear into others to gain their legitimacy, initially beating one another over the head, then progressing to mind control games to generate the fear with gods and religion and after life, and now again the fear is generated through physical violence as the mind control becomes less effective.
Now re-read Albert Schweizer's analysis above. That is how simple it is - take away mans ability to freely fulfil his needs and generate wants! Look at everything around you and it is simple if you follow the money to see who is pulling the strings.
From William Engdahl " this cabal is one of many interconnected ones with fearsome power and ruthless intent to use it - Big Banks controlling the Federal Reserve and our money, Big Oil our world energy resources, Big Media our information, Big Pharma our health, Big Technology our state-of-the-art everything and watching us, Big Defense our wars, Big Pentagon waging them, and other corporate predators exploiting our lives for profit. "
To get a basic understanding of the big picture interconnectedness. There is no simple linear cause and affect. I would strongly suggest you spend an hour and a quarter and watch, were bar the 747 being a 757 which in other presentations must be a slip of the tongue I have verified plus more of what he says and it is substantiated by numerous sources - if you use google often you need to go into pages 2 or 3!
With new understanding we can start to look for solutions, but without understanding how we got here there is no peaceful way forward.
This is not about BREXIT - This is about how you want to live!
If the vote goes ahead - you remain in Europe and sink with Europe under the power of US Imperial Corporatism!
That will shortly be followed by people who have the courage of their beliefs and the UK will fall under Sharia law because those extreme radicals who claim to be Muslim have the courage of their convictions and ACT on their beliefs whatever you may think of them. The law of the jungle will take over as force is the only way they see of overthrowing the US corporate empire. They have the experience of this over the last 100 years, where Western extremism first controlled their natural resources and then through force made many de Facto states.
80% of the humans on the planet have the same basic value set. We will always have 10% extremist on either side and currently those extremists are Corporate Imperial US and extreme fundamental Islam! Do not fall for the divide and conquer strategy that has been used so often in the past- see the US corporate Imperials and the Fundamental Islam extremists for what they are.
What can you do in the 80% centre? Start by getting out of Europe. Then hold your politicians accountable for their actions under UK and international law. That means people like Obama, Merkel, Cameron, Blair and Bush, to name but a few (whether they were led by the cabal or not is irrelevant - if they dont want to stand trial then they must reveal their paymasters who should stand trial), should stand trial for where they have broken international law by invading sovereign countries plus the war crimes they were responsible for. Hold Israel to account for the holocaust of the Palestinians and their crimes against humanity. Just these simple steps will have a dramatic change on the peace on our planet! Further it will send a strong message to others that they will be held to account for their actions which will change their behaviour.
If you value what you have you must stand up and ensure those laws you value are upheld in total transparency. Then and only then will things start to change for the better. No one should be above the law as otherwise you create hatred. Without the rule of law the rule of the jungle takes over. This means we need to move from de Facto to de Jure governments - governments for the people by the people, and to stop repeating history where we always have ended in revolution we must accept our responsibility of controlling those we choose to represent us.
Take back your freedom to overcome your fears.