You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
I think this is a modern day misunderstanding to the source of certain issues. Many of these issues can be solved without the need for a dictator.
The prime issue today, this exists in most nations, is the federal reserve. http://i.imgur.com/eoChcXj.pngPNG This is the illegal usury that enslaves and oppressed all Americans. This stolen wealth (well over a trillion a year) goes directly to the owners of the federal reserve. This makes them the unseen oligarchy of the USA. This is why the .1% are so insanely wealthy and have more wealth than the bottom 90% combined.
This tiny group of people do not give a shit about you, nationalism or your people. A lot of people today see issues with their nation and economy and believe that the problem is a lack of communism or socialism. Really the issue is the federal reserve owners stealing immense amounts of wealth and inacting policies which undermine the value of the people.
It's true there is work needed to be done to solve these issues, but I believe it can be done without the need for a dictator. Maybe I am wrong, I ask myself this question daily. The only reference I have is commies versus nazis 1920s-1940s.
What I want to do is unify everyone in the USA and on Earth focused against the world bankers. There is an absurd amount of benefit to this idea that isn't trivial to explain. We want the majority of hispanics out of the USA, fair enough right? So the idea is to aid them with their tyranny and corruption once ours is dealt with. Not only will they happily go, nobody can shame you in the process. This is vital. It would also lay the ground work for proceeding towards other nations on Earth, Europe, South America, Africa (blacks) and so on.
The things I fear losing in the USA seem likely to be lost in course of a dictator rising to power. Dictators aren't trivial business once they come to power. The subject of the world bankers might be the most important subject on Earth, sadly so few seem to appreciate the gravity. What happened to Nazi Germany? I suppose Hitler kicked out the world bankers, guess what the world bankers did afterwards? If you don't take away their power globally, educate the fuck out of everyone on the topic on Earth, they will just fuck up the world and your nation no matter what you do.
Those who do not learn from histories mistakes are doomed to repeat them.
I agree with you to a point. A "benevolent dictatorship" is certainly not the answer, not to mention nothing more than a wet dream.
Where I differ is your assessment of the .1% versus the rest of us. Your forgetting something called the Pareto principe. It's basically a mathematical economic model that predicts that all of the money automatically flows to a smaller and smaller percentage as time goes on. This has been born out by observation of real life economic history.
Its basically this: obtaining wealth is very difficult, but once you have wealth, it's easier to become even more wealthy. An example would be in business, it's hard to start a business and make it successful. But once that business is successful, more people are more likely to buy your product/services, invest capital, etc.
Look at celebrities as another example, it's hard to become A-list. But once you do, your income grows exponentially, almost without even trying. People bend over backward to give them free products and services, that would cost the rest of us a hell of a lot of money, in the hopes that they drive up business. Which it actually does, so it's a win/win, and such opportunities are far, far more likely to present themselves once you are already wealthy and successful.
This Pareto principle also applies to productivity. Out of roughly 100 employees, about 20 of them are going to produce about 80% of the company product/service. As the company gets larger, the number of high producers in relation to number of employees gets even smaller.
Play a game of monopoly to see this principle in action.
Think of it as a form of evolution. Economically speaking, it's the survival, and thriving, of the fittest. Note: this is why communism and socialism ultimately fail. It's basically humans trying to circumvent the laws of nature, which might work for a time, but entropy gets its way in the end.
And there is no answer to the Pareto principle problem. Even when you try to redistribute from the top to stratify the wealth, production, etc. it just goes right back to the top.
You are right, I agree. I've thought about what you are referring to precisely. It's sometimes the conclusion of universal basic income paid for by taxes to 'the rich' which seems like one answer to this riddle, perhaps another relates to certain degrees of wealth limits. In the end, I don't really know what to call that, some hybrid of capitalism and socialism perhaps, maybe it's just a weak form of socialism, maybe you are absolutely right and I haven't put enough thought into the subject. Truthfully it's a subject I've feared and avoided to large degrees as so many other systems seem to go horribly wrong, I just hate the idea of concentrated power in the hands of few so the notion of a dictator pisses me off.
Some people try and say things like 'real communism has never been tried', although the definition of communism varies wildly from person to person. As I noted, I simply fear vastly too much power concentration, as the world bankers hold today.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] White-Supremacist ago
I think this is a modern day misunderstanding to the source of certain issues. Many of these issues can be solved without the need for a dictator.
The prime issue today, this exists in most nations, is the federal reserve. http://i.imgur.com/eoChcXj.pngPNG This is the illegal usury that enslaves and oppressed all Americans. This stolen wealth (well over a trillion a year) goes directly to the owners of the federal reserve. This makes them the unseen oligarchy of the USA. This is why the .1% are so insanely wealthy and have more wealth than the bottom 90% combined.
This tiny group of people do not give a shit about you, nationalism or your people. A lot of people today see issues with their nation and economy and believe that the problem is a lack of communism or socialism. Really the issue is the federal reserve owners stealing immense amounts of wealth and inacting policies which undermine the value of the people.
It's true there is work needed to be done to solve these issues, but I believe it can be done without the need for a dictator. Maybe I am wrong, I ask myself this question daily. The only reference I have is commies versus nazis 1920s-1940s.
What I want to do is unify everyone in the USA and on Earth focused against the world bankers. There is an absurd amount of benefit to this idea that isn't trivial to explain. We want the majority of hispanics out of the USA, fair enough right? So the idea is to aid them with their tyranny and corruption once ours is dealt with. Not only will they happily go, nobody can shame you in the process. This is vital. It would also lay the ground work for proceeding towards other nations on Earth, Europe, South America, Africa (blacks) and so on.
The things I fear losing in the USA seem likely to be lost in course of a dictator rising to power. Dictators aren't trivial business once they come to power. The subject of the world bankers might be the most important subject on Earth, sadly so few seem to appreciate the gravity. What happened to Nazi Germany? I suppose Hitler kicked out the world bankers, guess what the world bankers did afterwards? If you don't take away their power globally, educate the fuck out of everyone on the topic on Earth, they will just fuck up the world and your nation no matter what you do.
Those who do not learn from histories mistakes are doomed to repeat them.
[–] 10469895? 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I agree with you to a point. A "benevolent dictatorship" is certainly not the answer, not to mention nothing more than a wet dream.
Where I differ is your assessment of the .1% versus the rest of us. Your forgetting something called the Pareto principe. It's basically a mathematical economic model that predicts that all of the money automatically flows to a smaller and smaller percentage as time goes on. This has been born out by observation of real life economic history.
Its basically this: obtaining wealth is very difficult, but once you have wealth, it's easier to become even more wealthy. An example would be in business, it's hard to start a business and make it successful. But once that business is successful, more people are more likely to buy your product/services, invest capital, etc.
Look at celebrities as another example, it's hard to become A-list. But once you do, your income grows exponentially, almost without even trying. People bend over backward to give them free products and services, that would cost the rest of us a hell of a lot of money, in the hopes that they drive up business. Which it actually does, so it's a win/win, and such opportunities are far, far more likely to present themselves once you are already wealthy and successful.
This Pareto principle also applies to productivity. Out of roughly 100 employees, about 20 of them are going to produce about 80% of the company product/service. As the company gets larger, the number of high producers in relation to number of employees gets even smaller.
Play a game of monopoly to see this principle in action.
Think of it as a form of evolution. Economically speaking, it's the survival, and thriving, of the fittest. Note: this is why communism and socialism ultimately fail. It's basically humans trying to circumvent the laws of nature, which might work for a time, but entropy gets its way in the end.
And there is no answer to the Pareto principle problem. Even when you try to redistribute from the top to stratify the wealth, production, etc. it just goes right back to the top.
I despise Wikipedia, but it provides a decent explanation of the principle, go to the Applications tab to slip the mathematical jargon. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_distribution
[–] White-Supremacist 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
You are right, I agree. I've thought about what you are referring to precisely. It's sometimes the conclusion of universal basic income paid for by taxes to 'the rich' which seems like one answer to this riddle, perhaps another relates to certain degrees of wealth limits. In the end, I don't really know what to call that, some hybrid of capitalism and socialism perhaps, maybe it's just a weak form of socialism, maybe you are absolutely right and I haven't put enough thought into the subject. Truthfully it's a subject I've feared and avoided to large degrees as so many other systems seem to go horribly wrong, I just hate the idea of concentrated power in the hands of few so the notion of a dictator pisses me off.
Some people try and say things like 'real communism has never been tried', although the definition of communism varies wildly from person to person. As I noted, I simply fear vastly too much power concentration, as the world bankers hold today.