Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Lawful Rebellion / Non Compliance / Sovereignty

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 26-01-2012, 08:14 PM   #1
h2pogo
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,650
Likes: 1,189 (670 Posts)
Default Its simple.

We are the victims of Crime, they are the criminals.

This guy says what i been trying to say for years really well.

h2pogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 08:24 PM   #2
firstworldproblems
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 929
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

He's right. Anarchy is simple.
__________________
What? I need to carry a piece a paper? Slavery!
firstworldproblems is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 08:29 PM   #3
h2pogo
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,650
Likes: 1,189 (670 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by firstworldproblems View Post
He's right. Anarchy is simple.
As long as people act with respect and responsibly I can see little problem.
h2pogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 08:32 PM   #4
firstworldproblems
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 929
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

And that's simplistic.
firstworldproblems is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 08:34 PM   #5
undeadcreature
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,679
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by h2pogo View Post
As long as people act with respect and responsibly I can see little problem.
And a lot of people would agree with you,
The problem is though, society has always had a small number of people who want to take advantage of you.
Until every single person thinks in exactly the same way, society will always need to control/govern it's members.
__________________
The problem with a revolution is that you always end up back where you started and ultimately........ bugger all changes....
undeadcreature is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 08:42 PM   #6
h2pogo
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,650
Likes: 1,189 (670 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by undeadcreature View Post
And a lot of people would agree with you,
The problem is though, society has always had a small number of people who want to take advantage of you.
Until every single person thinks in exactly the same way, society will always need to control/govern it's members.
Lets hope one day it will be volentary and no one can force their will on another.
I cant see why loads of societys cant contine to co exist in peace as they always have.
h2pogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 08:47 PM   #7
undeadcreature
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 1,679
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by h2pogo View Post
Lets hope one day it will be volentary and no one can force their will on another.
I cant see why loads of societys cant contine to co exist in peace as they always have.
But that is the problem, societies (and individuals for that matter) cannot coexist peacfully when one has something the other needs/wants.

Millenia of wars and conquest should tell you that.
__________________
The problem with a revolution is that you always end up back where you started and ultimately........ bugger all changes....
undeadcreature is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 09:01 PM   #8
h2pogo
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,650
Likes: 1,189 (670 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by undeadcreature View Post
But that is the problem, societies (and individuals for that matter) cannot coexist peacfully when one has something the other needs/wants.

Millenia of wars and conquest should tell you that.
Millenia of monarchy and fake democracy have indeed proven their worth..

In the few examples of co-operative authority of the people regimes many cultures coexisted relativley peacefully..

it comes back to people forcing their will.
h2pogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 09:07 PM   #9
reverendjim
Inactive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: canada
Posts: 8,306
Likes: 1,348 (822 Posts)
Default

He's right. Anarchy is simple.

yes it is

As long as people act with respect and responsibly I can see little problem.

true

And that's simplistic.

yes it is...and the simplest things work the best

And a lot of people would agree with you,
The problem is though, society has always had a small number of people who want to take advantage of you.

yes, and the worst small group who take advantage are governments
Until every single person thinks in exactly the same way, society will always need to control/govern it's members.
yes, and its members who seem to need governing also seem to be doing the governing

Lets hope one day it will be volentary and no one can force their will on another.one can always hope
I cant see why loads of societys cant contine to co exist in peace as they always have.well, they always have after one fashion or another, but it seems to depend on how much power their governing members have

But that is the problem, societies (and individuals for that matter) cannot coexist peacfully when one has something the other needs/wants.once again, it depends on how much power the governing members have and how it balances with those they govern

Millenia of wars and conquest should tell you thatmillenia of war and conquest...on whoes heads? surely on the heads those members of society who governed not those who were governed


Last edited by reverendjim; 26-01-2012 at 09:08 PM.
reverendjim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 09:15 PM   #10
firstworldproblems
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 929
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/simplistic
__________________
What? I need to carry a piece a paper? Slavery!
firstworldproblems is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 11:28 PM   #11
solzhenitsyn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,090
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

In the end, the current existence of at least some form of government/warlord over every square inch of the earth is fairly compelling evidence that anarchy is pretty difficult to achieve. There appears to be a substantial cohort of people who crave power over other people and are willing to go to pretty extreme lengths to get it. Anarchy is not likely to last long with those sorts of people around.
solzhenitsyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 11:44 PM   #12
h2pogo
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,650
Likes: 1,189 (670 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by solzhenitsyn View Post
In the end, the current existence of at least some form of government/warlord over every square inch of the earth is fairly compelling evidence that anarchy is pretty difficult to achieve. There appears to be a substantial cohort of people who crave power over other people and are willing to go to pretty extreme lengths to get it. Anarchy is not likely to last long with those sorts of people around.
Systems are still possible without governement..A judicial system that recognised the crime of forcing ones will over another should help.
h2pogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 11:48 PM   #13
rumpelstilzchen
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: the End of The Forest where the fox and the hare bid each other goodnight
Posts: 6,221
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by h2pogo View Post
A judicial system that recognised the crime of forcing ones will over another should help.
And the result would be that very judicial system forcing its own will unless of course one could ignore the decision of that judicial system.

Last edited by rumpelstilzchen; 26-01-2012 at 11:49 PM.
rumpelstilzchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26-01-2012, 11:48 PM   #14
solzhenitsyn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,090
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by h2pogo View Post
Systems are still possible without governement..A judicial system that recognised the crime of forcing ones will over another should help.
You do recognize the irony of what you've just written, yes?

EDIT: rump beat me to it, as usual.

Last edited by solzhenitsyn; 26-01-2012 at 11:49 PM.
solzhenitsyn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-01-2012, 01:46 AM   #15
aulus agerius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,418
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by h2pogo View Post
Systems are still possible without governement..A judicial system that recognised the crime of forcing ones will over another should help.
Such a system would still be a form of government. It would just be run by judges instead of politicians. It probably wouldn't be much like our current system, but it would still be a government. As Rumple points out, these courts would have to enforce their judgments - their views about how people ought to behave - on others.
aulus agerius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-01-2012, 12:46 PM   #16
h2pogo
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,650
Likes: 1,189 (670 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
And the result would be that very judicial system forcing its own will unless of course one could ignore the decision of that judicial system.
The result would be that the forced will is to stop the forcing of will.

A man that claims i owe him half my sweets unless he can prove he has a claim on half my sweets can not take half my sweets....A court should just deal with the facts and offer a remedy.

Its not about forcing their will its about being fair.

If one is to force their will IE rape then he looses his right not to have others force their will..Natural justice..or karma..or the balancing of the scale of justice.
h2pogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-01-2012, 01:40 PM   #17
rumpelstilzchen
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: the End of The Forest where the fox and the hare bid each other goodnight
Posts: 6,221
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by h2pogo View Post
The result would be that the forced will is to stop the forcing of will.
Exactly my point.
The forced will that was intended to stop forced will is itself a forced will which results in the continution of forced will.


Quote:
If one is to force their will IE rape then he looses his right not to have others force their will..Natural justice..or karma..or the balancing of the scale of justice.
Well, you say that he loses "his right", but who says he does? Where is this invisible authority and what exactly is it?
I would say that the reason he "loses his right" is more to do with the fact that other men will force their will upon him. But, what gives these other men that right to do so?
rumpelstilzchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-01-2012, 02:00 PM   #18
h2pogo
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,650
Likes: 1,189 (670 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
Exactly my point.
The forced will that was intended to stop forced will is itself a forced will which results in the continution of forced will.




Well, you say that he loses "his right", but who says he does? Where is this invisible authority and what exactly is it?
I would say that the reason he "loses his right" is more to do with the fact that other men will force their will upon him. But, what gives these other men that right to do so?
The fact that he was forcing his will.
Its back down to whats right and whats wrong.
h2pogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-01-2012, 02:09 PM   #19
rumpelstilzchen
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: the End of The Forest where the fox and the hare bid each other goodnight
Posts: 6,221
Likes: 0 (0 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by h2pogo View Post
The fact that he was forcing his will.
Yes but where is this rule book that states that if somebody forces their will they will in turn have the will of other people forced upon them?
I would say that it has nothing to do with rights but is more to do with other people's emotions. Anger for instance.
Quote:
Its back down to whats right and whats wrong.
But we all have different ideas on what is right and what is wrong.
rumpelstilzchen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-01-2012, 02:13 PM   #20
h2pogo
Inactive
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 11,650
Likes: 1,189 (670 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rumpelstilzchen View Post
Yes but where is this rule book that states that if somebody forces their will they will in turn have the will of other people forced upon them?
I would say that it has nothing to do with rights but is more to do with other people's emotions. Anger for instance.

But we all have different ideas on what is right and what is wrong.
May be should start a poll...How about.. is it right or wrong to deny some one in need, water.
What do you think?
Right or wrong?

Last edited by h2pogo; 27-01-2012 at 02:14 PM.
h2pogo is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:10 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.