Search

Does the Government ‘Own’ You?

Have you looked at the meaning of the word government lately?

Merriam-Webster’s top definition is: the act or process of governing; specifically : authoritative direction or control.

While some have danced around the question of whether the meaning, and by inference, purpose of government is authoritative control of the mind, I’d like to call attention to the question of authority itself.

By whose authority do those who “govern” do so?

I’m sure you have your own thoughts about this, as I certainly have mine. The salient question I’d like each to ask, is whether your idea of what our government is, or is supposed to be, is true.

In other words, is the system of government, as it is currently practiced, what you want? Sure, we can call it a democracy, but we could just as reasonably call it a mockery.

This isn’t (totally) because Donald Trump is president. Whether you like him or not, or agree with my assessment, the world is a far better place with Mr. Trump as POTUS than it would have been had his opponent ascended to the throne as she and the organizations that supported her had expected.

This is not to say that I think we’re in a good place with Mr. Trump. It doesn’t mean that I support his methods. It simply an indication of how deep the muck of the swamp has become.

And in his efforts to “drain it”, I wish Mr. Trump Godspeed.

But this is not about Mr. Trump.

How’s It Workin’ For You?

My question is whether government operates as you’d like it to? Is it effectively addressing your concerns? Are its representatives representing you?

Irrespective of where you sit on the political spectrum, or whether you choose to eschew sitting and prefer to stand, you have every right to expect that your government ~ city, state, and federal ~ will meet those criteria. This assumes that you respect the right of other citizens to have opinions that may not agree with yours, as they likewise respect you.

Societies are not monolithic in how they think. After all, people make societies what they are. People are like fingerprints and snowflakes; they are easy to recognize, but no two are the same.

A successful society must be mature enough to accommodate a wide range of thinking and behavior, and imaginative enough to nurture positive, healthy, constructive, involvement and interaction within and among its members.

It’s hard to achieve such social dynamics when bombasticism, bickering, blame dominate the discourse.

SOURCE: Illinois Review

Who ‘Represents’ Whom?

The premise of a government being “of the People, by the People, and for the People”, immortalized by Abraham Lincoln in his Gettysburg Address (November 19, 1863), came with no caveats or riders that said as long as they agree with government policies.

To take Lincoln’s quote a step further, the full thought was as follows:

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate-we can not consecrate-we can not hallow-this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us-that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion-that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain-that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom-and that government of the people, by the people, for the people shall not perish from the earth.

I am no proponent of war, for there are no “winners” among the combatants. A very small group of people profit from war, but from where I sit, profiting and winning are two different things. The United States looked more “united” and “free” after the Civil War, but it was as divided as it had been.

And in far greater debt.

SOURCE: Wikipedia

War is an unsustainable activity, a malignant social tumor, as death and destruction are the ultimate aim of the war’s participants. Not only is it unsustainable, it is unnatural; unnatural enough to question the intelligence of anyone who would participate.

With all due respect, war mongering and profiteering, that involves sending People to kill, destroy, or be maimed, is not the path “glory” of any meaningful or everlasting kind. On the contrary, it sets all participants back on their Soul’s journey. We are eternal beings, so perhaps some might think a little war or the appearance of “death” doesn’t matter.

It matters because we think it does. We think we’re “good” and the other guy is “bad”. We think the people telling us what we can, and cannot do, are “superiors”, or “inferiors” we give our power to. We think we have no power to say “no” or “yes” when its appropriate.

As such, the traumas that we created or sustained, will themselves cause disturbances in places that our eyes cannot see and drugs won’t deaden, that only time and love will quiet.

People go into war and allow it thinking only of the glory of a patch or medal on a lapel, oblivious of the cost they will have paid to their entire Being.

SOURCE: Wikimedia

Allegiance is an admirable trait, if the principle or ideal that one feels allegiance to is itself honorable. However, allegiance is not intelligent if the principle or ideal is no longer as it purports to be, assuming that it ever was.

Can’t ‘Fix’ What Ain’t Broken

With all its apparent flaws, government as we know and have experienced it, is running perfectly as it is. It is not “broken”.

It is achieving the aims that the un-elected administrators, bureaucrats, and managers of the organizations have mandated. As such, the social order that we have pointed to with such pride, is also not what is purports to be.

While there are “free” and “brave” people in America, the phrase “Land of the Free and Home of the Brave”, known by all who have sung the Star Spangled Banner, has become an empty soundbyte.

It has become Land of the Fearful, Distracted, Clueless, and Unmotivated, and Home of the Indentured. For these and many more reasons, the situation looks “dim” indeed. People prepare for the worst.

I don’t care for the term “anarchist”, which is defined as one who believes in, or tries to bring about anarchy.

But what is anarchy or anarchism?

Ok… fat chance, eh?

This is the first image that comes to mind.

SOURCE: Prepper Journal

Here’s another definition for anarchy:

a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.

absence of government and absolute freedom of the individual, regarded as a political ideal

Note that the issue seems to center around the word “authority.”

Upon further study of its origins, anarchy translates into “without rulers” or “ruler-less”.

The molders of public opinion who publish dictionaries and other reference material, regarded the presence of an “authority“ with rulership, and gave the word anarchy ~ the absence of said ruler ~ an additional descriptor: disorder. As in chaos.

SOURCE: Orgtheory

This is not the way I’d like to affect change, but it’s no wonder that our mind goes to this extreme at the mere thought of anarchy.

Each must ask the question what is important… change, or how it looks?

Then you may realize that the extreme that you fear does not have to be how change goes down.

Is Justice Flipped, or is Injustice Normal?

SOURCE: Wikipedia

Our society today is a state of disorder of our own making or allowing.

We have an absence or nonrecognition of authority.

I’ll ask the question again, whose authority?

Here are two perspectives:

Which one of these perspectives, rings truest to you now? Is the will of the people the basis of the authority of government now, as Eleanor Roosevelt said?

Or does government representatives use coercion, force, and other means, to influence your action, as Eldridge Cleaver once said?

To say that government appears to not recognize that the People are its authority, and not the other way around, would be a gross understatement.

What if… (gasp!) They Are?

But maybe it’s me that isn’t getting it. Maybe government is supposed to be the People’s keeper?

Is that your understanding, or preference?

If government officials think it is they who must “keep” the People (e.g., under control, from panicking, in line, etc.), then many of their policies and practices begin to make sense.

Here are just a few:

  • We allow medical personal to give newborns (around 4 million born in the U.S. alone each year) entire rounds of disruptive, IQ-lowering chemical injections on the premise of “guarding against” possible future diseases. While there’s no scientific support or metabolic benefit for this practice. Other diseases that aren’t on their lists have increased, yet they have consistently pushed to increase dosages instead of decrease them.
  • Some state governments have even initiated legislation to eliminate parents’ rights to refuse vaccinations for their children.
  • As if a regimen of vaccines wasn’t enough, over 75% of male infants are subjected to painful and traumatic circumcision.
  • Infant births are recorded via a document referred to as a “birth certificate”, on bond paper as any financial instrument would be, with the mother referred to as “Informant”. This record of “livestock” is sent to New York.
  • We allow our children to expect to be subjected these insults and injuries at the beginning of life then send them to institutions of further indoctrination, where they are fed specific information and judged by their proclivity to comply (+) or question (-).
  • We are encouraged to see our value in being “workers” and “consumers”, having a job (not creating jobs) and a paycheck.
  • We act as though value is in our possessions or ability to acquire/possess “things”, above such human traits as character, respect, truthfulness.
  • Our education provides little support to prepare us to grow in emotional and mental maturity as the body matures. Indeed, we actually think that we are the body, and do not see our place in a larger matrix of life that is universal.
  • We feed ourselves de-nourished, chemically preserved foodstuffs, drink dehydrating water substitutes, spend large tracks of time in energy-disruptive work and home spaces in an ungrounded state. When the degenerative conditions come, “doctors” have no clue as to cause, offer a myriad of poisons that are worst than snake oil (and more expensive), approved by both their professional association and government authority.
  • We learn to help others only if “authorized” or “licensed”… and to give to others in need (assuming we have the means) only if we can get a tax deduction.
  • In spite of numerous reports by credible sources that go back decades and beyond, of direct interaction with intelligent beings from places other than Earth (i.e., WE ARE *NOT* ALONE), government and military have practiced a strict policy of denial, deception, or stonewalling.
  • In spite of being unable to afford its wars (placing the People on an escalating continent of indebtedness that they did not ask for or knowingly consent to), government and military make no attempt to initiate or make peace. In fact, they appear to be ripe for more war, which they expect sons and daughters, husbands and wives of the People to go prosecute, while they retire to their caves (or escape off planet in craft that the People don’t know exist) and “survive.”

I could go on, because this list is just a small sampling. What I find is that government demonstrates very little responsiveness to what its people have asked of it, while sticking its nose into the lives of people around the world affecting them negatively, sending millions daily to one country, as though we owe them, while restricting the economic affairs of others.

We are not the “wealthiest” nation on earth. We are the most indebted. What’s great about that?

Of course the government doesn’t own us. It doesn’t even own itself. The question is whether you think this small list of “liberties” and discourtesies is acceptable.

If not, what are you going to do about it?

Video Series: The Inward Journey Home

During my stay in Las Vegas, a period that lasted roughly 15 months, occasionally sought the solitude of a dry lake bed located south of town, where I could set up my camera and essentially say what was on my mind at the moment, to no one and everyone. I titled that collection of recordings, “Alone with My Thoughts”. The very first, titled, “No Donald or Hillary Party”, sprung from the realization that very little true representation of the people exists in American social and political systems as it presently operates.

We have the appearance of a “two-party” system that will always be at odds with each other, whose representatives hash and rehash the same problems and push “solutions” mandated by lobbyists for corporate and foreign interests. Instead of demanding better proposals or inviting people with new vision to step forward, the population has grown accustomed to accepting the Pablum that their familiar “hated” politicians serve them.

Having watched enough of these excursions into political futility, I simply said why this was no longer good enough for me… nor, in my opinion, the American People, or the world.

I made about twenty videos from that locations, or one like it, before relocating to the Pacific Northwest toward the end of 2017.

Now the scene has changed, but the discourses, which I now cal, “The Inward Journey Home,” have become, let us say, “juicier.”

Here’s an early example:

A quick count suggests that I’ve produced about seventy-six of these talks thus far.

I won’t try to push them all on you now. Just wanted you to know that they’re available and invite you to visit my YouTube channel and see if the “topics” and the take are your cup of tea.

Written by 

Related posts

One Thought to “Does the Government ‘Own’ You?”

  1. Thank you, Adam, a really good article.
    You put some of my thoughts into words.
    Kind regards
    : leon: edwards.

Leave a Comment