Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: Parallels Between Ancient and Modern Republics

Posted 7 years ago on Dec. 21, 2011, 4:03 a.m. EST by GypsyKing (8719)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Originally, I posted this on another forum a month ago, but I thought it might be worth posting here as well:

by GypsyKing » November 20th, 2011, 7:24 am

I first posted this under an article related to this movement by a major news network, and five hours later I couldn't find either the article, or the comment I posted - so I thought I would post it again here . . . The relevence pertains to education about the justification for our cause.

Historically democracies/republics (I equate these terms here for the sake of convienance - in order that I might not fall into a long diggression regarding their differences - and also because both systems were in radical varriance to the predominant dictatorical monarchies of antiquity), have generally failed primarily due to self-destruction, rather than from outside invasion or changing environmental factors.

These internal-causes for the "decline and fall" of representitive government have remained surprizingly consistent over time. As an example, I will give a brief description of the circumstances surrounding the fall of Ancient Rome.

The first, and formost reason for that failure was the concentration of aggragate wealth and power into fewer and fewer hands. Although this slow transfer of power from small landholders and rural estates to Rome itself, with it's relatively small ruling class, had many consequences in the early Republic, it came to it's first true crisis from within, threatening Roman survival, with the Republican overthrow by Julius Caesar.

Interestingly, and not widely appreciated, is the fact that Caesar was alligned with the oppressed citizenry and empoverished veterans, against the concentrated greed and corruption that had taken root in Rome, symbolized by Crassus - whereby we derive the modern word, "crass." The eventual victory of Augustus, Caesar's appointed heir, in the civil wars restored the balance of power between the competing classes, and Rome thrived for a significant period of time subsequent to the rise of Augustus. So it might be said that, although the Republic lost, the spirit of Republicanism won.

Over time however, this balance gradually shifted once again in favor of the ruling elite, giving rise to the same problem of overly concentrated wealth and power. The result was the alienation of the colonies, resenting their economic supression, and the alienation of impoverished Italian peasants, freeholders, and even rural patricians from the establishment in Rome. Furthermore, the increasing loss of touch of the Roman elite with the real conditions of the Roman citizenry, and their gravitation to blatant decadence - in some cases to the degree of outright insanity, were all contriduting factors to Roman decline. Finally, and perhaps fatally, was the loss of the loyalty of the italian yeoman soldiers, who had always composed the backbone of the Roman army, forcing the ruling class to turn primarily to foreign mercenaries with no alligance to Rome itself or to the tradition of democratic/republican principles. Under such decaying circumstances Rome was gradually overrun - it simply imploded.

The parellels to the current situation should be precise enough to be chilling, and a concerted effort to convey those similarities to every American would powerfully justify, to any thinking person, the urgent reason we have finally taken to the streets in revolt.

85 Comments

85 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 7 years ago

It is time for a fundamental shift in our existence and to begin this we must change the most fundamental of all things. Our belief system. With out this shift we can never change for it is our belief system that has gotten us to where we are in the first place. It is time to create a new, bold, and beautiful world but with out a new belief system nothing will change. Theoretical physics, neuroscience, psychology, sociology, biology, and psychedelics are all showing amazing correlation with ancient esoteric mystical wisdoms. These amazing correlations are simply too profound to be ignored. The use of psychedelic drugs, marijuana, and nitrous oxide combined with depravation tanks, strobe lights, meditation, yoga, tai chi, and other spiritual practices can have profound effects on consciousness, reality, and the future of the human species. We must reconcile the our ancient archaic mystical past with our scientific technological future. A new syncretistic belief system is spontaneously forming amongst the most enlightened polymath truth seekers of OWS. A new psychedelic quantum mystical belief system is beginning to be thought into existence as like minded spiritual polymath truth seekers make connections with one another. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByhAjJlcxIg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dbh5l0b2-0o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VT50SV3W5K0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlPs10GSJjQ http://www.youtube.com/user/UFOTVstudios?feature=watch#p/search/5/XcEczjqvQYE just for starters watch these films.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 7 years ago

Actually I believe it is the expansionist policies of past republics and empires that brought about their demise. Rome, the Ottoman Empire, Great Britain...

The US needs to step back and stop trying to police the world, especially where they do not want us. We spend a lot of money creating enemies.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

I agree. That was, and is, a huge part of the problem. But the concentration of wealth and power into fewer and fewer hands was an equally great problem.

[-] 1 points by JoeTheFarmer (2654) 7 years ago

Rome lasted thousands of years with concentrated wealth. They only lasted about 100 when they expanded their Empire.

I am not defending concentration of wealth rather I am stressing the problem of trying to spread influence and control the world with military intervention. That hurts our reputation and empties our treasury.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

It has occurred to me that we cannot make comparisons between republics because what we have is not based on antiquity but born from the Enlightenment period.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

I think the parallels between ancient Rome and the US are numerous and dramatic. It is a history well worth studying. The series "Rome" produced by, I believe,by HBO, is also really amazing to watch.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

I agree that there are a lot of parallels. I just don't think that they are found in what we call the Fall of the empire. I think it is a mistake to make that type of comparison. I don't think Rome was lost in 410, otherwise the people would have been slaughtered. It was a power play.

I very much liked that series and it really pissed me off that they ended it. They rushed too much in the second season to end it. They cut it off when the fun was just starting. I would love to write a follow up series.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

I would love it if you did too!

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

Indeed. Making such comparisons only confuses matters further. To properly understand a particular government, it must be studied in its economical, sociological, and political context. There's no shortcut; no easy comparison that will suddenly make everything clear. It's hard intellectual work, and cannot be solved by reductionism.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

I agree, to an extent. . We know for a fact that Madison studied every written word that was available for every known (at the time) prior government that had existed. We know that the following document was also used: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/6*.html And we, too, should study those documents. But, they were not fighting for rights as Romans or Athenians or Spartans. They were fighting for the rights of Englishmen not as Americans. That is what they were. Of course, they were actually the stereotypical welfare recipients. And yes, that is hard intellectual work.

I kid, it is actually pretty easy.

As long as you realize that all of the documents leading up to the Constitution also played a role and are willing and able to study them. That means break out John Locke's Second Treatise of Government.

There are parallels to be found in the economical, political, and sociological context but the structure and ideals are different.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

If you think it's easy to properly understand a particular socio-political-economic structure, you are kidding yourself. It's one of the hardest things to grasp since it has to do with humans. There's no serious philosopher or anthropologist would would claim its easy to understand a society and how it functions. If you know of one, please tell us who.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

No, Thrasy, you cannot sit down an do it in a half hour. It does require time. It also requires a willingness to be open to new information as it becomes available-flexibility and to look in places that most don't and to recognize where you are limited.

I do it because I like it. It is where I am most happy.

Some people play video games, some golf, some smoke crack, some people want their time taken up with lots of family obligations or serial relationships and bar hopping.

You present it as if it is a "chore" and in doing so you make it much harder than is necessary. Insurmountable and overwhelming. It is only "work" if you have no interest in it at all.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

I don't think it's a chore, quite the opposite. I love studying. I'm simply saying I don't agree with your assessment that it's easy to pin down such issues, or that comparisons to 2000 year old political systems offer much help in understanding the problems of our modern governments. I think such comparisons do more harm than good. I don't think the type of thinking in your OP is a worthwhile venue of exploration to further our understanding of the US government.

Philosophers, anthropologists, sociologists, economists, etc... with a PH.D. still don't understand all the intricate details about any particular government and/or its people. It's one of the most difficult things to understand.

[-] 1 points by quantumystic (1710) from Memphis, TN 7 years ago

i understand quantum mysticism and when i master it i will be a freaking jedi. jk. but seriously that is the real lesson to be learned.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

There is no comparison in structure, as I have already noted. I keep repeating there was no "fall of Rome" and I agree that here, too, it is unwise to make any type of comparison. I say this because this comparison has been repeated over the internet. I don't think it is harmful so much as mental masturbation.

That said, you will find many correlations between the Roman Empire and US. In particular, you can look at the change of power in Church and state and find that occurring here and find striking similarities in the propaganda then and now and how this played out in a social, political and economical context. I was going to lay that out a few days ago and almost wish that I had but I did not want to completely derail the thread.

It is easy. I have no use for philosophers. I have no use for economists. I I have a much greater respect for archaeologists.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

"That said, you will find many correlations between the Roman Empire and US."

This is the problem. Correlations are not interesting by themselves. They must always be accompanied by shared causation, else you are only drowning in a logical fallacy: correlation without causation.

"It is easy. I have no use for philosophers. I have no use for economists. I I have a much greater respect for archaeologists."

This is where your thinking fails miserably. Archeologists are important, but so are philosophers, economists, sociologists, etc... You can't understand the manifolds of complexity of a particular society with only archeologists. You need to combine the research of many fields to even hope to start drawing a sketch of what a society and its governmental structure was like. You approach the problem in a way that is far to simplistic to achieve any real progress towards understanding; towards the truth.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

Thrasy, first off, it isn't a question of a multidisciplinary approach. That is where your thinking fails miserably. Further, you have no idea what I majored in or what degrees I hold.

Econ is the softest science that there is; it is all theory. Does that mean that we do not look at production, consumption, trade etc.? No. It means that after studying econ, it is all theory and it is not necessary to wait for an economist to explain it to me. Too, do I need someone with a degree in philosophy to explain it to me? No, I do not. I have already had my philosophy courses. It is imperative to trace the schools of thought that were built on and when examining small groups aligned with a particular school. That is all.

Sociology is the shizzle. But, it is archaeology that is the game changer. It is archaeology that pushes the boundaries of what is known.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

I disagree. A multidisciplinary approach is needed more than ever before. We are entering another renaissance type period. Biologists, doctors, genetic engineers, etc... are all starting to work together to marry all the knowledge of the modern era. We are currently ending the post-modern era. Some call it post post-modernism since a better name as yet to be coined.

Understanding history is primordial, but it only serves as a basic framework to understand the particularities of contemporary and particular socio-economic-political setups. It's a first baby step.

You won't understand today's US republic through archeological digs. If you want to reach even a semblance of truth, you'll have to look at many papers from many fields of research, and you'll have to be very smart to come of with some kind of meaningful synthesis. Very few scholars are capable of this. Most scholars can become experts in a particular field, but to bring things together to form an understand of a manifold of problems and complexities takes a higher than normal intellect. A few like Noam Chomsky are able to scratch the surface of such understanding, but even they are smart enough to admit it is too difficult to fully comprehend.

You have to realize that socio-economic-political structures are in constant flux. Even if you could pin down some form of clarification of a particular structure, it would be changed a few days, weeks, or months later. A simple look at 2011 shows us how the face of many countries has been drastically altered by the Arab Spring protests and by Occupy. Laws are being added, new thoughts are being proposed and passed along, etc...

I'm sorry, but archeology alone won't help you much in this area. And, comparing the US republic to the Roman empire doesn't help all that much either. I think it confuses the issue more than anything else.

We can certainly agree to disagree. Thank you for your time, and for an honest debate. I enjoy those who don't dabble in ad hominem and other logical fallacies. You debate well which is a very welcomed rarity on this forum.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

You are looking at intersections of power, who has it, who wants it, and what they are willing to do to get it. Further, you are looking at the myriad of ways that people who do know this history are using it as a methods of controlling the population today through propaganda. I agree that it is in constant flux-to an extent.

You are not looking at the republic of Rome, it has already gone. You are looking at late antiquity. The rise of Pope as Emperor.

Look now, go read the relationship between Theodosius I and Ambrose of Milan. The state is funding religion, who in turn is taking the money to use as "charity", and manipulating through propaganda that it is the church that is the benefactor, they turn around and use those at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale by saying that the state is trying to control religion. In this way, the people are manipulated into "mob action". Compare Ambrose fictional siege, and writings, and actions and the speeches of our well known dominionists. They use Christian interpolations into historical text as a method of manipulation. Look at the intentional creation of conflict between Jews and Christians.

Now, go read the influence of NAR and listen to Michelle Bachman, Further, go read up on David Barton and Romney. Then go look up faith based initiatives and look at your non profit organizations that are trying to make sure that those receiving funding do not have to be accountable and are using that state is interfering in religion meme to masses.

You will notice that there were residues of the Christian persecution complex lasting even still into this holiday season. Except, there were not any mass persecutions of Christians. How important is archaeology? It is a game changer. Not to mention that all of that history sets up hundreds of years in the future, directly impacts England in various bloody ways and shows up in our first amendment.

Yes, archaeology is important when looking at the US republic and what is being spoon-fed to people in a white washed manner.
You want to know what was going on in the colonies? http://www.archaeology.org/online/features/boston/index.html

^^^all kinds of smuggled shit. There was the law and then there was what was really going on.

And then there are things of this nature: http://www.archaeology.org/1105/conversation/duke_riley.html

You will find all research into the study of power and wealth aids in international relations and conflict resolution. Archaeology has a way of smacking the crap out of what people would manipulate as history. This all edges closer to the truth.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

Both of you need to get in touch with the totality of your spirits. You must have that moment of spiritual liberation that sees something glorious beyond the confines of the battle of the soulless, loveless, left brain. Only when you come to be whole will you begin to understand.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

You just said a whole lot of nothing.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

And you just said a whole lot more than you realize.

[-] 1 points by chuck1al (1074) from Flomaton, AL 7 years ago

@ GypsyKing .............The United States is not a Republic in the classical sense, like Rome. The United States is Representative Democracy, The Republic part of our country is not a classical Republic.

A distinct set of definitions for the word republic evolved in the United States. In common parlance a republic is a state that does not practice direct democracy but rather has a government indirectly controlled by the people. This is known as representative democracy.

This understanding of the term was originally developed by James Madison, and notably employed in Federalist Paper No. 10. This meaning was widely adopted early in the history of the United States, including in Noah Webster's dictionary of 1828. It was a novel meaning to the term; representative democracy was not an idea mentioned by Machiavelli and did not exist in the classical republics.

The term republic does not appear in the Declaration of Independence, but does appear in Article IV of the Constitution which "guarantee[s] to every State in this Union a Republican form of Government." What exactly the writers of the constitution felt this should mean is uncertain. The Supreme Court, in Luther v. Borden (1849), declared that the definition of republic was a "political question" in which it would not intervene. In two later cases, it did establish a basic definition. In United States v. Cruikshank (1875), the court ruled that the "equal rights of citizens" were inherent to the idea of republic.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

Thank you for that clairification.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

This post has attracted so many trolls that you might just want to skip reading the "dialogue" altogether, and save yourself a headache.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

They wouldn't have had to rely on a foreign population if they hadn't spread themselves too thin.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 7 years ago

Good morning Girl! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and yours!

http://www.trueworldhistory.info/

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/

Do you still believe our nation is not on the brink of it's final default of it's amazing 1871 Bankruptcy and all it's subsequent reorganizations?

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

Good morning Frog, Happy Holidays back at you!!!

Do you still believe that there is only one definition for corporation or incorporated?

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 7 years ago

Not at all, neither semantics or linguistics change the dollars and cents of how our nation's republic was taken over by world bankers.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

Yes, and as to the question of other systems besides democracies and republics being subject to corruption, what other systems are we reffering to? Tyannies, dictatorships, oligarchies, plutocracies? These are about the range of pilitical systems, other than democracies and repiblics that have stood the test of time, and they are all inherently corrupt.

[-] 1 points by FrogWithWings (1367) 7 years ago

It sure appears to me we have gone from A Democratic Republic to a full blown Plutarchy.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

Well yes. Rome fell for the exact reason America is falling. Hopefully we can learn from history rather than simply repeating it. The way we have undermined our founding values in a series of wars for profit that are not only unethical but don't even benefit the country as a whole, just alienate everyone against this country, finally even it's own citizens. That is an almost exact repeat of how Rome fell. We must return to our genuine founding values which were sold. That's why I have a problem with the word "revolution." Is a renewal of sound democratic values a revolution? We must all really know what it is we are trying to do, and why.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

I do not believe that Rome fell. I do see parallels but not in the "fall of the Roman Empire". The power had already shifted, Latin had already fallen out of use as the language of the empire. The gap between the rich and poor was widening for the first time. Cell phones would have been handy. I think the rise of Christianity as the state religion did more harm overall because it was used as a mob force for whomever was seeking power, like Ambrose of Milan, and created the deep divisions within the empire. I do agree that the constant wars and, civil wars, plots, intrigues, thefts and overall corruption were there. But, with the shift of power it merely continued on in another form in another location and carried on in Rome itself. Pope as emperor.

[-] 2 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

Yes, actually I agree with that, and am thrilled to hear from someone versed in that history. I was referring to Rome itself, rather than Constantinople. The reasons Rome was sacked and Italy lost.

But I agree it did carry on in Constantinople, and that very power structure remained to become The Roman Catholic Church, and then state supression led to the dark ages. Long, complicated history here. But I think my essential point about republics being vulnerable to oligarchy and plutocracy is valid.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

Me, too. I am also in agreement that republics are vulnerable and they require vigilance.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

"But I think my essential point about republics being vulnerable to oligarchy and plutocracy is valid."

I think this is obvious and has been pointed out by Plato 2,500 years ago. However, It's important to realize that all systems are prone to be corrupted, not only republics.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

" Rome fell for the exact reason America is falling"

There are many differences. Not seeing them only confuses matters and makes finding solutions more complicated.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

Apparently, you are the only person on this site that doesn't know you are a troll.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

My comments here are not trollish in the least. I had an interesting exchange with NewEnglandPatriot who seems to agree with me on many issues.

As for your post, I agree there are similarities, but not seeing the differences is dangerous in my opinion. To find proper solutions to a country's problems, we have to analyze the particular socio-economic-political context of that nation. Comparing it to others might help, but it's also dangerous. We must stay focused on what modern day America is and isn't. It's not Rome of 2000 years ago even though it might have some similarities to it.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

You say "my comments here." The question is, why would you be trolling this site in the first place?

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

I don't consider that I'm trolling this site. That's your opinion. I offered constructive criticism in your posting. Read my comments again. I guess you assume anyone who opposes or criticizes your opinions is a troll. Many here will agree with you, but I don't share this idea. I believe criticism is an important ingredient when one wants to foster critical thinking. I'm on these boards to discuss issues, not to give and receive high-fives.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

Are there two people posting on this site, with the user name Thrasymaque? I do not assume everyone who opposes or criticizes my opinions to be a troll, but the very fact that you have said you post here under other names as your "alter ego" is weird, and makes me suspect either your motives or your sanity.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

I only post with Thrasymaque and Glaucon. Both are characters from Plato's Republic. There are many posers who try to imitate both these names in an attempt to discredit me. You should check for the correct spelling.

Don't worry about my motives or sanity, those are just logical fallacies you are making: appeal to motive and ad hominem. Either counter my arguments with serious counter-arguments, or don't bother discussing at all. There's not point in attacking the proposer. It does nothing to counter the arguments provided. It's a weak and flawed debating tactic. Many here us such tactics, but I think you shouldn't. Don't imitate the weak debaters on this forum. Try to imitate posters like NewEnglandPatriot. These people debate properly.

[-] 0 points by betuadollar (-313) 7 years ago

This is true... and Americans have been using this analogy since colonial times; we have discussed the similarity for hundreds of years now; - what we disregard are the distinct differences and it is those differences that define us.

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 7 years ago

The history is recalled in this documentary I ran across on YouTube that is short and sweet considering it takes only about an hour to go through each segment vs. the lengthier time it will take to do a reread of the US Constitution, Bill of Rights, Federalist papers and the history involved:

There's also alot of misunderstanding 'out there' with respect to meaning/definitions. Many do not know the difference between forms of government nor do many Americans know what the true design of US Government is but once they have even a basic understanding they clearly recognize the corruption that has taken up residence in US Government, Wall Street and, through the fractional reserve banking system-The World.

Here, for all to get the basics is a very nice outline of what America was founded to be. If we would only study the Constitution, The Bill of Rights and The Federalist Papers to solidify the foundation, the numbers of OWS participants by acting in the interest of the original ethical ideals would make major headway! Also, if more American businesses and individuals would VOLUNTARILY create their own social programs on a greater scale to the point of eclipsing the crappy government ones we wouldn't need those programs at the expense to taxpayers!

http://www.occupywallst.org/forum/americadefinitions-of-principles-helpful-in-exposi/ Forum Post: America:Definitions of Principles helpful in exposing the corruption of US govt. and Wall Street

Thanks to YouTube there is a synopsis of what America as a nation is supposed to be as setup by the founders along with the true definition of capitalism when practiced without the corruption (obscene concentration of wealth and economic manipulation of US government and the world through the fractional reserve banking system)we are seeing now and rightfully railing against.

The great thing about this series is it allows a quick educational overview of the principles and form of government America was founded on and through clear definitions allows the viewer to see the pros and cons of each type of government in comparison.

PS:And when you have time you can read the US Constitution, Bill of Rights and Federalist Papers.

John Birch Society - Overview of America - Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_ciT1psaPc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

John Birch Society - Overview of America - Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DsoIR2BlCH8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

John Birch Society - Overview of America - Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPr0ujS2kyc&feature=youtube_gdata_player

John Birch Society - Overview of America - Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szbLKeQIZCk&feature=youtube_gdata_player

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

The John Birch Society?

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 7 years ago

I know, really an odd source that YouTube came up with while I was poking around for this type of clear information that even a teenager could understand (an outline of American foundations/clear definition of what ideals we were founded on.) The John Birch Society still exists even though Welch died.

I think the founding fathers came up with the most sanely workable governmental foundation, the problem is there are always 'stupid humans' who with their greed and lust for power then as now who would tear it all apart.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

I agree with what you're saying completely, but would have a hard time looking at anything put out by the J. B. Society. Fortunately, I already know that the U.S. Constitution is still the most radical pro-freedom and justice document every written. Those who would have us throw it out are just alienating people and trying to re-invent the wheel at the same time.

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 7 years ago

I'm glad to see your positive stance on the U.S. Constitution and you are so right about those who would have us throw it out.

As for JB, when I was a kid my father encouraged us to be curious about what other people had to say and to keep an open but critical mind too and savoring those experiences that were most meaningful. This included the occasional visit with whomever to whatever church, synagogue, organization or event they would invite us to.

On one of those occasions we visited a JBS family for a meeting in their home that began and ended with prayer all holding hands in a circle. In watching some of these adults say some of the oddest things as a 10 year old even I could tell they were a bit extreme in their views even though as an adult I can see the validity of alot of what they have to say.

Whoever posted this on the forums made me aware that the John Birch Society still existed and yes, it did blow my mind! How in the heck did Robert Welch know then where we would be now?!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZU0c8DAIU4

Mind blowing speech by Robert Welch in 1958 predicting Insiders plans to destroy America Uploaded by NYredwhiteandblue on Apr 27, 2009

Proof that the NEW WORLD ORDER has been planned by the elite. Robert Welch, Founder of The John Birch Society, predicted today's problems with uncanny accuracy back in 1958 and prescribed solutions in 1974 that are very similar to Ron Paul's positions today. This is proof that there are plans in place by the elite to systemically disassemble US sovereignty. I wonder who those elite are.

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8719) 7 years ago

I agree with you about keeping an open mind, but not about the JBS, or Ron Paul. But thanks for taking the time to post this comment

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 7 years ago

The John Birch Society?

[-] 0 points by economicallydiscardedcitizen (761) 7 years ago

I know, really an odd source that YouTube came up with while I was poking around for this type of clear information that even a teenager could understand (an outline of American foundations/clear definition of what ideals we were founded on.) The John Birch Society still exists even though Welch died.

I think the founding fathers came up with the most sanely workable governmental foundation, the problem is there are always 'stupid humans' who with their greed and lust for power then as now who would tear it all apart.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

There might be parallels between US and ancient Rome, but there are also many differences. One of them being that Romans were actively gaining more territory and resources by invading other lands. This is a not the case with modern day US; not in the same way at least. US has become more subtle in its gain of power over other countries. Instead of invading directly, it creates economic prisons by using questionable foreign policies to control the resources of other nations.

A better comparison would be with other modern day republics. Some have good laws and are working quite well. It's worth looking at nordic European countries for example.

Plato wrote 2.500 years ago that all republics tend to become ogliarchies. However, he also noted that other political systems also get corrupted. Humans will corrupt whatever system is in place if they are able to. There is still a lot of truth in his book The Republic, even though there are also many naïve ideas in it. It must be read in its historical context.

That being said, I still believe in republics. A republic is simply a system where voted representatives direct a country by following a set of given laws. I think its the best model and have yet to see another one that even comes close. The problem is not the idea of a republic, but the bad laws that are in place. With tight laws, a republic can shine. US governments need to be pressured into changing these laws. For example, laws need to be put in place to stop money from invading and corrupting politics.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

The problem is our government and population continues to "rely" on government. They were herded into this corner, and fell into the trap. This allowed for the continuation of law creation that further eroded the freedoms we have left. Freedom to most is not being in jail.

We all are in a jail or prison, just there are no bars. They are invisible bars, such as laws, guilt trips for not conforming, etc. I break laws and ordinances that hurt nobody all time for mere principle that gives me some liberation. There are "community police" that go around to attempt to write up those that put trash out too early, no lids on barrels, etc. I put mine out 1/2 hour sometimes a day intentionally. I am always the only barrels on my street before 5 PM on Sunday. $50 fine, per day for non compliance and if it is not in a barrel , meaning trash bag, or out early.

I intentionally break laws like this as they hurt nobody. Any way I can give a finger to the revenue generators make me feel a little more free.

I even drink a beer or two and drive, so if I get pulled over , I will be just below. A cop once smelled it, and I called it. I am .06, I had a drink @ certain time, and another, judging rate/excretion per hour I am X. He was amazed I knew my BAC. I was pulled over at checkpoint and not intoxicated/buzzed. I do not advise this unless you know what you are doing though. It amazed them that I was responsible.

There are tattle tales w/the trash ordinances all over the place, but some in my neighborhood won't give in. I am slowly getting more to break the rules here and there. It hurts nobody - they made these rules to make money, just like the global warming leading to carbon taxes. I will be a patriot any way I can, nonviolently of course.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

Every system will be corrupted to the extent that it's possible. In a republic, this possibility of corruption depends on the laws in place, and the existence of independent committees to make sure the government abides by the laws which concerns it.

"The problem is our government and population continues to "rely" on government. They were herded into this corner, and fell into the trap. This allowed for the continuation of law creation that further eroded the freedoms we have left. Freedom to most is not being in jail."

The problem is not that people "rely" on government representatives to make political and economic decisions. It's important we have such representatives. If we had to take part in all those decisions it would be a real mess. Most people don't have the required knowledge to make such decisions, and are not interested in spending time to educate themselves in order to be able to make them. Personally, I wouldn't want to have the responsibility of taking part in these decisions. I have other eggs to fry. I'm a musician and programmer, not an economist or politician.

Having representatives is good as long as there are laws and independent committees to make sure these people do their job correctly.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Spammer alert, I put some more once I figured out where image was but it got deleted. I think I bruised ribs laughing at this....

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

As you stated: It's important we have such representatives. If we had to take part in all those decisions it would be a real mess. Most people don't have the required knowledge to make such decisions, and are not interested in spending time to educate themselves in order to be able to make them. Personally, I wouldn't want to have the responsibility of taking part in these decisions.

I do agree - only at the lower levels, community levels of government, this approach does work.

As government gets larger & larger (due to the growth of population) the law of averages applies. We are in a mess anyways. The mess would occur if people involved did not understand, perhaps more reps are needed to accurately represent the increased quantity of population. This is why the corruption took its hold.

Also, what I meant by people relying on government, expecting government to do more for them. They forget this does not come without consequence. They keep creating issues , and rather than just working they want more handouts, benefits if you will. Financial aid, healthcare, etc. - to be spoon fed social programs, etc. Not to say some are not warranted, but whenever more people.demand something, that is attributable to votes and the candidates use these issues to win elections. Then nobody wants to pay their share.

Again law of averages, more people, more complaints, more issues, more crime, etc. I am all for independent committees & oversight. The corruption must be weeded out. Hopefully this and other movements (I do not consider this as revolution, but activist group that raises awareness nothing more) Will continue to help expose where the corruption lies. BTW what language you program in?

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

I agree. More representatives are needed when the population grows.

A system like in Indonesia might improve things. Here, every community has meetings where people speak their minds and vote on local issues. There is a community per street. Usually, for every 100 houses or so. They have a village head which leads the meetings. He is not part of the government per say, but the government representatives meet up with the village heads to discuss how things are going in the community and to hear about the complaints and suggestions of the citizens.

These small communities also make decisions which have nothing to do with the government. For example, if a member of the community gets his house burned for some reason, the whole community might help rebuilt it by offering donations or free manual labor.

Personally, I believe health care for all, education for all, etc... are all good. I like social programs and don't mind paying high taxes for them if they are well implemented. I prefer a controlled capitalism like in Canada to a hard-core capitalism like US. This is a personal preference, and is highly debatable.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Well implemented is key... Now when I grew up in a small town (Acushnet, MA and Rochester, MA) this is how it was as you describe. It is no longer the case. There are small groups that still help , but most people keep to themselves now. Sounds like they are on the right track there - and we really need to go back to what used to work here...I actually lost many friends to Canada, they are doing better and want me to go. I do not like cold weather, or maybe I would. Also US was controlled capitalism at one time. Energy, food, healtcare were all under regulation ; as was banking with glass-steagal These were "taken"out by those above, got people to actually think it would lead to better times. We were told that if allowed to go to free market it would lead to competition. This is what put us in the situation we are in now. I never wanted it to change, It generated a booming bubble things were great, and I knew the bubbles would pop. We will be paying for this for a long time to come.

[-] 1 points by kristianb21 (33) 7 years ago

I agree most people just keep to themselves, I think it mostly because there's only so many hours in a day. As a civilization I think we are expected to work too many hours in a day.

Too much talk is spent on politics and not enough on what it is to be human and why the current system endangers the greater number of human population.

We would of learned a ton from the natives and their way of living but we all know what happened to that.

Look at a the fundamentals of human survival and implement that into policies, for instance: food, shelter, keeping good health, family, etc. With a long days work who in their right mind would have the strength to raise a family bring food to the table every night, stay healthy, and then attend community assemblies.

If we were to create a policy protecting human rights(which barely work anyways now and days) to raise a family, prepare food(meaning no frozen garbage and easy-microwave dinner crap), and alone time whether it's attending a chess club, studying something new or playing sports in the yard. Then you create an environment where everyone less stressed and will be able to attend these important community general assemblies. There's no reason why one should work 1 third of the day and sacrifice so much to barely make a living whether you're making 100K or 30K.

Money?... The day I see a polar bear go to a fish market to buy food with some pocket change, I'll be ok with money.

On a serious note: Greed kills and it shouldn't be tolerated, we need to create a system where one does not profit from human needs, like food, health, land, Earth's resources and most importantly EDUCATION.

Notice how capitalism today is the exact opposite and that's why we need change, a great change.

A revolution is heavily needed, because the current system doesn't work. Yes, you may protest now and fix it in a few years but you're bound to repeat the same mistakes only now in a shorter period of time.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Breaking up the family has always been the plan. Break unity at that level, nobody has time for each other anymore. Break unity at church level, and values go out the window. The bottom line is there are so many of us now, that don't get it. I ask many, all I do is get up in morning, commute, work, commute, home, shower, bed - do it over again next day. I like to work, but time is short. I lost so much time w/friends and family over years. Now who has time to go to town/city meetings, protests? not too many - the rest are miserable and take it out on all of us. The party is over people - the first castle has fallen, and things are about to get a whole lot worse. Just do not forget love, love to family , friends, and even the bad ones- project it to them they will need it, they feed on fear.

[-] 1 points by kristianb21 (33) 7 years ago

Great points. Love is all you need, and people look at that just laugh, mostly because they've never felt it. Like you said broken up families, a big down fall in our country.

Going to work in NYC is like a clock work, every morning you see the same thing over and over and over again to the point where your daily lives and culture are hypnotized to fit into a system where you provide for the elite.

To some people life is just a game of chess.

Have you seen "ZEITGEIST: MOVING FORWARD" they have it free on youtube. Its a great film on most of the conversations on this site, very informative and backed by great research.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Yep - It points out the facts, people used to think I was nuts for predicting where we are now back in 90s. I also knew once energy deregulation occurred, and Glass-Steagal was undone we were doomed. I thought it would be further down the road, but I never took into consideration the European Union, which is nothing more than the United States of Europe.. It rose quick and fell hard. It has fallen, it is a matter of time before it is accepted that it has

[-] 1 points by kristianb21 (33) 7 years ago

United States of Europe haha I like that, it's so true except ICELAND who's people were bold enough to stand up to the banks and declared independence from International banks.

Gee I wonder why that didn't make headlines in the US....humm it must of happen during the whole Tiger Woods thing which is obviously way more important then a group of citizens fighting for their rights.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Thats all it takes, and Iceland weathered just fine... Call their bluff

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

Very good points, and yes Canada is quite a cold place so I understand why you wouldn't want to live there. Iv'e been in Indonesia 5 years now, and I dread my return to the cold Montreal!

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

I long for warmer climate, and I get the cycle, only cold for few months. They are starting this again, I do not know if they mean you or imposters or what. From what I learned you are a debater nothing more.

http://occupywallst.org/forum/thrasymaque-is-grooming-and-conditioning-the-argum/

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

It's for me. I debate serious issues, but I also deface the threads of conspiracy theorists which are against the forum rules. See forum rule #2. This gets them very upset.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 7 years ago

MO


In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room, or blog, with the primary intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[3] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[4] The noun troll may refer to the provocative message itself, as in: "That was an excellent troll you posted".


You are by definition, trolling. it is not your place to decide who can post what.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Do not respond with emotion. this is what perpetuates things......Then the games....It is funny in a way, but if you are calling out trolls with this same approach, you are playing the same game? I stay out of this crap, if something hits emotionally (strikes a nerve) then try to back away and think about response. Then respond, with fact not emotion.... Nobody is perfect, my posts have been attacked by many and I get along with them on different threads. No emotion, I like the debate - engage

[-] 0 points by richardkentgates (3269) 7 years ago

It's not about me. it's about watching them day after day bully people on this forum. I have a certain view of bullies. I appreciate your neutrality, that is the essence of freedom. the freedom to not participate is more powerful than people give credit to.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

"You are by definition, trolling. it is not your place to decide who can post what."

I have made no such decision. The moderators have decided that conspiracy theories are against the forum rules. Read rule #2. Now, please don't flood this serious post with more anti-Thrasymaque nonsense. You already have three posts in which you can write all the insults you want. You should leave this one to GypsyKing.


So, you're saying conspiracy theorist are trolls because they post off-topic messages as per the forum rules. Spamming is also disallowed, so I guess you would be a troll as well? You can call me a troll. I don't care for these ridiculous labels. I simply post to comments to express myself. Whether you agree or not with my comments is not important to me. I'm not looking for high-fives.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Do you still exist? It seemed after post was deleted you have not been on here.

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

I'm not too sure what you're talking about, but, yes, I still exist.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

I did not see posts for a bit, After that spam/post thread richardgates was deleted I haven't seen you much.. I wasn't sure if you got banned for putting the spammer alerts or something. OK false alarm...you are OK

[-] 0 points by Thrasymaque (-2138) 7 years ago

I had a lot of work to do this week. I wasn't on as much as usual.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

Here we go again,

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 7 years ago

Sorry dude but why should these douche bags get a free ride. They spend every day on here running anyone off that doesn't walk in lock step with them. That is not in the interest of this movement. In fact, it is counter to this movement to be divisive and lower the numbers of supporters or cause people to lose interest. So whos interest are they working towards and why should that be made easy on them?

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 7 years ago

It's trolling assholes like you who have run people off, they can't be bothered with your bullshit.

Your topics range from "visit my website" and "post a banner to my website" to "so-and-so (whoever calls you out as a TROLL) is a troll".

I know you only have a high school education, but even that seems unused.

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 7 years ago

[-] 1 points by nucleus (3291) 7 years ago

And there it is, another banner co-opting OWS.

TROLL & SPAM

2 for the price of one!

[-] 1 points by richardkentgates (3269) 7 years ago

Yeah, I have the means and the power to co-opt a movement of millions... you are seriously paranoid.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 7 years ago

I sit on the side , it is like watching David and Goliath go at it - it is entertaining to me, nothing more....My ribs hurt and almost piss myself once as this back and forth occurs - sometimes I take a side depending on issue, and have civil debate. Otherwise I don't get involved. I need more examples, please.