(This of course does
not apply only to the South African government, but applies to
virtually all governments acting on our Earth today.)
I
also want to mention that I wrote this
article for my Swedish blog first. Sweden and South Africa are very
different in many ways, both when it comes to how they are governed
and the attitude of their people. The Swedes have gone from the proud
and fierce Vikings to a bunch of spineless cowards who allowed the
politicians, the bankers and big business to dictate almost
everything in their lives. But they are unable to see this, and think
they are well informed and a good example to the world as to how a
society should be run and how people should think.
South
Africans are far more independent, self reliant and self governing.
They are also blessed with a fairly incompetent government, that does
not pose any huge threat to the individual.
Maybe this comparison is unfair, and maybe I do not know SA well enough as I have only been here for over a year, plus six years in the nineties. But this article should be relevant anyway.
Maybe this comparison is unfair, and maybe I do not know SA well enough as I have only been here for over a year, plus six years in the nineties. But this article should be relevant anyway.
Before we can continue,
we should first define the concept of government.
Government: A group of
people (like you and me) who have either been appointed by the people
to represent them and their will, or who through cunning, violence
and betrayal ensured that they came into a position where they could
claim to speak for the people (whether the people agree or not).
All ceremonies,
protocols, procedures, etc. that led to a government coming into
being, is rather irrelevant. The fact remains that they are people
like you and me. They eat, sleep, piss, fart, burp, brush their
teeth, cut their toenails, love, hate, dream, have fears, faults,
weaknesses and aspirations, just like you and me. They no more
deserve to rule their fellow man, than you and I. In fact, by
thinking they do, they probably are less suited to do so, since they
then lack humility.
All power stems from the
people. The Preamble of the Constitution states: "We,
the people of South Africa, ..."
which shows that the PEOPLE of South Africa is the highest authority
– since it's constitution is written in the voice of the people and
is the highest law of this land.
This is true even in a dictatorship. If all the people in a nation with a dictator as head of state, suddenly turned their backs to the dictator, and ignored him, he would just be a pathetic individual with a superiority complex, who stood and screamed and stomped somewhere. The police, military, security services and the entire public sector is run by individuals who are all part of “the people”.
This is true even in a dictatorship. If all the people in a nation with a dictator as head of state, suddenly turned their backs to the dictator, and ignored him, he would just be a pathetic individual with a superiority complex, who stood and screamed and stomped somewhere. The police, military, security services and the entire public sector is run by individuals who are all part of “the people”.
So, how is it that the current government is not legitimate?
If we agree that the
only laws that apply are the laws of nature, then it may be true that
someone who is strong or cunning can acquire a position of power
over his fellow men, by any means. And those who are too weak or
stupid to assert their right to be free, deserve the fate they
receive.
But in our human
tradition - across different cultures, races and geographical
locations, there seems to be some kind of agreement in terms of our
relationship to each other. This could be called "natural law",
“universal law" or "moral law". It is a subject in
itself, but includes things like "Treat others as you want them
to treat you", "When you step on other people's right to
life, limb, property, peace, freedom, etc., you give up your own
rights these things", "All human beings are born with equal
rights and freedoms ", "All are equal before the law",
"Each one is his own master", "Everyone has the right
to a free, fair and impartial justice procedure", "Everyone
has the right to defend themselves and others who need help, against
an aggressor", "Everyone has the right to the fruits of
their labour", "Everyone has the right to choose to join a
society or a group, or not" etc. etc.
With this viewpoint in
mind, lets continue.
Eight points showing why the government is not legitimate:
1) The government is
doing things that individuals according to moral law does not have
the right to do. You can not transfer a right to another that you do
not possess yourself.
Theft and extortion is
still theft and extortion, even if they are carried out in the
government's name. To confiscate money (tax), property (confiscation)
and even children (kidnapping) under threat of further fines,
confiscation or imprisonment, is not something a person has the right
to do with another. Thus, no abstraction like "The State"
(which is nothing more than a bunch of people like you and I) have
the right to do these things.
Murder is murder,
whether it be planned and executed by a private person or a soldier
in the service. The only circumstance in which it can be considered
acceptable to kill another is if in the current moment s/he is about
to kill or seriously injure you or someone else who can not defend
himself or herself.
2) You can not be
forced to commit acts contrary to your faith and morals. In
Humankind, some things are seen as bad or or wrong - regardless of
the circumstances under which they were committed. In the Nurnberg trials, it was no excuse to say "I was only following orders."
An assassin can not
say, as a mitigating circumstance "I was just doing what I got
paid to do."
Similarly, a business
owner with employees has no right to take a share of the compensation
he / she gives an employee and give it to a third party (SARS – the
Taxman) if the employee does not agree. If your morals say that it is
wrong to steal, then it is wrong to contribute to theft in this way.
If you think it's better for your children to develop a natural
immunity to childhood diseases, rather than to vaccinate them and
possibly thus expose them to substances that in the long run are more
harmful to them, you can not be forced to vaccinate your children.
3) You can not be
expected to follow laws or rules that you can not understand. If
someone gives you a thick wad of paper with only Chinese writing on
them, and says that you must do what it says there, everyone would
agree that it would be impossible to do so (unless you are fluent in
Chinese). But if you are given a tax return form, most people think
that you can and should complete it and attest under oath, that all
information given is correct. How can you do this if you do not have
a law degree, knows for sure what definition of each word in the
Income Tax Act was intended by its creators, or even studied the
Income Tax Act?
Furthermore, if you are
not a lawyer, are you qualified to interpret a legal text? If you are
not qualified to interpret a legal document, how can you understand
what it says? If you can not understand what it says, how can you
comply with it? How can you be punished for not following directives
you can not understand, or even do not have the right to try to
understand? And, which you may not have agreed to follow in the
first place?
4) If we all, according
to natural or moral law, are free men and women who are born with
equal rights and freedoms, are we not then our own masters? If you
then consider that the CREATOR is the senior to the CREATION, and
that we humans created our laws, governments, money, contracts,
statutes, rules, etc. then, logically speaking, these could only
apply to us, with our consent. Consent can only be given when you
understand what you agree to.
How many people can
honestly say that they fully understand how this society is composed
and how some people acting on behalf;f of such abstractions as The
State, Municipalities, The Police or "The Justice System"
has the right to order a free man, who did not cause others any harm
whatsoever? Is not that like Donald Duck telling Walt Disney what to
draw and write ???
We can, as free men
and women, enter into contracts or agreements where we make ourselves
subservient to others - such as an employer and employee scenario,
but this is then, based on an informed and conscious decision where
all terms are on the table and the terms for how this relationship
can be terminated, as well as established and agreed upon.
In addition, it is
customary that the person who agrees to subjugate him or herself to
another person, does so for an agreed compensation (salary or
payment) during certain scheduled hours or for a given time or task.
When did you last get paid for entering into a role, subordinate to
these clowns who now rule the roost? What!!! Never???
What is your schedule for when you agreed to subjugate yourself to them? What! Do you don't
have one ??? Why???
5) Those who pay for
something are the ones who decide over the thing in question. We -
the people are the ones paying for everything. This is true even if
you take money out of the equation. We tar the roads, build the cars,
build the houses, sweep the streets, grow the food, transport
everything, maintain equipment, tend gardens and parks, purifies
water, remove the rubbish, educate the children, keep the books, bake
the bread and anything else that needs to be done our country.
We do this both for
ourselves and for those who can not contribute because of illness or
age.
We even do it (and even
more so) for those traitors who were meant to act as a good leader
and trustees of the land and it's people, but now acts as traitors by
letting large corporations and foreign interests rule the roost and
rob us of our resources, as well as taking a lot for themselves and
their personal comfort. They also allow our skies to be sprayed with
toxic aerosols in global geoengineering programs – totally without
asking the people or even informing the people.
6) South Africa as an
institution (not the land mass), is what it seems, a corporation in a
giant global commercial system. The crafty Men (and maybe Women) who
designed this system, have done so more or less in secret.
Not only that - they
also have for each one of us created a commercial unit; Our
legal/juristic Person. This is in my case MR KENT ERIK BENGTSSON
with ID Number. This is probably a trust or a corporation. Most
likely it is a trust, as there is no obligation to inform the
beneficiaries of a trust, that a trust even exists. See "The difference between You and Yourself" if you are not familiar with this.
The good news here is
that we as a people can not be forced to do business with a company
or obey its decrees without a voluntary agreement to that effect. The
bad news is that it seems as if everyone in the public sector refuses
to see us as people with natural rights and only recognizes us in the
capacity of our legal person, which can be seen as a subordinate
commercial entity. This in turn makes them Masters and us Subjects.
What leads me to
conclude that South Africa (and other nations) is a corporations?
"THE REPUBLIC OF
SOUTH AFRICA" is registered in the US Securities & Exchange
Commission, and tax revenues listed as income. See this link and the
article in this blog called “What is South Africa” for more on
that:
https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000932419&owner=include&count=40
https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000932419&owner=include&count=40
Also, all countries
seem to have a certain credit rating. If they were sovereign nations,
how can anyone say what their credit rating was?
A legal person is, in
other words, a fiction, an abstraction, a paper construct, a figment
of our imagination - that only exists on paper and in our minds. A
legal person has different rights and obligations. But only within a
larger fiction, such as a political or commercial system - not in the
tangible physical reality, where a legal person can not exist any
more than a fictitious person in a novel or movie.
7) “The State” is
not a part of the tangible reality, and exists only as a legal
abstraction. The basic idea is that the "state" providing
certain services and protection for its members (citizens) in
exchange for members give their support to the state (in the form of
taxes, obedience and recognition). A bit like a Golf Club – you pay
the membership fee and abide by the rules, and you can play on the
golf course. Mutual benefit. But whoever heard of a club you cannot
leave?
We hear about the
"social contract" as an unwritten contract in which the
members of a society have an implied contract with those who act as
leaders for a society, where the leadership is providing protection
and assistance to those in need in exchange for financial support,
obedience and recognition of the State as a legitimate institution.
From this "social
contract" can be concluded that the State can only be legitimate
if it acts for the good of the members of the society and in
accordance with the wishes and needs of the people.
Does the South African
State do this today ???
From where I stand, it
looks more as if they are working for interests other than the South
African people. One of the first things the new Government did after
apartheid fell, was to borrow from the IMF which made out nation a
“debtor” and subject to a whole array of negative conditions. Then
the politicians gave themselves huge salaries “so they would not be
tempted to be corrupt”. Yet as we have seen over the years the
corruption is rife and there are claims of 700 billion rand wasted in
the last 20 years.
Also, in many parts of this country the skies are being sprayed with nano-
particles of aluminium, barium and other agents. This must be done with the blessings of the Government. Search “Chemtrails” and “geoengineering”.
In and around the larger cities black South Africans are today enjoying an improved education, opportunities and income. But go to rural areas and nothing looks different than it did 30 years ago, except the prices in the shops.
Large corporations are given free reign to enrich themselves – like SANRAL and it's e-tolls, or the banks who create credit, at no real cost to themselves, and then confiscate tangible assets if people cannot pay the “loans”, or gets paid in money that represents our labour, while the credit they issued were not backed by anything tangible or of any substantial value.
Also, in many parts of this country the skies are being sprayed with nano-
particles of aluminium, barium and other agents. This must be done with the blessings of the Government. Search “Chemtrails” and “geoengineering”.
In and around the larger cities black South Africans are today enjoying an improved education, opportunities and income. But go to rural areas and nothing looks different than it did 30 years ago, except the prices in the shops.
Large corporations are given free reign to enrich themselves – like SANRAL and it's e-tolls, or the banks who create credit, at no real cost to themselves, and then confiscate tangible assets if people cannot pay the “loans”, or gets paid in money that represents our labour, while the credit they issued were not backed by anything tangible or of any substantial value.
8) It appears that most
countries are bankrupt (They have debts they can not pay right off),
and are operating in bankruptcy under administration of people
appointed by the bankruptcy court or Trustee. (ever wondered why
politicians and officials change, but not much changes in the real
world?)
I guess this is also
true in the case of South Africa. In the UK, it has been admitted by
public officials that the country has been in bankruptcy since the
end of the eighteenth century.
If a country
(corporation) is operating under a bankruptcy, it is not sovereign
and its government (leadership) must do what is dictated by the
Trustee or whoever administers and controls the bankruptcy.
Many a wise man has
said, "If you have debts, you are not free." I am convinced
that this is a key strategy in keeping both nations and individuals
enslaved in this world.
Tempt politicians and
public officials with personal wealth and benefits if they put their
countries in debt. Tempt individuals with new cars, mobile phones,
luxury homes and nice holidays, which they can get right now - if
they just take out a loan.
In both cases, you now
have much more control over the country or individual in question,
and you can set conditions on how they run their business.
Perhaps I am wrong in
some of the assumption above. I do not write thinking I have all the
answers or that I am always right. I write to get people to think and
question. I want us all to lift the veil of indoctrination that we
had covering our own eyes, since we stopped asking "Why" as
three or four year olds.
I do not want to
overthrow the government or the current system. If the house of
cards, built on lies, which today constitutes our modern society,
suddenly fell, a lot of suffering would result. BUT, I want the
people we entrusted to take care of public functions, to do what they
get paid to do, and that they do it for their people and in
accordance with the will, the culture, the values and the
traditions of the people.
I also want them to do all they can to make the people wise, strong, responsible, community minded, etc. so they can start govern themselves and run their own lives, rather than having it done for them.
I also want them to do all they can to make the people wise, strong, responsible, community minded, etc. so they can start govern themselves and run their own lives, rather than having it done for them.
I want those who are
now in positions of power to recognize us as living, breathing
sovereign people, and treat us as their employers, not their slaves.
If they want us to cooperate with them, they will have to do what
others have to do – to come to us with a proposal for cooperation
and draw up an individual voluntary arrangement concerning each
individual's relationship to the State and public bodies.
I want them to stop
seeing themselves as a monopoly on how things should be, and stop
fighting individuals or groups who want to go their own way and test
new ideas or models for communities, money system and laws. If we
look around we certainly can find lots of flaws with the current
system. So why not encourage alternatives and those who are willing
to go out on a limb to try new systems.
I realize of course
that no one cares what little me wants. But if we all started to wake
up and removes the blinkers, and can get enough people to do the
same, then we will become a group so powerful that we can change
things or a group large enough to turn our back on the existing
system and create our own.
So if you're reading
this, and more or less agree with it, share it - and talk to people.
Talk only about things they can agree with and introduce a little bit
at a time of new ideas and evidence. Try not to lump the whole
"truth" of someone living in "The Matrix" (the
current system), as this can be overwhelming and too unreal. We do
not want to seem like unreal weirdos, which can easily happen if you
try to present a whole new and strange reality.
Ask questions that
encourages people to think. Ask them to compare the past with the way
things are now. Ask how they think it should, be rather than how
things are, etc. etc.
It seems that we, as
humanity are moving towards a crossroads, in the not too distant
future. Beyond it (which could be a new world war, or a technological
coup, in which we are facing weapons that we find it very hard to
defend ourselves against) might wait a world that is totally
centrally controlled by a small elite that has us in a stranglehold
and dictates everything of importance, with few personal choices and
freedoms. But it may also happen that humanity will wake up in time,
realize their faults and weaknesses and decide to change their ways
and become more responsible and live in harmony with nature.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar