We The People want a Full Wage and Benefits package of our Inalienable Rights Which includes the Establishment of a Peoples Legislative Branch whose primary function will be to insure that the diverse opinions of the public have a National (if not International) venue for discussion, for deliberation to be voted on, and then secured as the law of the Land, in order that the Right of Self-Representation and Self-Determination can be fully realized as an expressed Full-Partnership agreement which does not permit established form of governance and economics to despotically insist on the inclusion of some clause akin to a pre-nuptial agreement whose meaning is so generalized that its interpretation can be deduced whenever, by whomever, for whatever reason they may conjecture as a Right to a separation, annulment or divorce guarantee which will render the marriage null and void, thus enabling them to suggest that a precedent has been established whereby they can resort to the imposition of some previous rule or practice which negates the value of the People's Inalienable Rights by making them proprietarily alienable under some artificially manufactured or seemly naturally occurring event. If the government and its confederates do not want to forge a Full-partnership agreement, then the Collective Will of the people have a Right to render them into a Non-Representative state of definition and replaced accordingly, if this is deemed of further usage.
For those who would strive to insist on interpreting some incongruency with the requests of the public by effecting the introduction of some intentioned application of suggesting an "in" Representative criteria in their vocalized or sub-vocalized impulse to form an opposition (i.e., in-activate, in-articulate, in-authenticate, in-capacitate, in-cinerate, in-terruption, in-terference, etc.,) in an effort to "out" maneuver the public and "oust" them from the path upon which they have collectively chosen to crusade along... through some usage of a maligned in-terpretation that may or may not be supported with a Loyalist or Tory authentication of authoritative propriety that all are supposed to defer to and humble themselves in the presence of; let us reaffirm that We The People will be vigilant to those who attempt to denigrate the public's efforts to amass the currency of their Collective Will in any way, shape, or form... as if to make it improbable or impossible for a "Collective Will" rendering to occur and thus refute an establishment of the peoples' binding consciousness which forces the presently established authority to yield to such a formative assertion. In plain language, using an analogy that some readers will fully be able to appreciate; those who would think to stand in our path will be the 'Little John' whom Robin Hood refused to pay taxes or toll too and tossed them astride. Whereas We The People have no interest in stealing from the rich and giving to the poor if a partnership agreement to share equally in revenues and resources can be reached diplomatically. We should not need to steal back what we have a Right to share in as established long ago by the Inalienable Rights provisions outlined in the Independence Declaration of 1776. If we must so initiate another Declaration to establish a Full Wage and benefits package of our Inalienable Rights for the Despotic Aristocracy which the present government has become and there is no Constitutionally mandated provision to correct without the usage of a Revolution, then the reformation of our rights will call for a Declaration of Greater Independence!
Indeed, the people have been subjected to a "pretensed, pretended and pretexted" model of democracy supported by a similarly-minded Executive, Legislative, and Judicial government contraption offered as a well-oiled functionality possessing the presumed technical marvel of a 'checks-and-balances' provision that is to be viewed as a preternatural exercise of an enlightened consciousness used as a public manipulation by being offered as being due to some "Genius of The People" facility that the government doesn't even trusted with the practiced exercise of Self-Representation and Self-Determination, and must have its hand held like an over-possessive and controlling parent... and ultimately either creates a dumbed-down docile public or a rebellious youth who comes to stand their ground and demands the Respect, Rights, and Privileges they deserve. It is the projection of an Aristocratically originating preference convoluted to assist in controlling the public through specious flattery. Whereas in fact, the Genius of the People will be once they have gained a Full Wage and Benefits package of their Inalienable Rights.
The enforced dependency and servitude of our Citizenship status engenders little more than a subsistence level of Inalienable Rights and Benefits. It is a condition-of-citizenship akin to the workplace environment of an indentured servant receiving the scraps of an allowance based on the mood of a bipolar designed government... who are routinely exploited for whatever business deal, military exercise, or entertainment-by-manipulation is promoted for one government reason or another whose main objective is infrequently focused on doing what is best for the well-being of a public whose taxes pay for a cost-of-living benefits and wage package with a basic needs coverage that many tax payers do not themselves have. By maintaining a social environment of affected despondency, the military's wage and benefits offerings are a lucrative bribe to those whose social living conditions reflect a policy of suppression and oppression so that government employment is viewed as a protective castle whose admission into requires an allegiance of a reciprocating supportive embrace against any and all, regardless of any illogicality or injustice, who might want to alter the system which accommodates a select few for receiving such benefits and wages.
The government is like a barking, biting, moon-baying (Hound of the Baskervilles?) dog that is friendly and responsive to a few, but causes annoyance, irritation, destruction, and even death to others whose complaints are, for the most part, ignored or silenced by its dog handlers and trainers who resort to various tactics to silence those asking for a redress of grievances and commensurate remuneration. The dog has marked out territories by way of exercised defecations, urinations and bone burying, called colonization, imperialism and commercial expansion through exploration... although alternative descriptions could be included. It has bitten, mangled, and even killed many through acts of war, espionage, conflict instigation, various policing brutalities, etc... Yet it can be made to perform social tricks which are intended to show an amiable, friendly and obedient creature to a few who walk it, feed it, pet it, groom it, and otherwise befriends basic functions, by way of Executive, Legislative or Judicial snack giving, ball throwing, and belly rubbing tactics which exhibit their understanding of its basic (often base) motivations and manipulable moods and manners.
But such affected domestications do not conceal that the dog (called democracy, democratic or some pet reference) sometimes acts like a ("serenading") coyote, ("singing") dingo, barking prairie dog, undisciplined (whiny) puppy scampering and frolicking about (in a "boys will be boys" personification of permissiveness), or a wolf in sheep's clothing in order to effect solicitations which help it to more easily prey on the old, the young, disabled, infirmed or in some other representative 'poor' condition. Resources apparently allocated to assist those so named are not programs of advocation, but public-forced vocations whose funding may be stricken by any number of diseases in order to effect a "killed" legislation or supportive social welfare program, so that the funds can be diverted into aggressive channels of application to enrich someone or some organization being treated as an alpha-male or alpha-female. Like the dog itself, government officials are themselves white-washed, authoritatively groomed and ceremoniously dressed to present the public with a domesticated image of compatible breeds that are obedient to the public's commands and thus reflect a "peoples government" slogan which might suggest the people are designated with a sole ownership status instead of as a participating audience trained to laugh, ooh, ahh, and clap with approval on cue. In some regard, there is a distinction to be made amongst the breeds who may or may not recognize themselves as a Herbivore, Carnivore, or Omnivore.... (suggesting that either the government has gone to the dogs (representing various self-serving definitions of democracy), or that the one almighty dog may actually have a mixture of different (folklorish) animals... or life forms, in its makeup.) It is a tripartite distinction which must be placed into the context of a previous digression of socio-political analysis.
 |
 | ||
 | |||
 | |||
 |
 | ||
 |
 Different breeds of government, like different breeds of Democracy, Communism, Socialism, etc., trying to strive in a gaming room called Earth... inside a casino called the Milky Way Galaxy... within a Town/City/Reservation called the Universe. |
||
The trainers and dog handlers (elected and selected officials) in government frequently like to create conditions which will permit the dog's basic instincts or/and contoured domestications to run wild, 'play nice' in order to parade... or compete in a publicly exhibited dog and pony show for variously affected tastes (military, industry, diplomacy, journalists, the poor, the rich, etc...). However, the public's efforts at retraining the old dog have proven unsuccessful by standard training methodologies (protest, petitions, publication, etc...). Such efforts to leash, muzzle, scold, etc..., have been to no avail. Some consider that there in fact may be too much of a wild nature in the dog because it retains a mixed breed of conflicting orientations that can not be resolved by those of today whose methods of instructive discipline adhere to traditions handed down by their ancestors who developed the breed specifically to perform in a manner viably important to the crude, rustic, untamed needs of the past.
Their won Independence occurred in a wild state of affected civility. It is a reference that can be deduced in the alternative realms of perception called analogy and metaphor (like viewing an abstract painting or poem at different times and places). For example, the previous occasion of expression about civility and rustic feralness can be illustrated as "a gorilla wearing a suit and claiming to have been selectively chosen to represent the image of their god"... or we might digress further into a more complex illustration by saying: "to the point of the matter, their pedestal propped-up dog had previously indulged in a cabin boy type of seaman's long-voyage pederasty that no one talked about but everyone knew was occurring"... Then again, an even further digression, if one might be permitted to use a metaphor without creating a moment of cognitive dissonance because no former nautical allusion had been introduced as a convenient plank upon which to walk between one ideological vessel and another... and provided with an offered apology to those whose intellectual footing has not acquired the necessary 'sea-legs' in the present current of thought which has permitted the sails of confluent imagery to bellow out in an on-rushing tide of vessel-disturbing waves— let us simply say that the canvas of the present perspective can appear to move as an observer alters their vantage point.
Let us take a moment to look a bit closer at this consideration of viewing Democracy as a breed of dog. If not a dog, then perhaps one might be inclined to consider another animal such as a cat, horse, bird, flower, tree or otherwise. Which breed(s) of dog do you think best describes the characteristics of the breed of Anarchism, Communism, Democracy, Libertarianism, Socialism, Monarchialism, etc., you prefer? This may well depend on your knowledge of one or more of the breeds. Do you have an in depth knowledge or a generalized understanding of one, two or all the breeds? Likewise, what do you know about the different breeds of economics, music, mathematics, physics, medicine, biology, sociology, art, sports, dancing, jewelry, cooking, baking, gardening, plumbing, mechanics, television/radio programming, language, religion, etc...? Which breed of shoes do you wear and why? Which breed of vehicle do your drive or weather conditions you prefer? Which breed of Satanism or other alternative (non-main stream) ideological orientation do you prefer? Which type of Journalism agrees with your taste? Is humanity a breed of sentient life form that has a destiny? What are the characteristics of the particular breed of God you pray to? What breed(s) of employment do you prefer? What breed(s) of employment do you have the requisite skill set for? What breed(s) of skill(s) do you have an aptitude for learning? Which breed of people do you associate with? Do you prefer a smart breed, a dumb breed or a breed that likes to go night clubbing in order to get drunk and possibly find a sexually motivated encounter? What influences you to think that your breed of logic is the best for you? Which dog breed best describes your preferred philosophy, mathematics, sociology, music, etc...? Do you prefer those breeds of people who like pornographic material, chess, billiards, tennis, swimming, eating at restaurants or prefer cold pizza and watching an old movie? Which breed of entertainment do you prefer? Are your preferences due to some actual choice, a habit, or simply because you have a herd mentality and are not aware of it?
Why do you think the American or British breeds (formulas) of democracy are best for humanity? Why not one of the breeds of Communism or Socialism? Which breed of Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, or Judaism do you prefer? Because your family has always cared for such a breed? Is your preferred Socio-political philosophy because it is treated as a pet and others are viewed in one negative sense or another such as it eats too much, slobbers, has a viscous reputation, looks ugly, barks too loud, etc...? What breed of sports do you prefer? Which of the different breeds of sports teams do you select and "own" due to one personalization or another? Which breed of motorcycle or bicycle do you ride? Which breed of vehicle engine or transmission do you prefer rebuilding? Which breed of hunting weapon do you prefer and which breed of animal is chosen to hunt? Which breed of environmental issue do you support, or which breed of racial complaint(s) do you consider not worth your time to look closely at? Which breed of government design do you think or think you know is best if you have a superficial understanding of your preference and a general ignorance of other breeds? How do you know your breed of dentist is best for you or that the current breeds of socio-political theorists actually know what they are talking about? If you have a vague understanding of different breeds, and only a slightly more informed knowledge with respect to that which you claim to like, maybe... just maybe... your chosen breed is not best for you, much less an entire nation or humanity. How do you know whether Buddhism is good for you or not, if you've never tasted its cuisine? How do you know Islam, pizza, bear meat, etc., does not suit your taste if your ideological taste buds have been prejudiced by one irrationality or another? Which breed of subject matter do you take for a walk with you? Which one(s) do you take to bed, or have an emotional relationship with? Why is it that we come to focus on the specificity of a given generality? Why do we allow the rich to get richer and the poor to get poorer? Why don't we insist on an equal distribution of resources and an increase in the wages as well as associated benefits which accompany an enhanced Inalienable Rights provision involving Self-Representation and Self-Determination?
Is human society the result of an unacknowledged eclecticism or is the presumed eclecticism a breed of specificity formed by the requirements of adaptive homeostasis in an environment heading in the singular direction of decay? Is the multiplicity of ideological interests due to an increasing environmental temperature which increases molecular activity of which different life forms represent different packets of molecules like fissionable material constrained in a small physical space? Do any of the present forms of political theory represent viable governing programs to insure adaptable stability even in the event of one or multiple breeds (forms) of violent environmental or social activity? Are all ideological breeds a type of stove top burner whose flames are set at different intensities, even in the case of electric stoves? What is the dog breed of your ideological preference and what are its needs of sustenance? Is it a dog that likes the water, or is a lap dog? Is it a whiny dog, or a dog that sleeps all day except to eat, wag its tail a bit, and goes outside to use the restroom? Is your ideological breed a playful one? Is it a grumpy one? Is it morose and moody? Is it generous to a fault, or so aggressively stingy it will steal from anyone... even those who think they have an ownership thereof? Do we need to progress beyond the usage of animalistic socio-political breeds... thus initiating the development of a new breed of humanity? Must we take steps to intentionally breed a different type of human in order to create the conditions in which a better ideological framework might be scaffold to erect a better government, governance and economic practice? Is humanity otherwise doomed to repeat different breeds of historical tragedies?
But irrespective of the divergent contemplations which may invite themselves during an open field of creative intimations, and whether or not such illustrations prompt complaint from those who have difficulty with these types of eclectic transliterations... such that they proffer the opinion one is indulging in playful sophistry for purposes of selective self-entertainment; let us not overlook that the excitement surrounding a newly acquired Independence affected the early Colonists of America with a perspective that their dog... the pretensed democracy of their to-be-lived-in dog house (government), should be able to run just as free and unshackled... albeit likewise disciplined according to their own inclinations to exercise a type of freedom held in check by those of the Continental Congress who wanted to gain an equal share in the hunted down game which at that time had no ceremonial trappings like the Englishman's Fox Hunt. In other words, it was alright that Democracy exhibited the same liberation as themselves, so long as they were privy to receiving a portion of any wild (winged or footed) game (profit) from an exercise of letting the dog (democracy) run afield (along trails of commodity and commercialism) that they would also benefit from... thus describing the type of "discipline" that was to be applied to democracy.
Accordingly, set into the context of today, some feel that such a breed of democracy has no place amongst a civilized people, because they are forced to adopt a similar type of behavior in order to accommodate the antics of an anachronistically bestial life-style. It still retains an underlying barbarism of its initial breeders who combined those characteristics thought to be necessary within the constraints of time, place, feeding schedule, diet, etc..., which existed in the 18th and 19th centuries. These characteristics, these particular abilities seen as inherent dispositions, provide an opportunity for those who would use the government to stage commercially viable dog fights, economic competitions, or as a mythologically-embellished three-headed Cerberus used to intimidate and threatened others into submission. It is a dog that very often bites the hand that feeds it (the public provides tax revenues which are not given back in kind as a personal gift, but are returned in non-individualized accommodations such as public services that do not equate with the kind of subsistence that the tax monies could have provide a person in the individual life). The present formula (breed) of democracy, even though some devise the notion of "demo-n-acracy" (demonacracy), is perhaps more accurately described metaphorically as "dog-acracy" because of its predisposed dog-legged, dog-eared, dogmatic, dog-paddling, dogged, doggerel and... doggone it, its all around dogginess. And while there are those who might well provide a more accurate and intimate portrayal of government activity to that of a mongrel dog, the foregoing suffices as an easily comprehendable analogical narrative.
Another narrative that may be described as a formative dog-like "yelp" (help!) signaling the need for extended attentiveness, is the parallel of today's political events with those during the off-centered decade in which the Declaration of Independence culminated in a win for the early Colonists of America. While other analogically driven ideological considerations are available to create constructive representations, for the time being, let's permit the usage of a prevailing theme already mentioned so that there is at least some measure of continuity. Along with the Declaration of Independence, due to the growing rift between the colonial government and Britain, caused for a Congressional motion that the colonies should establish their own choice of government within their territorial boundaries. Hence, we have State legislatures which practice an enhanced wage in their Inalienable Rights, but the citizens of the States do not get to practice an enhanced form of Self-Representation as a full-time legislative body. Thus, not only are the people suppressed by the Federal Legislative body, their individualized States use their larger wage and benefits package of Inalienable Rights to create another level of suppression. The States were allowed to retain their individualized independences not only from the British government, but from the yet-to-be Federal government as well. Because the British government was clearly advancing policies based on a conflict-of-interest and Trust orientation of self-interest, the Colonists felt it was appropriate and necessary to establish a larger wage and benefits package of what were to be labeled "Inalienable Rights" in the Declaration of Independence:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government (a Cenocracy), laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. |
There was no public voting system in place which allowed everyone to vote, much less voice their opinion because of the distances one would have to travel by foot or horse. In fact, very few of the population could vote. Such a repression of voting is still practiced by the military, though it proclaims itself to be a champion of Democracy. Its formula of Democracy is based on Communist (communal) and Socialist practices that maintain military-styled Aristocracy. While there was no requisite poll tax that needed to be paid and used as a disfranchising method to control the voting process as in later years of America's so-called Democratic system, there was the rule that only white men with property were permitted to vote... though there may have been some exceptions made in some circumstances... since there regularly exists some who circumvent one political practice or another. Nonetheless, the absence of an Actual Democracy did not keep the Legislative bodies from describing their practices as being democratic as a means of providing the definition as an acceptable illusion to the people who believed they too had won some gargantuan prize... that in any event could not be used by the people to barter for anything of value. It was merely a tool which enabled the few in the Legislatures to assert themselves, their interests into legislations which would keep the State or Union intact... thereby enabling a few to have access to a large pool of taxes-driven money to carry out direct commercial actions with other countries or between the States themselves, and later used to create better access points (roads, trains, etc...) for increasing commercial activities so that larger revenues could be realized.
However, in as much as a fund called Social Security as a social reform policy through a managed redistribution formula would eventually be adopted by the Federal government, its critics claim that not only is inadequate for some in many cases, but it is referred to as a Ponzi scheme... in that without a continue influx of younger workers, there would be no available money to be dispersed, since those who had earlier put money into the Federal Social Security pool, had to pay for other government subsidies the people had no way of arguing or voting against. While it is generally understood that the Federal Government need to provide a means for assisting in the welfare of aging peoples (and later, others...) who would not be able to work for one reason or another, no such similar mechanism exists with the States who often consume more taxes than the federal government. While States may claim they use tax dollars to fulfill many diverse social programs, many of these programs do not directly assist many of those who pay taxes. In any case, the point to be made is that the people do not have a Full Measure of the Inalienable Right to collectively Represent themselves. Instead, they are subjected to a disfranchising system of government practice by forcing the people to comply with a form of Vicarious Representation. And a larger point to be made is that even if the public wins an increased Wage and Benefits package in its Inalienable Rights from the Federal government, State governments may want to deny such an increase, thereby the States effectively act as a pseudo-Federal government.
After winning their Independence in 1783, the colonists were faced with what may be referred to as an "adhocracy" because the government was an organization with very little structure. The non-voted in Legislature of the would-be Federal government set out to formulate the particulars of governance. In so doing, their actions constituted with what may be called the dollying out of I.O.U's, in that the Inalienable Rights won by everyone, had to be taken in as a sort of tax. The people could not have a Full Measure of their Inalienable Rights or they could have demanded an equal say in the development of the government, and what laws were to be observed and how they were to be enforced. Over the years, the people have had to fight for a measure of their Inalienable Rights such as Voting Rights and Civil Rights. Though such Rights were guaranteed by winning Independence, it was a profit that the Legislatures confiscated by means of a "Civil Asset Forfeiture". In effect, the people were forced into a practice of Austerity, with respect to their Inalienable Rights. This Austerity continues to this day. Attempting to cash in the I.O.Us has met with severe resistance, though some efforts have yielded a small return for the implied government promissory note exchanged in 1783 for the public's deference, subservience and dependency. The I.O.Us were given as a contractual agreement between the citizens and the Legislators of the time, that they were promised a Full deed to the Inalienable Rights property which, amongst other things, represented the rewards of Justice, Freedom, and Equality... marked by Self-Representation and Self-Determination which represented a Liberation of mind, body and spirit, that they themselves got to freely practice and acquire personal social rewards from, while the public was, for the most part, excluded from experiencing such a bounty.
There existed a pre-government program of Inalienable Rights provisions which required personal sacrifices of the Full compliment of those Rights, as a practiced Austerity program. The people were forced to hand over control of the bulk of their Inalienable Rights wages and benefits and defined as a self-imposed impoverishment in order to assist the nascent growth of a fledgling government. However, it was recognized that the government's program of imposed Austerity was so lucrative for those who wanted to use the mechanism of government as a means of furthering their own interests, whether or not the public would be able to share in the rewards. The Austerity program continues to this day as an established institution which can profit off of the exploited people, because they have no real resource or legal mechanism to intervene on their own behalf, except through the usage of a Reformative Revolution. As long as the Austerity measures of Inalienable Rights are maintained, the few can continue to enrich themselves at the expense of the many. In order to gain even the smallest wage and benefits increase for their continued participation in the Austerity program as a citizen, they have had to fight tooth and nail against those who intentionally delay even the most meagre return payment of the IOUs, so as to devise some other law, rule, practice or policy which will make up for the loss in their revenues (money, position, power, etc...). Far too many social issues remain unresolved because in doing so, the selfish interests of those in government and their Loyal confederates in various channels of commerce (such as through tax deferments), which include their compatriots in education, religion, and Journalism— would find themselves either insolvent, or greatly diminished by having to share in the bounty of their increased wages and benefits of their semi-restored Inalienable Rights.
Yet there is a problem... in that so much time has transpired since the IOU transactions occurred, both sides of the transaction have forgotten that there was even an exchange. However, because of the increased valuation of the Declaration's stature as a surviving legal document to which the nation abides by as a precedent, there is no statute-of-limitations which may be cited to nullify the implied agreement between the citizens and the early government. The "Power-of-Attorney" transferred to the government in being able to suspend payment of the Independence-acquired Inalienable Rights to the people in the budding years of growth, was meant as a temporary transference governed by Common Law based on judicial precedents because there was no prevailing Civil Law based on observed Statutes. In effect, the Common Law was aligned closely with an observed "Natural Law" interpretation because of the "Inalienable" label that was used in the Declaration of Independence... and was used as a foundational premise upon which later Civil law was formatively stipulated as yielding a humbled deference to. No less, the law of Torts (delict) and Contracts as well as those dealing with property and succession (inheritance)... reveal that specific rationalities of jurisprudence are effectively petitioned to take part because both the rule and spirit of the law come into question and sustained by the practiced exercises of individualism and free will. Additionally, the Law-of-Equity necessarily comes into play not only because of the aforementioned outstanding criteria in the illegal withholding of property which neither falls under the jurisdictions of Civil or Criminal forfeiture nor Eminent Domain confiscation, explicates the need for an exegesis as to why and under what Authority granted to them by the principal of Vicarious Representation, are those officials in government permitted to continue in the action of reprinting a bureaucracy of counterfeit democracy, when the people themselves have unequivocally stated in protest after protest, they want the government to cease and desist in its egregious disproportionalities of redistributed equality which continue to foment so much disillusionment, disenchantment and disfranchisements amongst the populace... and surrender both the underlying probity and historical propriety of the government's functionality to them... the rightful owners.
It is abhorrently and pathetically ridiculous, not to mention morally and ethically barbaric for the government to withhold the Full property of the public's Inalienable Rights by exercising some convoluted, self-serving Right of Eminent Domain irrationality which intends to provide what it believes to be 'Just Compensation' at market value, when... because of its abuses, the market value of the peoples' Inalienable Rights and Benefits are being negatively assessed by a process of stock market valuation which consistently diminishes the value into negative territory unless it can position itself to be poised to take advantage of speculative investments that leak the rumor of a merger in order to create the conditions for an artifiialized "buyers market" scenario of readily available bonds that provide a culture of investment portfolios whereby cheap common stocks of the populace invariably take a loss and the costly preferred stock of the wealthy are enabled to cash in on a quick sell of liquidation... thus creating a generally unrecognized stock market cycle which some investors are intuitive about, but may not have as yet formulated an articulated consciousness thereof. It is a situation in which some interpreted to be a three-(or multi-) tiered chess game with a fractualed set of rules that in any respect keep the majority as pieces to be sacrificed or exploited as needed by a few to gain or maintain their ascendency over others.
The Cenocratic Reform Movement is, in effect, a type of publicly held judicial court case involving the People Vrs. the Government (as opposed to a maritime (admiralty) or military law case held at sea or during a wartime... to be distinguished from martial law). The People are the Plaintiffs and the Government is the Defendant (since it is We The People who are bringing charges against the Government and there is no contributory negligence on the part of the citizenry and there is a preponderance of evidence against the Government), though those in government may well attempt to circumvent "their" judicial process (because there exists a double [one for the rich and one for the poor] and triple (government-business-labor) standards of law); and claim itself to be the legally warranted Prosecutor (as well as Judge and Jury) having the greater Authority to dictate terms of final adjudicated judgment such as what... if any resolution and payment awards are to be deemed acceptable (particularly to itself). The Power-of-Attorney privileges awarded the fledgling government was a consignment, a By-Proxy arrangement that was never intended by the People to be a permanent consolidation of rights— into an Incorporation which nullified the Right of the People a Full Partnership agreement promised to them via the legal document widely known as the Declaration of Independence; which signified a binding contractual agreement between the government and the people... and which unequivocally, in bold print without the need for indistinct 'small print' enclosures; clearly entitled them to a full restoration of their Inalienable Rights once the government had reached a stage of self-sustaining solvency and would be able to repay not only the IOUs of the public's Inalienable Rights inheritance, but an equitable dividend for their day-to-day labors-of-loyalty in preserving, as well as increasing the productive administrative capabilities of the government on their behalf.
The Government's would-be argument that it is not solvent, that it is in fact in debt, belies the fact that the debt is caused by a persistent mismanagement of the Peoples' tax revenues and used as "Play Money" by officials and their linked co-conspirators engaging in a "creative accounting" technique of credit liability subterfuge-ion meant to force the conscientiousness of the public to maintain, if not increase its level of servitude and exploitation like Capitalists of old who created conditions in which workers had to pay rent, as well as purchase food and other goods of living necessity directly from their employer who force the workers to live in make-shift shanty towns owned by the employer, who paid them a wage at a meagre subsistence level which did not permit an accumulation of savings to occur... and most often increased an employee's debt-to-earnings ratio. Such a situation gives further evidence of the government's complicity with a confederacy of the wealthy to commit economic forms of assault and battery against the public because such actions causes harm to both their person and their commercially tangible property... making such property lose it value so that it may be purchased at various government auctions by the highest bidder whose fees the government collects for its own coffers and renders the public into a state of 'quagmire-impoverishment' akin to former social reform measures such as the laughably incoherent European Monarchist debtor's prison or Russian Tsar's (1861) reprehensible 49 year 'redemption payments' statute... which amounted to replacing one system of servitude with that of another and calling it a socially responsible government activity... that becomes an institutionalized revenue-generating mechanism that is made compulsory... like the present day American Health Care system... one must either pay for the system through an exorbitant cost structure or be fined a fee through collected taxes. And the government wonders why the citizens' loyalty and confidence in it wanes!
The inherited endowment of Inalienable Rights constitutes real property that is legally owned by each person whose entitlement was temporarily transferred, but never actually returned to their Full Ownership... and has been used to effect both a modern day economic formula of a debtor's imprisonment and a 'redemptory payments' imposition authorized under the provisionary decree of 'citizenship'. The property of the public is being held as a hostage by the government demanding that an ongoing ransom be paid by various means such as an indentured servitude (because no equal payment of resources is allotted) and a protracted dependency (in order for a subsistence level of rights to be permitted under provisions such as 'civil rights' and those contained in various amendments); thus revealing the liability of the government to give redress for the injuries the public has sustained by an agreement which has since been rendered into a circumstance resembling theft which obscene's the notions of good faith and fair dealing, and therefore constitutes a breach-of-contract verified by the assented witness of the many millions of public persons (citizens, etc...) who have experienced affliction because of the neglect in rendering unto the people what is rightfully theirs.
Indeed, the situation necessarily coalesces all divergent considerations to attend to the need for a juridical deliberation in the Supreme Court, yet, because of how the Supreme Court judges are chosen (through a political selection process), there is need for the people to have serious concern that any Supreme Court review would be biased in favor of the government, despite official oaths or personal declarations to the contrary... since all courts are government-dependent for their sustenance. In addition, the situation affords the government a means of delaying payment or create some occasion for withholding payment by using the Supreme Court's slow process of selecting which cases should be heard, as an acceptable excuse. Nonetheless, the IOUs represent a long-standing debt that the people need to collectively ask for to be Paid-In-Full, signifying a Full legal capacity of individually-collectivized Self-Representation and Self-Determination.
When the consciousness of a people differentiates one another into classes based on resources of actual or imagined surpluses of wealth, and overlooks this property of ownership as having a counter-part level of an increased wage and benefits of Inalienable Rights, they do not recognize that it is a complementary necessity since one can not exist without the other. To wit, by increasing one's wealth one also increases the value of their Inalienable Rights which affords them commensurate benefits of Self-Representation and Self-Determination. By an extended reciprocation, if one's value of Inalienable Rights is increased, there will be a commensurate profit in one's wealth. If one necessarily follows the other, then the former of either will produce the latter in the context to which it appears. If it is a suit of clothes which makes a person as suggested by some conventionalisms of colloquial deference, then the public must be provided a new, clean and pressed wardrobe of their Inalienable Rights.
Date of Origination: Tuesday, 23-January-2018... 3:26 AM
Date of Initial Posting: Monday, 29-Jan-2018... 11:48 AM