It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Do you really know what Democracy is ? Or, do you THINK you know ?

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on May, 19 2014 @ 12:30 PM
True Democracy cannot ever be actioned without a tangible and realtime Global influence catalysing it,and its structure must have 100% voter participaction enforced by laws.

No single Country on Earth can ever claim to project a Democracy,it is impossible to do this when global dynamics are factored into the equation,and really there has never been a pre-Internet time that this was a valid method.

A True Democracy removes the requirement for any "representation of the People",the Peoples voices represent themselves in realtime.

A True Democracy does not have a Liberal and a democratic or any other type of Party or group,there is simply no need for them.

Political partys were created to support the logistics of gathering the peoples individual voices from over a huge geographic area,levels of Government were created to support this dynamic structure and its growth and evolution.

A True Democracy is not Governed it is accomodated.

A True Democracy does not have a leader,it has a C.E.O who is legally responsible for executing the peoples wishes EXACTLY as they demand with ZERO LATTITUDE and ZERO decision making input.This hired influence simply does as it is told with no autonomy and strict legal oversight carring punative and serious measures for abbrogation of duty to the People.Employees of the People in a democracy go to prison every time they veer from their duties of 100% execution of the Peoples wishes.

This means that you need 100% voter participaction to begin with enforced by law,this results in 100% representation of the populace and prevents vote salvaging or pirating of voter impacts which are left unattended when people fail to use them.This is how we see mis-representation supported,it is these unattended but still very real and tangile voting IMPACTS which feed the monsters manipulating us all.

If we had a True Global Democracy we would see realtime votes by Humanity on important issues such as resource allocation and Population migrations,we would see massive changes enacted immediatly on a scale never seen before,if the current PTB had any brains at all they would see that the next bonanza fiscally on a Global scale will only come from a Re-Birth and a Re-organisation Globally,this doesnt mean losing any value it actually means gaining value,tremendously,but doing it by supporting Humanity instead of fighting its growth and evolution,the point of diminishing returns has been reached for the Olde Ways and now the Future really does lie in helping Humanity come together if one wants to make money and allow it to keep its value.

Can you imagine what it would look like if there were no borders and people could go anywhere they chose to live on a Global scale? No one would live in bad places with limited or no resources,people would naturally Migrate to the best areas,space would be used properly,land ownership on a large scale would not be allowed releasing the worlds best spots from private ownership and underuse,the transportaion costs of taking resources to these billions of people living in the worst places would not be needed,that alone would make an epic impact on the Global Standard of Living.

We would actually be farming LESS arable land to feed the Global appetite,less would be wasted,less of ALL resources would be wasted.

Efficiancy COSTS LOTS OF MONEY TO SET UP AND INITIATE,this means that although this Global System is Optimal and the only option it will cost untold and new standard setting amounts of Money to establish and properly structure.This level of Fiscal Opportunitty has never been seen before on Earth.

To an anticipatory mind a True Global Democracy is the path for the already rich to become obscenely rich far beyond even the greediest ones expectations,they could not visualise the scope of gain because they were focusing on only one side of the coin,the laughable irony of it all is that i believe they will be realising this very very soon,and that is hilarious,they will have to invest all of their Ill-gotten gains into PURELY HUMANITARIAN GLOBAL CAUSES WITH GOOD INTENTIONS if they ever hope to keep their fiscal ball and influence rolling along into the future.It isnt a Greater Power forcing them either it is the natural and unavoidable evolution of fiscal influences and their conduits and parameters,the MONEY is forcing their hands and the longer they delay now ha ha ha ha the MORE they lose and on a DAILY basis,they are out of "bad boy' ways to make money make more money so now they are being forced to look for "good boy" ways to roll the dough over again for god knows how many more centuries.

When I think about democracy as we accept its definitions today i visualise two American Politicians making promises to the People,one saying he would fight for free-health care and one saying he would fight against it,then I ask myself who they are trying to fool,the PEOPLE ONLY HAVE ONE NEED,there are NO OPTIONS,the peoples Voice projected via realtime votes on an ongoing basis as a Civic and legally enforced responsibility will TELL THEIR EMPLOYEE WHAT TO DO FOR THEM.

If Americans WANT free healthcare and a realtime 100% participaction vote says so tomorrow ,then the day after that there is free Healthcare,and it is that simple,if Americans want to pull out of a Global conflict then a realtime vote today will decide EXACTLY what the Peoples Employees do tomorrow.

A true Democcracy self-polices because there is one clear and 100% actuated Voice or decision made and actioned upon with 100% clarity and accuracy,and this means that there are Punative consequences to anyone who abbrogates this defined path of action,so there are no more Politicians,none at all,just Hired People who execute the peoples wishes exactly as requested,with jail terms for disobeying this request.

No one man decides if a democratic nation goes to War,no 12 men decide if a Democratic nation goes to War, THE PEOPLE 100% OF THE PEOPLE make these decisions.And they do it in an hour .

If you want to make Money in the future then you need political Global balance and structure,Wars DO NOT MAKE MONEY anymore because Global resources are now all accounted for and needed for survival,the expenditure of the resuorces needed for a Global conflict now outweigh the gains,no one can come out ahead via conflict now,it is a resource based control mechanism and cannot be changed unless resource managment growth and allocation is streamlined and optimised on a Global scale,this is why there is no other way to ever roll over Global fiscal impacts and never will be,the global resource base dictates Fiscal power,and it is now completely accounted for and only better managment practices can create a new growth catalyst for Global Fiscal Growth and maintenance.

Hoarding resouces and selling them for higher profits is not how you make money grow long term,it is like planting one crop that will never replentish itself,TPTB need an economics lesson,it is not the ways they see it,if the richest of rich were smart they would not let their peers do things like buy up the Global Supply of Coa-coa beans,this is regressive and will only make the immediate switch to globally managed resource base harder to accomplish.

If the Planet were optimally managed in terms of land viablity and optimal resource allocation there would be a Global Economic BOOM of Universal proportions,all of the money that is hidden and hoarded will PALE compared to the potential fiscal influence which will be generated by this Global Managment Revolution which is coming one way or another anyways.

The old way was to generate money by preying on and manipulating peoples basc needs,the future of fiscal power is in actually turning the tables and correcting all of the wrongs that supported the old business method and optimising the support of the peoples neds..........think of it this way,

In the olde days,you made money by building ten types of less than optimal products intentionally under-engineered using poor materials with short term consumerism in mind,you sold the people on the need to have choices and instigated social change that destroyed family dynamics and values to support this requirement for a multi-choice societal comfort zone,

In todays world unbeknownst to the idiots who have let the power and money rot their ability to visualise true growth beyond their own control, it is better business to now RELOCATE people to cut down transportation costs,then to use the saved energy to produce BETTER LONG LASTING QUALITY products with limited choices and quality levels,only the best can be marketed,but it will be MARKETED TO BILLIONS with little to no transportation costs.Move the People to the resources and provide them with the best product possible with the longest functional lifespan possible and then move on to the NEXT GLOBAL NEED,there are so many that the profit potentials are astronomical.

Global Borders used to support the optimal power generation methodology but now and in the Future they will reduce this potential.

The only ways for ANY of the RICH to stay rich or get any richer is for Global Borders to drop ASAP and for Global Popu;ation relocation and optimal resurce managment and allocation to begin ASAP.

Now you make the most money off of building and selling the single best longest lasting Cell Phone to the majority of people and you compound your wealth by bringing them to you to to work for you rebuilding the world they already allowed you to destroy.We could relocate Humanity over 50-100 years and begin a new age of species growth and evolution unseen and unrivaled.The Rich dont LOSE money in these dynamics they MAKE oodles of Money,this is the only thing that can possibly generate by my calculations up to 100 times more profit for the elite than a World War could.In fact this focus would make destructive power generation obsolete immediatly.Wars are already NOT PROFITABLE,and anyone can see this,so the elite will not take that route in fact they will NOT ALLOW IT.

Constructive growth far outpaces destructive growth when Global Resource managment is the primary driver.

If the Global Population relocations are timed properly with the Infrastructure and Resource managment changes then the Migtations will be timed as a WORKFORCE Migration with an immediate and seamless integration into the economic structure,imagine people coming from all over the Planet to build the Great PYramids,well we will soon be seeing this happen in ALL optimal habitation spots which are located close to resource bases and this means paralell and astronomical Global growth supported by the majority of the Planets population creating a Power Mongers wet dream.

Only the cerebrally challenged Global Elite will be missing this point,maybe they are all missing it who knows huh?

A true Global Democracy would produce unheard of levels and degrees of power and influence,it makes the rich richer through the enrichment of the masses not through the disenfranchisement of the masses,Power and Money lust always leads to True Democracy,because it is really the PEOPLE who define worth and value in anything,so the sooner you give the masses the impetus to WANT more for themselves and the equal for their fellow man with equal passion you have a Capitalists wet dream with no wars to stop the money making and power generation.Everyone is happier and even more bundles of money are made when everyone is Happy at the Carnival,ask and Carnival manager how important consumers "feelings" are in the moment.No one cared how much money or influence the Elite had until it started to bring down Humanitys forward evolution,it wasnt personal the Elite brought it on themselves through a lack of foresight and poor managment practices.As soon as Global Resource managment was recognised by the Global Population as a thorn in their side they looked to see who was sticking it there and wha la they found all of the elite,and now the Gig is up,so instead of being a thorn now the Elite need to be a Curative measure,which is the only way forward for them in any case.The inability to maintain or grow their powerbases fiscally has been crippeling the Elite and splintering them for a few centuries now since the Industrial Revolution specificlly.They could have introduced optimal technology 200 years ago and not burned up so many of the Planets resources,instead they supported regressive high maintenance technlogies which were not resource friendly,that resource instabilty this caused is what got the Cat on their Tails,now the only way they can take the heat off before they are all targeted is to optimise Global resource Managment which they themselves screwed up on purpose,they have built their own gallows and now need to work even harder to dismantle them.Ironic isnt it?

The fools didnt consider or accurately extrapolate global population growth and needs vs Global Carrying capacity,it is not that the Planet doesnt have enough resources,we could support 50 billion People easily with optimal managment.It is that they used resource managment on a Global scale to manipulate Humanity and to create wealth,but in doing so they creted regressive and high maintenance systems to optimise wealth generation and wasted now precious resources to do so,they are learning that those resources they wasted represented the purest form of profit in existance.And that the unbalanced displacement of these resources on a Global scale is having ramifications in nearly every area of their Fiscal growth Calenders because this displacement is causing Global unrest and drawing attention DIRECTLY TO THEM.

I think we can all relax because if you consider it the Elite will need to create a better revenue generation system than wars can produce,this is a new age for real and of all of us they realise it the most.

The longer the elite wait to do the right things,the more money power and influence they will lose,and they will lose it as fast as the compounding interest gave it to them.

A smart Elite would be combing the Internet and harvesting the cream of the Humanitarian crop and REALLY supporting them in their endeavours because this IS the only way the future of fiscal and power generation can go,and time IS of the essence..

I used to worry about World Wars because I knew they financed the Elite,then I realised how fast our world has changed and saw that they have been caught wioth their pants down and now the worm has turned and they will have to be the ones making Global Humanitarian reparations OF THEIR OWN ACCORDS or face losing their power and influence permanently in the future.War canot generate the types and levels of power and influence they feed upon,times have changed.

posted on May, 19 2014 @ 07:06 PM
checked the thread again and im glad to see some discussion.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: unity100

A better discussion would be about the similarities and anything identical between all of the above.

And about how many of those "systems" borrow from each other.

One comparison would be "Capitalism" using "front money" by issuing (selling) stock and a "free market" businessman not using investors for initial funding. Are both examples "Capitalism"?

definitions are important to determine this kind of stuff in the first place.

stock market, front money, stocks, trading - these are not necessarily fundamentals of capitalism. these are mechanics and methods for governance of economy.

stock market could as well be publicly-owned but run through this kind of system. like how the production was run by government-owned 'companies' in ussr.

the catch with capitalism is in the concept of OWNERSHIP. particularly, PRIVATE ownership.

take note - not PERSONAL ownership or property.

personal property is stuff you can utilize yourself or with your family etc. like your house, car, your small boat, your hobby motorcycle. your family farmland etc.

But there is no limit to private property - one guy can own entire groundwater in a state, or a country, or even the world and everyone would end up being obliged to his whims. Or, entire farmland. Or entire telecommunications infrastructure. Or all the companies.

And the potential savior from this situation is a competitor - a guy which wants to do EXACTLY the same.

here is the problem of capitalism - it concentrates power, and after a while economic power concentrates so much in the economy that it starts to become an aristocracy. just like our current situation.

this may be sped up through different means - like government subsidies or other stuff - but even in a totally unregulated market it happens. like how american economy got owned by 12 people in between 1850-1890.

Here is where communism and capitalism separates and the identifying traits are visible :

communism allows PERSONAL property (house, car, small boat this that) but it does not allow PRIVATE property that you cant yourself utilize.

Like, you can own a small fishing boat or a small yacht for your family in communism. But you cannot own a transatlantic which can take 3000 people on a cruise. Instead, it is considered PUBLIC property and is required to be democratically governed by the entire, LOCAL public. Like, the people of the port who built the transatlantic.

From what i understand from the knowledge in the article and what i read elsewhere, this is the gist of it.

So then, in your example, its not the stock market tricks or the mechanics in which a resource allocation center works, but its WHO owns everything.

originally posted by: solomons path
a reply to: unity100

Thanks for the link . . . However, I have a major problem with this thread. You assert that posters here don't actually know the definitions for the labels they throw around, to which I can agree in a lot of cases. However, your "evidence" for this assertion is nothing more than a blog by an anonymous author or authors. What exactly gives this blog any more credibility than those anonymous authors of ATS who also "don't know zit", as you would say?

i think that article gives enough references. Links are hard to see because it seems that they are very closely colored like the text, but i saw a lot of references embedded to scholarly definitions and histories of systems there.

I can agree with some of the authors points, even many of his conclusions. However, I also disagree with several of his "definitions" for the isms. For instance:

Corporatism is supposedly the dominance of corporations in political and economic life. Who subvert democracy, kill ‘small businesses’, and then exploit everyone and wreck nations for their own profit.

Where the actual definition of classical Corporatism is:

Corporatism (also known as corporativism) is the socio-political organization of a society by major interest groups, or corporate groups, such as agricultural, business, ethnic, labour, military, patronage, or scientific affiliations, on the basis of common interests. Corporatism is theoretically based upon the interpretation of a community as an organic body. The term corporatism is based on the Latin root word "corpus" (plural – "corpora") meaning "body".

Which is actually more closely associated with Communism.

that's incorrect.

corporations are privately owned. in communism, anything big must be owned democratically.

You may organize a society into corporations which represent major interest groups, but in the end what matters is WHO owns it.

For example in usa, ~450 rich men at the top control almost entire economy through their shares.

A corporation is an organization, but the people in organization have no power or say in anything. A rich guy at the top dictates everything, which then gets dictated all the way to the bottom.

In communism that doesnt apply since it requires that everyone participating in the organization have democratic say in governance and revenue.

In America today, the argument is against neo-Corporatism, usually defined as:

Corporatism may also refer to economic tripartism involving negotiations between business, labour, and state interest groups to establish economic policy. This is sometimes also referred to as neo-corporatism.

Which is more about using the power of mutli-industry/national conglomerates for political subterfuge, in order to shape public policy to their advantage. Not simply "getting rid of the little guy", but to gain a position of power in the government. It would also include the labor unions, in a true Corporatist government.
Source - wiki

That is simply going off of Wikipedia, which is sourced and cited infinitely more than the blog you referred to (which has zero citations to back their assertions).

So, in essence, you are doing the exact same thing you are trying to talk down to others for doing. Going with the definitions that fit your personal prejudices and saying everyone else is wrong.

Bad form . . .

But as the article says - take out corporations. What remains ?

The rich minority elite who previously owned the corporation. They STILL keep owning all the resources and assets and manpower. So they will just do everything they were doing, directly.

A corporation was just a means to force some form of democracy into economy at the end of 19th century. Before that time, one person could own and dictate all the newspapers in usa. (hearst i believe) after that, they had to delegate their power more to shareholders, which were forced to increase in number.

As for wikipedia, there are plenty of references to wikipedia in the article. If wikipedia's references and citations are solid, this means the article is also on solid footing.

posted on May, 19 2014 @ 07:17 PM

originally posted by: Not Authorized
a reply to: unity100

But the real point is, it is corrupted. Even Yellen can't define what kind of a system we are.

The questions we should be asking is, how do we fix it? Their are reasons this has happened, and it becomes obvious what they are when you see it.


true. that's the question needing asked.

but as i said before, i think that knowing what is what is also important to give some answers to this question.

the article's conclusion is sound : democratization of life (which gives power to people - us) vs privatization of life. (which transfers power to minority elite).

looking back at history, best times are always times in which people are more empowered, free and also can share a decent amount from the economic prosperity of their society.

looking back at worst times, we see wealth concentration, accompanied (naturally) by those who hold that wealth as power (from aristocracy to wall street), and everyone else getting dictated what they can and they cant do in life.

i agree with that conclusion : there cant be freedom in a place where there is private tyranny.

like, how much freedom to start up a small business do we have in current climate, with wal-mart ?

comcast is trying to kill net neutrality. which will make internet into a private-cable environment. what kind of freedom will we have to set up websites, forums and whatnot in that environment ? forums like this will need to pay an arm and a leg to even reach us.

so its private extremely rich minority vs us - 'the people'.

which seems to be a repeating story in history. be it early aristocracy, be it roman elites, be it feudalism, be it rich business tycoons, be it wall street.

it seems that the 'privileged elite' concept always seeks to keep its power through transforming and adapting.

so we must look into the core of the subject - private vs public.

i'd say anything that is as big as strategical should be publicly owned. like, internet infrastructure. then noone can attempt lordship over entire american internet through private property.

or, seeds and agribusiness. it must be either publicly owned, or only small farms should be allowed. it must be democratic. so that monsanto cannot try to hold an entire nation hostage by the balls.

or, banks, finance mechanisms must be public. so that no major investment firm can play with entire world economy and then break it - like how goldman sachs did.

or telephone infrastructure, or this or that. you get the idea - anything that we all need to survive and do personal and business activity, needs to be public.

this would eradicate private power in economy and democracy - while leaving out small and medium businesses to thrive.

italy had done a great spectacular success with what is called 'small and medium scale industry' back in 1990s.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: unity100

- republic is actually democracy - contrary to what many in the right, think. - See more at:

No it isn't.

Democracy is mob rule, and if anyone is in the minority sucks being them.

'Majority' rules.

Republic minority rights are protected from the mob.

Also one of the reasons they wrote the US constitution, and the Bill of rights.

One of the most important amendments in it is this one:

Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Which pretty much tells the mob to eff off.

thats absolutely incorrect.

a republic is a democracy in which you have more centralization. and the centralized representatives make laws that pass valid for every locale.

in democracy, minorities can make their voices heard since democracy in its unmodified form requires local and direct governance.

that's why articles like this topic links are necessary.

posted on May, 19 2014 @ 07:19 PM

originally posted by: lynxpilot
US is a constitutional republic, not a democracy, fwiw.

Give this man a cigar!

I hope the OP understands the difference

posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:43 PM
a reply to: SLAYER69

Give this man a cigar!

Can't the mob has declared smoking is bad for people so we can't.

'Democracy' in action.

posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:51 PM

originally posted by: lynxpilot
US is a constitutional republic, not a democracy, fwiw.

Perhaps it used to be but now we are a Corpratracracy or a Corporate Oligarchy....take your pick!

posted on May, 20 2014 @ 02:58 PM
a reply to: olaru12

Perhaps it used to be but now we are a Corpratracracy or a Corporate Oligarchy....take your pick!

I am so sick of comments like that.

So lets 'regulate' them !

No wait the 'mob' already has.

Lets give people more money on the hour do doing the job of teenagers!

No wait the 'mob' already did that too.

Lets use government to rob from the rich to give to the so called poor so they can go out and buy more stuff from them evil corporations !

No wait the 'mob' done that too.

Let's use government fascism to give people 'free' healthcare one of them 'corporate' products.

No wait been there done that, came back for another helping of stupid.

Let's use government fascism to 'give' people 'free' homes !

No wait been there done that too have to them out. !

Hey !

The 'mob' loves unions so let's bail them out while were at it !

Ah hell guess we are ' corpratracy' when the 'mob' uses government to give them fiat currency, and corporate products.

Ranging from homes,cell phones, and 'education' , and healthcare for nothing.

Whoops I forgot the 'mob' hates them evil corporations lets use 'democracy'- MOB RULE to get what 'we want'.

posted on May, 20 2014 @ 03:05 PM
Last thought here:

Civilization, in fact, grows more and more maudlin and hysterical; especially under democracy it tends to degenerate into a mere combat of crazes; the whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary. In Defense of Women (1918)

Almost 100 YEARS Ago.

Anyone else see just how TRUE that comment is ?

posted on May, 20 2014 @ 03:08 PM

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: olaru12

Perhaps it used to be but now we are a Corpratracracy or a Corporate Oligarchy....take your pick!

I am so sick of comments like that.

to bad....

Research will bare out my opinion....

"to big to fail" ring a bell?

Don't let your ideology get in the way of your common sense.
edit on 20-5-2014 by olaru12 because: x0x0

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in