How about it?

Recently a new meme has caught my attention involving the Aztecs and how they sacrificed their elite during catastrophic times.


Did the Aztecs sacrifice their elite?


The above article by Reuters fact check says no, sacrifice of leaders has never been a thing.


Today I ask the question : why not?


The movers and shakers of the world compete for power, money, territory.

They perpetrate psy-ops against the common man in order to deceive them so they can achieve their goals.


The average person just wants to be able to live out their lives in peace.

No commoner wants to die in a war.

No commoner declares wars.


No commoner creates diseases in highly specialized laboratories.


If there was a platform for specifically gathering opinions of common people worldwide I am pretty sure that we would find that most of us have a lot in common.

If war was seen as backwards and not promoted by the elite for just one generation, this world would drastically change.

If usury was outlawed, how drastically would this world change?

The degeneracy we see today, is manufactured.








Worst case scenario : some innocent one percenter dies. Still a better outcome than so many lives lost on the battlefield.


This is similar to the idea that if two countries declare war, their politicians/bankers/captains of industry/religious leaders should fight to the death while we can watch it on television.



What say you ATS? Is it time to 'leadership' by example?

a reply to: 19Bones79

Their time is short... and they know it.


We will build a beautiful new world.

originally posted by: 19Bones79
Recently a new meme has caught my attention involving the Aztecs and how they sacrificed their elite during catastrophic times.


Did the Aztecs sacrifice their elite?


The above article by Reuters fact check says no, sacrifice of leaders has never been a thing.


Today I ask the question : why not?


The movers and shakers of the world compete for power, money, territory.

They perpetrate psy-ops against the common man in order to deceive them so they can achieve their goals.


The average person just wants to be able to live out their lives in peace.

No commoner wants to die in a war.

No commoner declares wars.


[...]

I haven't read the article yet, but:

"No commoner declares wars"

I can think of at least a few pretty famous times commoners did just that.

a reply to: 19Bones79

You can't sacrifice any leaders today. Too many sycophants to label you an insurgent, or insurrectionist.

If they were despots, you could, but not when it's a shallow pool of like minded and empowered gutter snakes.

a reply to: 19Bones79

This is similar to the idea that if two countries declare war, their politicians/bankers/captains of industry/religious leaders should fight to the death

In days of old The Kings Of England actually lead their troops into battle, and fought and died along side them.

Don't know much about the Aztecs. During the French Revolution a lot of the establishment lost their heads.

Dan Andrews, the Premier of Victoria, Australia during all of it lock downs and excessive fines has gone quite these days. Reports suggest he got a bad bashing.

"Great men do not seek power, they have power thrust upon them."
~Kah'less the Unforgettable


I have trouble trusting anyone who actually wants a position of power or authority over myself or others.

a reply to: 19Bones79

What say you ATS? Is it time to 'leadership' by example?

Don't be so cryptic. Just say what you really mean in plainspeak.

Are you suggesting that we should have our "leaders" fight to the death to decide political issues?

Are you suggesting drawing and quartering the "leaders" we don't like?

Are you suggesting outright murder?

Just say it. Clear and unambiguous terms. Loud and clear. What are you really suggesting?

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: 19Bones79

What say you ATS? Is it time to 'leadership' by example?

Don't be so cryptic. Just say what you really mean in plainspeak.

Are you suggesting that we should have our "leaders" fight to the death to decide political issues?

Are you suggesting drawing and quartering the "leaders" we don't like?

Are you suggesting outright murder?

Just say it. Clear and unambiguous terms. Loud and clear. What are you really suggesting?

If making them fight to the death is an option, I'm going with that one. It would make the conviction and truth much more up front than it seems to be currently. You would have to truly believe in what you were fighting for, and I suspect there would be a lot more common ground found if that were the case.

a reply to: Boadicea

What are you really suggesting?

Act with honor and integrity in what we do.

I see it as a numbers game, when enough people wake up and see they are getting the rough end of things. While the lights are on and food on the table most will be complacent. As more become personally affected by the mismanagement of covid and aware of the facts, gain of function, treatment suppression and immune system damage from the vaccination it gets harder to keep the fake news alive. People do start to push back, the rallying around new Nuremberg trials is one example. It is a preferable option to resolve this issues in a civil way.

Maybe this is what rumors of an upcoming internet shutdown is about? Cut off the public discourse before the public become too aware of what is going on and pick up their pitch forks?

For ATS role in this, keep doing what it does, Deny Ignorance.

a reply to: 19Bones79


Ummm...in all my 61 years on this rock...I've never once been tempted enough to actually put money down on...

"Pay per view"...

But dayam...I'd certainly pay to see that hot mess...

We could even give the progs cool names...like "Undertaker"...or "Overtaken"...Or maybe just..."Sleepy Joe"...





YouSir

a reply to: network dude

If making them fight to the death is an option, I'm going with that one. It would make the conviction and truth much more up front than it seems to be currently. You would have to truly believe in what you were fighting for, and I suspect there would be a lot more common ground found if that were the case.

Maybe... but then the people are forced to live according to the will of the winner.

I'd sure hate for those to be the rules with Biden and Putin... My money would be on Putin... but then my life would be whatever Putin wanted it to be. Everyone's life would be what Putin wants it to be.

That would suck.

a reply to: kwakakev

Act with honor and integrity in what we do.

I commend you -- but I know your words reflect who you are. Not the OP. You are speaking for yourself.

For ATS role in this, keep doing what it does, Deny Ignorance.

That's not quite as true as it once was... but I appreciate it to the extent it does still hold true!

a reply to: Boadicea


Are you having a hard time of it dear?


I'm afraid I can't dumb down my posts anymore than they already are for you.

originally posted by: 19Bones79
a reply to: Boadicea


Are you having a hard time of it dear?


I'm afraid I can't dumb down my posts anymore than they already are for you.

Gotcha! Cannot/will not answer the question... on a discussion forum. Apparently insulting and belittling is the best you can do.

But it's cool. I got my answer.

originally posted by: kwakakev
Don't know much about the Aztecs. During the French Revolution a lot of the establishment lost their heads.

Dan Andrews, the Premier of Victoria, Australia during all of it lock downs and excessive fines has gone quite these days. Reports suggest he got a bad bashing.

The problem with the French Revolution is that they didn't quit. The powerless took power, took vengeance, and then started eating each other instead of building a beautiful new world.

What people tend to forget in the rush to tear down is that destruction is easy. Creation is much, much harder.

a reply to: 19Bones79

I read Aztec by Gary Jennings. In that book the High Priest pirced his penis with a thorn so that he would not be temped by sex and they cut out the hearts of children and then skinned them and wore the skins to dance in.

Perhaps a different culture would be better.

a reply to: alldaylong

At this point I have When Two Tribes go to war by Frankie Goes to Hollywood going through my head
Good Liverpool band!



Rainbows
Jane

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: network dude

If making them fight to the death is an option, I'm going with that one. It would make the conviction and truth much more up front than it seems to be currently. You would have to truly believe in what you were fighting for, and I suspect there would be a lot more common ground found if that were the case.

Maybe... but then the people are forced to live according to the will of the winner.

I'd sure hate for those to be the rules with Biden and Putin... My money would be on Putin... but then my life would be whatever Putin wanted it to be. Everyone's life would be what Putin wants it to be.

That would suck.

I think you underestimate Joey. he whooped Corn Pop, and can do push ups. No, really.

a reply to: network dude

LOL! I did literally laugh out loud. That was brilliant!!!

And now I'll go hang my head in shame for doubting old Joey...