3 class system is still in effect - secretly....

The old 3 class system is still secretly in place...

Basically the old 3 class system is still in play from way back in the middle ages. What happens is is everyone is documented as to what class they're in based on there bloodlines. If anyone starts to gain ranking, like say you're born low class and you work super hard and start to reach middle class; if you do that then you get flagged and put on a watch list. Then if you still are showing signs of "climbing the ladder of success" you're really scrutinized. Like they really check into what you're doing. And or immediately audit you and try and purposefully bankrupt you. Then you end up basically getting pushed back down to low class.

That way they maintain the 3 class structure. If people were actually freely allowed to go from low to middle to upper class without any checks and balances what would happen is a top heavy effect. Too many people would end up at the top. They would then give birth to kids who start off with an upper hand, both in terms of knowledge and money. And the trend would continue generation after generation, eventually replacing many of TPTB, Elitists, Royals, etc etc.

So instead they use g=v as a means to keep people within there classes that they were born into using a gazillion devices they have at their disposal to steal any wealth you start to build up. (ie: audits) That way they keep you down and keep themselves up by stealing your money, which essentially is your energy, because it takes hard work to make money often times. I honestly think that this is an underlying structure of developed nations. The class structure likely still is in FULL EFFECT. What you're born into you stay in, if you climb out, they system is designed to try and throw you back.

My evidence of this is that as you know most of the wealth in America for example is owned by less than 1% of the families. We're told this is natural in some way. I don't believe's true. I believe it's orchestrated by law.

Correct me if you think I'm wrong??

Although I believe there are three distinct social classes, I don't think the social structure is designed to hold anyone back. There are plenty of examples of ultra wealthy families who were not wealthy no more than 100 years ago. For example the Walton family could hardly be considered wealthy before the introduction of Wal-Mart.This doesn't mean that social mobility is completely cut, but rather strongly filtered. If you're born poor you more than likely will die poor, and there isn't much you can do about it. Poor people will be born into poor social systems, go to poor schools, get caught up into poor social trappings (substance abuse, criminal activity, and failure to work on higher education), and work poor jobs (general labor). Ditto middle class. Here's a question to play with. If a poor woman steals in order to feed her hungry children is she still a criminal? What if there is very little opportunity to gain any employment for this woman? This is hard for a lot of people to imagine, but unfortunately this is reality for many people, whether others want to admit it or not. It's called being disenfranchised. One aspect of disenfranchisement is the social system completely ignoring ones struggle and viewing ones position in a complete vacuum where ones actions are the only determining factors of their position. If you're wealthy enough you can get away with murder. If you're poor enough you may serve a decade behind bars for drug possession. That drug possession charge more than likely will ensure you never gain any meaningful employment once you've served those ten years. Exponentially increasing the chances that you'll wind up incarcerated again.

You're correct except I haven't heard or thought about it being a secret 3 class structure.
I don't think you're put on a watch list, so to speak, until you are approaching the top class status cutting into their territory. They aren't out to knock everyone down that tries to move up. They don't care about the low class becoming middle class. That middle class one moving up is most desired because it's like a cat guarding the gate catching all the mice trickling in. They need the cats to take care of the mice.

reply to post by spartacus699

My evidence of this is that as you know most of the wealth in America for example is owned by less than 1% of the families. We're told this is natural in some way. I don't believe's true.

The pareto rule is 80% of the wealth is controlled by 20% of the population.

The original observation was in connection with income and wealth. Pareto noticed that 80% of Italy's land was owned by 20% of the population.[4] He then carried out surveys on a variety of other countries and found to his surprise that a similar distribution applied. www.princeton.edu...

It is pretty universal link

So does it still apply? The answer from the IMF (International Monetary Fund) is no.

....In many countries the distribution of income has become more unequal, and the top earners’ share of income in particular has risen dramatically. In the United States the share of the top 1 percent has close to tripled over the past three decades, now accounting for about 20 percent of total U.S. income (Alvaredo and others, 2012). At the same time, while the new convergence mentioned above has reduced the distance between advanced and developing economies....

Within many countries the dramatic divergence between the top 1 percent and the rest is a new reality. The increased share of the top 1 percent is clear in the United States and in some English-speaking countries and, to a lesser degree, in China and India. But it is not clear from the available data whether this new hyperconcentration at the top is a truly global phenomenon. The World Top Incomes Database (Alvaredo and others, 2012) shows that, at least until 2007, continental Europe and Japan did not experience the same shift of incomes to the top of the income distribution. But because the causes of the concentration are largely global and can be counteracted only partially by national policies, it is likely that this top-heavy concentration will only increase....
www.imf.org...

Of course the question become why? The answer is Fractional Reserve Banking siphons off the wealth from the workers.

speech of Sen. Daniel Webster, during the debate over the reauthorization of the Second National Bank of the U.S. in 1832

“A disordered currency is one of the greatest of evils. It wars against industry, frugality, and economy. And it fosters the evil spirits of extravagance and speculation. Of all the contrivances for cheating the laboring classes of mankind, none has been more effectual than that which deludes them with paper money. This is one of the most effectual of inventions to fertilize the rich man’s field by the sweat of the poor man’s brow. Ordinary tyranny, oppression, excessive taxation: These bear lightly the happiness of the mass of the community, compared with fraudulent currencies and robberies committed with depreciated paper.”

“Robberies committed with depreciated paper,” the man said. This was another way of referring to bad debt. In the accepted American view of the time, bad money led to excessive credit. Excessive credit led to bad debt. And bad debt was part and parcel of bad economic policy. It harmed the nation. The accumulation of bad debt was ruinous to the growth of the economy.

reply to post by spartacus699


Makes sense. In fact 10 years ago I wrote a paper about how economic status is the new racism.

People on the low tier of the economic ladder (you and me) can do whatever and say whatever we like as long as it doesn't upset the economic level above us.

The people on the next level of economic status (those who control the banks, land, and our prospective ways of life) are essentially happy as long as we don't infringe on their status.

The highest economic tier doesn't care about the other two tiers because they actively prevent the other two tiers from getting to their level without their consent. This is the tier that acts like gods. If they want you to live, you live. If they want you to die, you die. They have the power to say this, and there isn't anything we can do about it.

The reason I equated it to racism is that people in one tier will refuse to deal with people in lower tiers as people, but rather treat them as pets.

Don't think about trying to over throw a higher level tier then you're currently in. While we hear about these events taking place in history, the truth is that if this had ever happened we would have never heard about it out of fear that the same could happen to the people in the highest tier could be over thrown as well. When you read about those ever so great battles that changed the world think about it, did the over riding issue that caused the over throw even get fixed?

*****PERSONAL NOTE*****

When I wrote my paper it was written in protest to a step system that the college I went to had for treatment of students, and I had written it as a parallel of the system rather then a reflection of the system.

And NO, the above is only a synapse of the paper. I'm not going to dig through a bunch of boxes to look for a report from a decade ago to post its contents here.

reply to post by spartacus699

The old 3 class system is still secretly in place

They really do not care about keeping the bloodline 'clean' they are more interested in the mindset. LINK

Actually the plans are to do away with the middle class and return us to a Feudal Estate/Company Town type set-up called Transit Villages for a video of the information see LINK


Straight from the writings of Pascal Lamy Director-General of the World Trade Organization (Brainchild of Bush AND Clinton)

...In the same way, climate change negotiations are not just about the global environment but global economics as well — the way that technology, costs and growth are to be distributed and shared...

Can we balance the need for a sustainable planet with the need to provide billions with decent living standards? Can we do that without questioning radically the Western way of life? ....

At the same time, globalization is blurring the line between national and world issues, redefining our notions of space, sovereignty and identity....
www.theglobalist.com...

I dont think the 3 class system is in effect due to people watching us. By definition the majority can never be upper class. If too many people gather a certain ammount of wealth, then the value of money decreases, because the money suffers inflation. Think of your Ford Taurus with navigation cruise control, power, power windows etc. . Several years ago a car like that was upper class, a mercedes maybe. Now in the first world its a commoners car because it is not a rare car. There are several countries where it would be a luxury an inhabitant couldnt afford if he worked all his life. I can think of several people of success, Jobs, Gates. Also what about people abroad, the Russians, the Chinese. Can it be shown that Papa John belonged to some kind of bloodline?

That does not mean there are not people in positions where they can operate above the system, get money straight from the printing press, operate above the law. But I do think thats more due to nepotism and favoritism in the system, rather than due to the doings of a class of people that belong to a group and bloodline spanning generations.

To sumrise, yes, to the people at the top a top heavy society where too many people living off interest rate and investments and too few people to do menial tasks are undesirable, but the makeup of our societal structure is due to the nature of the system that is in place and I dont believe it takes a watchgroup to keep the social pyramid. What you see is due to the workings of the system in place, not the doings of a group of conspirators.

My parents started from scratch and are in the top 1% now. I think the system works to keep the lower classes depressed, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to be rich without privileges. I don't think the "elite" start taking interest until you have 9 digits in net worth.

Show Times