Thanks for the comment, and no, not me, I think that the most powerful of the worst people constitute a consortium or monopoly power.
I don't see how those people could have possibly survived this long, polluting the gene pool, without an "honor among thieves":
Absent that agreement to divide the turf, to specialize among their number, and to divide the loot, and to divide the labor load, absent that order, they would be consuming each other continuously.
I've read enough of diverse scientific perspectives to know that it is common among very powerful people to be actual mutations of normal human beings called sociopaths and their brains are missing the parts that normally work when a human being experiences what is commonly known as empathy.
These mutations of human beings acting alone are a threat to everyone else as the well publicized examples of Serial Killers prove the rule.
Having no power of moral conscience: their actions can include willful plans to kidnap, torture, murder, and even cannibalize innocent people, including babies, toddlers, and including anyone, anytime.
What happens if every single person was born this way?
There are few of these mutations among us, and this may sound like a comic book viewpoint offered by someone who reads too many comic books or watches too much television, and this may appear to be a viewpoint offered by a nutcase, tin hat wearing, conspiracy theorist.
Here is one (of many) books on the subject:
Anatomy of Human Destructiveness Erich Fromm
There must be, therefore, an explanation as to why these types of people somehow manage to avoid targeting each other, and in that way their malady would be self regulating - so to speak - without an agreement to combine forces among their despicable number.
The design of life is (by God or by some other power if you don't believe in God) to live, there is no other way to keep life going, it must be designed to live.
Errors in the design prove themselves to be unproductive, or incapable of survival, obviously, and measurably.
What explains the seemingly contradictory condition of sociopaths taking power and somehow avoiding the obvious antagonism?
This is not too difficult to conceptualize since the rule, not the exception, is for the "leaders" to escape trial while the innocent victims on both sides, or all sides, are punished for those moral lapses that are so common among those "leaders" - a.k.a. war.
Might making right works the way it works, and I call this the honor among thieves factor; which is not to be confused with Liberty or how right is found by mutual agreement to avoid might making right.
On a small scale it is easy to see.
Suppose you took the time to farm a local high school by first investing in the cheap production of a very addictive drug and you gave the first supplies out for free. The worst of the addicts were then hired by you to start demanding payments for more drugs flowing to the rest of the addicts, and then, just when things were moving along very well, another of your type moves into your turf and begins a competitive enterprise.
You and your competitor are forced by the victims into supplying higher quality drugs at lower costs so that you or your competitor will take over more market share because your supply is better in quality and lower in cost compared to the competition and the result is that both you and your competitor are forced down to selling highest quality drugs at the lowest possible cost, where your prices are moved ever lower, and the quality of your supply is moved ever higher, in the battle to gain market share among the addicted victims. Not much fun for sociopaths - do you agree?
You and your competitor target each other for elimination since crime never pays when competition is allowed to happen, such as when Liberty is the power in force, and one of you is destroyed by the other, or your fighting destroys both of you, and then another sociopath farming the high school victims takes over.
You agree with your competitor to halve the High School into sections and learning from this experience you specialize and divide the labor load. One of you keeps up the good work of making sure that the school children are desperate enough to do just about anything to get a fix and the other one of you now works on keeping other competitors snuffed out before other competitors become too powerful, or powerful enough to threaten to consortium that you have just formed.
A very devious underling of yours inspires another less intelligent and less devious underling of yours to fight you, and that very devious underling of yours takes over your business in that way - thesis, antithesis, and synthesis.
Inspire one side - Thesis
Inspire the other side Anti-Thesis
What is the Synthesis of World War II?
The Dollar Hegemony
Previous to World War II the World Reserve Currency was The British Pound, and World War II was the event that keeps the victims fighting each other so as to divide them and conquer them, keep them guessing as to who the real power is in fact.
Names, addresses, who knew what, and when did they know it.
If the most powerful people are known by all the victims what will the victims be thinking about when the victims finally have had enough?
Do the sociopaths in public office wear special hats to let the victims know who, exactly, is being supplied with the means by which they suffer?
This is not news.
George Orwell Newspeak
"Eurasia was Oceania's enemy at the start of the book, and by the end Eurasia had always been Oceania's ally."
The Dollar Hegemony, Worlds Reserve Currency, U.S.A., Washington, Wall Street, The World Bank.
Which people, having names, have done what, when, why, and are their thoughts and actions currently focused on causing World War III, so as to move focus of the victims away from the old Monopoly names (Wall Street, or Oceania) and onto the new (Eastasia or China)?
Who is holding who to an accurate accounting? What tool is used for that purpose? I, and obviously you, ask the vital questions, but we few are the exceptions, as the most powerful people work together so as to cause World War III and profit by doing so as their power grows stronger while the source of their power, their productive victims, grows weaker.
World Wars are the highest amplitude of the business cycle which in only possible when the sources of power used by productive people are monopolized by a few powerful people who manage to set aside their differences and form a consortium or monopoly.
A monopoly cannot exist when there is competition.
That is as indisputable as is the accurate observation that staring directly at the sun will damage your power to see.
Why is the most powerful money currently enforced into use actually a very, very, very poor money for those same people who are forced into using it?
The only possible answer is that there is no competition.
China alone can force The Dollar Hegemony out of business today, before tomorrow morning.
China, Russia, Iran, Brazil, Cuba, Africa, and Venezuela can force The Dollar Hegemony out of business if China alone can - lets be serious about this no?
Why do the leaders of those countries victimize their own people more than the leaders of our country victimize us?
The answer is that we, us, here in America, are fooled into believing that we are being victimized less, and we are not, we are only less poor because we have been on a long boom cycle as the money monopoly power here has been booming our "economy" for almost 100 years, but now we are on the bust cycle.
China has been on the boom cycle for at least the 20 years I've been measuring it, and that is how it works, with overlapping sine waves of at least 3 major false competitors.
Oceania, Eastasia, and Eurasia, at least 3. One (U.S.A.) has peaked in the boom cycle, one is on the way up (China), and the other has hit bottom (England/Europe/Russia).
It isn't all neat and tidy, sure, but again there is no other working explanation for the most powerful money in the world to be very, very, very poor money.
Why is China buying up all the gold?
Why was America so powerful at its highest and did America have any gold then?
Where is all the gold in Fort Knox?
Who is in charge?
Who is a conspiracy theorist nut job?
Don't ask, don't tell?
If Ron Paul wins, and if at the same time a Chinese copy of a Ron Paul in China wins, then what happens to the Doom Day Parade that for some strange reasons is moving a lot of power into focus onto a new World War?
Ron Paul represents competition, not conformity, not monopoly, not consortium, not dictatorship, not despotism, not even Nationalism.
Why is Ron Paul not dead yet?
My explanation includes the concept that those most powerful at the top, those who control The Dollar Hegemony are doing what they do best as they are using the power they steal to start World War III, as their predecessors did when they started World War II, so that they can be ready to pick up the pieces and continue their noncompetitive money issue forced upon every single victim who uses that fraudulent money, but they are not all powerful and they have a nasty habit of killing each other off, and therefore they may be very weak at this point, as they are in need of pairing down their own bloated numbers, and so a Ron Paul, and others, with cooler heads, are gaining power, gaining political currency, and presenting the monopoly power with competition.
It may very well be a similar situation in China, where the worst of the worst have stepped over the line of prudence and caution, overextended their reach, and they may find their attempt to control China to be a malinvestment. China, the competitive people in China, the productive people in China, may not be so easily led into World War III.
That may leave the monopolists in a very desperate state, able to do anything, having nothing "off the table". They may resort to legalized torture. They may resort to legalized mass murder. They may resort to threatening the human species with extinction. Is there a pattern emerging here?
Then again, cooler heads may prevail, even among those who are in The Establishment.
What has history taught us on these questions concerning modern times?
Would World War II have progressed on schedule if a Ron Paul had pulled the plug on The Federal Reserve before the boom cycle of The Roaring 20s was engineered into being by doubling the money supply, and therefore before The Federal Reserve removed half the money supply so as to cause the Great Depression, before they had therefore accumulated enough power to buy Hitler into power and to buy Stalin into power?
We are, by more measures than my opinion, on the edge of World War III.
If we can opt out of it, it may be a good idea to do so, and if the honest productive people in China can opt out too, wouldn't that be nice, and who would cry over that spilled milk?
If everyone were against war, there would be no war, so who are these people who actually cause wars?
Are they going to raise their hands, or wear special hats?
How many of those people who agree to start wars are required to start wars: 2?
How many people have the legal power to sign the legal order to release the dogs of war?
Who agrees to follow immoral or illegal orders?
How many people?
What do those types of people look like, again, do they wear special hats?
My answers may be more than that which is demanded, or asked, but this is the work of my life, this isn't my first rodeo on this subject. My brain works on this night and day.
"This is another false assumption, I believe. The legal criminals are worldwide, more or less, and the nation states are part of the illusion created by the legal criminals. Divide and rule to keep us as victims."
I think that those words are true, not specific enough to begin issuing requests to appear in court served to the most likely most powerful of those Legal Criminals, but the concept, to me, is sound, and provable.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: