Comment: Is it better?

(See in situ)

Is it better?

Having the power to take all the wealth from all the targeted victims within a geographical area, such as the areas known as these States in this Country called America, is a problem, having all that power concentrated into the hands of a few people known as The FED, or The New World Order, or The Dollar Hegemony, or The Military Industrial Complex, or Wall Street, or Washington, or The United Nations, or whatever False Front is being used to hide the actual people who have this power from all the victims of this power used in the destructive ways that those few criminals use that power they steal.

Long sentence I know.

Is it better to have that power divided into the hands of 13 State Powers, or 50 State Powers, or 51 State Powers, or just that ONE MONOPOLY POWER of those few people who now abuse it?

Take this Topic for example.

If the actual problem is that this Power is abused, and the actual problem is that this power is abused by so few people, these Federal Reserve People, or these New World Order People, or these people in Washington D.C., or these people in Wall Street, where these people have this power to create and spend as much money as everyone else combined, which is a considerably large amount of power with which to abuse power, if that is the real problem, then it seems to me that suggesting to them, what they can, or cannot do, with their power, or suggesting to them, what they should, or should not do, with the power they steal, is not even on the map of solutions that are possible, reasonable, effective, efficient, or anything even close to a good investment of the power that has not been stolen yet.

On the other hand, there is the real possibility that these types of solutions that could work to fix real problems could work on a more voluntary basis, whereby a number of competitive powers, of similar design, could experiment with various ideas, such as these ideas in this Topic, and then implement those ideas, to see if those ideas accomplish the goals intended by those who invest in the accomplishment of those goals, with that power they have acquired.

Instead of one Monopoly Power whose obvious, and accurately measurable goal is Monopoly Power, there could be, instead, 50 odd Powers Volunteering to Join into one Defensive Power against Monopoly Power.

It is not a novel idea, actually, and when it was tried, between 1776 and 1788 it worked the way it was designed to work.

Then the Monopolists took over, and that is a sad story, but it may be an off-topic story.

I do not claim to be the only, single, judge of everything everywhere, and I'm not trying to suggest that the Topic Starter, the OP is someone claiming to be the judge of everything everywhere, what I am saying, is that a Single Monopoly Power that works effectively at being the judge of everything everywhere is the problem.

The Single Monopoly of Power is not the way to solve the Single Monopoly of Power Problem.