https://hesedyahu.wordpress.com/2019/08/16/how-the-british-legal-system-the-us-constitution-and-other-like-systems-intrinsically-fail/I said in my last article that left-right statism, left statism and right statism, have fundamentally failed, and observably so. By statism, I refer to a view of what the state, the territorial mafia and monopoly on legitimised violence, is, and a person’s attempt to erect and/or support such a political edifice. It still relies on a religious faith in “The State,” the notion that once such a violence-breeding and -dealing gang exists, the declarations of its human hosts are more authoritative than that of a normal human, even though “The State” is only a human construct run by humans who have no intrinsic right of rule/ownership over another. Hence, “statism” is a good choice of word for so-called “right” and “left” attempts to prop up their version of their constructed “Baal,” the Master, the Owner/Lord.
I love God’s law not simply because it can be so clear about its legal scope, but also because it points me to a deeper teaching. I’ve said before – I don’t remember when – that the law of idolatry teaches me not to mystify objects, not to give them an extra and illusory power. That teaching helps me to see more clearly the limitations of philosophies and sciences and not raise them up as prophets and (occult) Truth tellers. Just like a man sculpts an idol in his own image, imposes on this limited object a hyper-view, imagined powers of control over nature, although this thing is just a limp and limited nothing, a person can mystify, make mysterious, almost anything. But the law against idolatry teaches me to cut through the mystery and deal with things as they are factually.
So I come to the statism valued by many Brits and Americans and other people. I’m gonna focus on a small part of the system of the Brits and Americans because that is what I have more experience with, but I think what I’ll share will more likely relate to other systems.
You see, I’ve seen a good amount of activists and presenters on both sides of the Atlantic reflecting emotively on the state of current affairs. There’s the channel called “WE HAVE A PROBLEM” where the host, a proponent of Brexit, the political decree for the government of the British isles to leave in some fashion the collective of governments from across Europe, decries the way in which politicians and a segment of the British population are workig against “democracy.” For him, democracy is so important. It’s the voice of “the British people.” These “British people” – well, around a quarter of the population – voted to have the government leave the European collective. This quarter, through “democracy,” becomes “the voice of Britain,” and, for this host, it must be listened to. Because … errr … democracy.
I hear how much some Americans also lift democracy high, stating that certain deeds of their top parasite, I mean, politician, works against democracy, or how Russia attempted to pervert democracy, or this or that about democracy. I hear this word flung about in Europe too, “democracy.”
This reminds me of what the British government has, seemingly recently, tried to push out a message of what British values are supposed to be. I wrote about them in a previous article: democracy, individual liberty, rule of law and tolerance. These are supposed to be core British values. You may know what these translate to in real life: apparent mob rule and subservience to the whim and will of some of the masses, as much privilege as the territorial mafia grants, the rule of political or judicial subjective opinion, and the acceptance of evil.
I think about how much people in Britain and America go on about some “constitution.” In Britain, it’s some invisible, unwritten convention or agreement between politicians and judges. In America, it’s the words written on some old parchment that’s supposed to be the “law of the land.” It’s supposed to set forth the powers and limitations of the government. Supposed to. LOL! Isn’t that one of the greatest historical jokes in the world!!!
So there are all of these political and societal edifices, these systems that are supposed to help govern the peoples of the lands.
But I think to myself, what are these things really? And how are they any different to the ancient Baal idol which was formed from the hands and minds of man, something essentially limited but imagined to have much more power than it actually has, yet it is doomed to fail the devotee?
What do I mean?
Hmmm …
Let me take the American constitution for example. What is it factually? What is it? Yes, it is mystified into being “the law of the land,” its amendments elevated into being the revelation of intrinsic and fundamental human “rights, as if the founders were actually mystical wise men whose main aim was to sift through the fundamental nature of (American) humanity, and pull from that essential essence the true structure and hierarchy of mankind, the eternal purpose of government and the quintessent rights of the American human. Or maybe they were the choicest of Gentile prophets, in close touch with the transcendent, holy men intent on hearing the revelation of God and putting it to print for the sake of first Americans, and then the world. Or, for the less Godly, they were philosophers of intense scientific integrity, heart set on using objective observation, experience and rationality to present a time-tested governmental system.
Maybe. Just maybe.
But, without the eyes of faith, just with my own human eyes and mind, what really is the American constitution? It is just written opinion. Its source is just human and has no power, no inherent authority beyond that. That’s it.
Seeing it for what it is helps me understand why, although it was supposed to limit government, it didn’t and it never could. And knowing that people have mystified it into something greater, I can understand why its words have been used to turn the population of that land, and their future generations into debt slaves. The politicians and judges can use and have used the idolatrous faith of the masses and their interpretation of its words to do what is expected of people who craved for power and got it: they attempt to get more. The so-called limitations are interpreted away, that is, unless the document was written in such a way as to allow this so-called transgression. One only has to look at how this document was further mystified/ratified and America’s history after its ratification to see that the Baal-ish document remains exactly what it as always been, a written opinion, a limited image from the mind of man, but many of the priests of said statist religion have metaphorically used the written opinion as toilet tissue, wiping their arses in as comfortable a fashion as possible. Even the “good” priests, like Ron Paul, still teach the slavish population of the American plantation to continue to raise that piece of paper high, and inculcate the values he believes it preaches, as if “what the founders intended” is holy and objective writ.
Whiskey rebellions, Sedition Acts, the formation of the federal reserve and creation of the income tax, the death of a man from the desire to teach his own kids, the internments (imprisoning) of Japanese Americans, the repeated, consistent and reliable infractions of claimed “inalienable rights” by government agents day after day after day after friggin’ day, again and again it is openly paraded in front of Americans that the constitution is only and simply a written opinion with no innate authority (or even innate correctness), yet it is still elevated into the mystical.
Because the founding documents are, because the legal ukases are, because each human system is just another manmade tool or attempt which seems to demand or naturally engender elevation and mystification beyond its actual limits, it must also bring failure, and systematically so.
Whether we’re talking about state/govt law, capitalism, socialism, communism, democracy, rule of law, because it is based on or hinged upon religious mystification and what appears to be as an idolatrous-like faith, it has no other fate than failure. Every structure of man, every material structure, has its limit, its failure point. And once it is used beyond that point, what else can it do but fall apart in one way or another?
Failures in the British system are rife as well to the point where it is more openly showing its tyranny and the people’s ability to explain that tyranny away and just live under it.
Think about it. You see how I keep referring to government as a territorial mafia or gang, a monopolt on legitimise violence. I don’t do that out of simple hatred. But I choose to ask myself, what factually is government? If I remove the eyes of the worldwide Baal faith, push past the obfuscation, what is there? A bunch of people. But wait, bunches of people are everywhere. But isn’t it taught that that bunch of people is needed because people can’t morally and justly get along? So what’s the inherent difference between that bunch of people and people in general? “Well, they were voted into …” Not only is that not an inherent difference, it only brought up another Baal, the notion that a big enough group of people can give to another group of people powers and authorities that no person possesses.
Anyway, so “government,” that small tiny group of people (in comparison with the population), they think they can manage the affairs of a whole territory and the people in it. Just the thought of it seems utterly ridiculous. Yet, that’s what faith and mystification gets you. And that group of people can make “laws,” threats to everyone else, but that’s somehow ok? That’s the monopoly on legitimised violence.
Is it me, or is the world crazy?
“David, it’s just you. All this is normal.”
Ah, I’m envious of such a way of thinking. Life would be so much easier if I could be like the work colleague I quizzed, revealing with simple acceptance that he believed that robbery, robbery on a grand scale – yes, I’m talking about taxation – was morally fine if the victims get a benefit, enough benefits. Frig, why can’t I have simple acceptance like that? If I did, I’d still be a christian enjoying life with a bigger group of likeminded people, not just christians but statists. TV programmes and movies and amusement park rides would be so much more enjoyable without me realising that so much is scripted, the main actors are just good at pretending, and the rides are simply moving in unusual ways. I could just get lost in the illusion and have the solace of belonging in the group, in a group. Or at least I’d have the appearance of belonging and I’d be lost in it.
*sigh*
Anyway, …
Topic: How the British legal system, the US constitution and other like systems fail (Read 2148 times)