Leo

would you mind listing those 20 founding Elders of Zion families and
giving some links to information about them ?

Thanx.


KimB I tend to agree about the 'downcurve'.

Capitalism by definition depends on 'growth' of capital and markets. But resources are limited.

Perhaps it will behave like a house of cards in an earth tremor sooner than we think.

But Socialism is limited to the economic and human raw materials also.
Not only does Socialism destroy the vision of intelligent men and women, and limit them to glorified lemmings, it is an unsound economic system based on a flawed understanding of human nature.

Leo..back to you.. not sure where you are coming from, are you in fact laying into the axe of the world system and the Jewish string pullers (as you see them) ? if so, what are you advocating in place of the current relatively restrained capitalist globalism ?
Please inform us in 'point form' so we don't get submerged in your VERY tight typing.

Where are you and Kim on the political spectrum. Left... Right... Centrist... Perhaps we are having some contributions from those from the Australian Electoral Lobby ?

Yep Pete, (a few further comments), you're right. And the sooner the better. The spin doctors, politicos and media barrons are clueless about the tsunami of change coming their way (a terminal case of "Hubris"?) Me? I'm just a part time RN (casual/part time, by choice) - but I'm wired to internet news . . . And here's me co-ordinating "Queensland After Oil":-

http://www.relocalize.net/groups/queensland

And my recent open letter to John Howard re fighting for oil (note cc list):-

http://www.kimspages.org/openmessagetoJH.htm

Until very recently, I wouldn't have had a clue about all this stuff. Now it stares me in the face everyday.

Peter,
What we need is evolution not revolution. A revolving body will return to its original position, and given the least malfunction will spin-off with incalculable results. The evolution that I have in mind is the ever increasing realisation that greed and anger are the cause of the world's ills. No amount of technological innovation will improve the lot of humanity unless that innovation is put to the service of humanity, which greed prevents. Technology is advancing at an exponential rate but has the world beneffited? (Think 3rd world countries, thik global warming etc.)

The greedy will never give up their wealth unless forced to do so. What do I suggest.

First, all wealth and tax records, for both individuals and corporations, should be in the public domain. When the populace knows who has abscene wealth and how little of it is returned to society,the clamour for genuine tax reform will be irresistible.

Now you will say that this is pie in the sky and will never be achieved. So secondly we need a political party that puts principles before power. Such a party would be appropriately called the unelectables.

Looks like Peter's really started something we really need.
As yet there is not much nasty sniping. Seems the deep thought processes are really working for the good. One Poster suggested to use more reason. Certainly Socrates would have agreed when he said, out with the Gods and in with the Good. Just another way of saying that we must balance our faith with more reason, as even St Thomas Aquinas came to admit, bringing on the Age of Reason onto the Age of Enlightenment, and now into the Age of Democracy, we hope?

Peter,
Thanks for this much-needed thought trigger.
You have evoked worthwhile replies, each deeply reasoned and each pointing out that the status quo is changing.
I suggest that, among some aspects of the need for change, is the acceptance that change is inevitable - nothing ever remains the same.
Many conservatives cannot acept this, and try to preserve life and living in a form which they understand and which they are most comfortable. They fear change.
Fdixit hits at this succinctly - what is needed is EVOLUTION, not revolution.
We need to remember that our political leaders are just that - leaders, not commanders! They manage at our behest.
The enormous complexity of their task often obscures that fact that they depend largely on society's cooperation for success in making our laws work, despite the ultimate sanction of enforced compliance.

In one form, lack of cooperation can manifest in revolution with attendant violence. This results in ongoing competitive hatreds.

In another form, lack of cooperation can result in society's questioning, and its refusal to accept dutifully what it is being told as truth.
Reasoned understanding can lead to acceptance and the evolvement of the new.
This is one of the mighty benefits of today's increased ability to share ideas; no longer are we beholden to a small number of media controllers for our knowledge.

Like Fdixit, I support evolution as a pathway for change.
Happiness cannot be bought or won; it results from truth, personal honesty, and the rejection of anger, delusion, hatred and greed.
Accepting that we are all responsible personally for our outcomes will result in our choosing actions which benefit mankind.
Now these choices can be made from a better and deeper knowledge reasoned by ourselves, not from political or corporate spin.

Peter, great to see your optimism, I am following these post with interest.

I have become increasingly pessimistic and cynical about our political processes.
I think the base contributing factor to the rank political smell is the centralisation of power within the political parties. I believe I experienced this as the root cause of the Democrat problems.

With power centralised, spin doctoring comes into its own as the preferred way of presenting a cheap, controlled message with little substance.
The shallowness of this process is what turns people off involvement in the political debate.

So I see the road ahead as the decentralisation of power within the parties, something their elites will fight against. I can see the internet bringing this about by weight of numbers overwhelming these political elites/insiders.

I also do not see the need for any dramatic changes to take place. Aside from the party hacks, another byproduct of centralisation, we have a group of decent men and women serving our political needs. All we need to do is remove the shackles of centralised party power.