Thucydides Trap V
by Joe Kelley
9-23-2022

Declaration of the People of the United States for Global Peace and Prosperity
[greatreject.org]

Before diving into this curious arrangement of letters, the opportunity to reinforce basic common sense concerning the process of deception, also known as fraud, is open when readers have the capacity to question what they are reading, people WHO ARE not JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS.

Spiritual manifestations of morality form into independent individual human members of humanity as conceived in the process of conception.

Before there were none, and then, and there, appearing for the first time on the planet earth, one example of humanity appeared in flesh, blood, mind, body, soul, and spirit, complete with something humanity intimately knows to be our moral conscience. We have it, we hold it dear, it is ours, and unless we abdicate, or otherwise discard it, it remains to be a qualified manifestation of the human spirit in each independent individual example after another and another throughout time and space.

abdicate (v.)
1540s, "to disown, disinherit (children)," from Latin abdicatus, past participle of abdicare "to disown, disavow, reject" (specifically abdicare magistratu "renounce office" ), literally "proclaim as not belonging to one," from ab "off, away from" (see ab-) + dicare "proclaim" (from PIE root *deik- "to show," also "pronounce solemnly," and see diction). Meaning "divest oneself of office, privilege, etc., before the term expires" is recorded by 1610s in English (it was in classical Latin). Related: Abdicated; abdicating.
[etymonline.com]

Verbs express intimate knowledge of a process that proceeds along in time and place, as compared to a noun that fixes in place a fictional version of actual dynamic reality, so as to inspect the body in view while the body in view is fictionally not moving, a corpse of its living self, as if taking a picture, placing the picture of something real, turning something real into something only representative of the real deal.

If the word in English spelled “is” can be a source of defense against charges of immorality, as the defendant nicknamed Slick Willy slithers when under the microscope of moral inspection, then more complicated words like independence or individual are also subject to deception traced back forensically to the deceiver in time and place as the deceiver invents a fixed fictional example of the original dynamic thing, a dead corpse version of living reality.

When the words Evil Monster no longer meant a good thing to follow on the Evil Monster’s path driven by moral common sense, the words Evil Monster was then besmirched, and never again in human conversation would a moral and innocent victim be misled by an Evil Monster, because now, unlike ancient history, no moral human being will be tricked into thinking an Evil Monster was talking and walking along the morally justified path traveled by human beings producing higher quality life at a lower cost to all of humanity.

So, readers can all turn their heads in UNISON at me making this ridiculous claim that the words "Evil Monster" once meant a morally justified leader of humanity leading humanity to prosperity for posterity.

You must be on crack!

You all can justify your indignant response to my fictional claim that the meaning of "Evil Monster" once meant the same meaning as Jesus Christ.

Witch, Blasphemer, Terrorist WOKE from his sleeper cell!

Well, assuming, of course, that you all are True Christians, I am ungodly, not so much for followers of other Fearless Leaders leading other flocks.

Those leaders who tell the flock to go forth and lead themselves, here, here, and here, try that method on for size, see how it works, and if that method does not work for you, then return back to get more sound leadership. That type of leadership is not an exception to the rule, they RULE by example. 

Not "do as I say, not as I do."

Here, look at how this works, and if you do the opposite, who is then to blame for the trouble caused by WHO?

“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”

Depending upon your individual programming, the above message could trigger a need in YOU to denounce the messenger as an Evil Monster.

An individual programmed to force people to give up their internal power to conscientiously object to just following orders blindingly, for one example, will be someone inspired to denounce the golden rule as a quaint, weak, useless, word salad, dreamed up by someone writing a fictional novel about a fairy prince from antiquity. Someone would then be inspired to accuse the charlatan as an Enemy of The State if there was the slightest suggestion that the antiquated story was in any way a justification for disobedience.

How dare you?

How dare you suggest anything other than JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS?

Me, are you talking to me? I, a true believer in blind obedience, have to think for myself, HOW DARE YOU?

My GOD!

Such blasphemy.

How about, now, with the stage set, taking a careful look at some words now in print officially?

“...that all Men are created equal...”

Why, in God’s name, would someone arrange words in such a way as to afford an interpreter all the room required to construct any meaning out of the published sentence, as if the idea was to create a message that can mean anything at all, and thereby afford the interpreter all the opportunity needed to construct a new meaning into the sentence every single time the interpreter found a use for a change in the meaning of the official, leading, message?

Carte Blanche?

There is a very important precedent for this type of constructability authorized and written into the authorized sentence authorized by the authorities responsible for authorizing that constructability.

They, those authorities, are responsible, factually, forensically, for the messages that they constructed for the reasons that they had in their minds when they pulled that trigger.

“So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets.”

If all men were created equal, no one would need to lead, and no one would need to follow, as all men would all do the same things all the time, without any need for leadership whatsoever.

Free at last!

Everyone does to other persons that which they themselves would passionately defend against with extreme prejudice and contempt for whoever dares to do the same to THEM!

Conceived in Liberty, by Murray Rothbard, 1979
Chapter 18
Slavery in Virginia
Page 584
"The prevalent practice of fornication by the masters with the female slaves was regarded as “a pleasant method to secure slaves at a cheap rate.”

Confessions.

Do as I say, not as I do.

Beware of Greeks bearing gifts like fraudulent claims of free stuff, for your soul.

To Serve Man, the cookbook.

Slave Trade Deal, 1787
"Representatives and direct taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective numbers, which shall be determined by adding the whole number of free persons, including those bound to service for a term of years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three-fifths of all other persons."

Confessions by words and by actions. Follow the leader's order to not follow the leader.

How are they claiming that somehow people are created equal while they do the opposite, not as an exception, but as a rule?

Abigail Adams to John Adams Braintree, Mass., March 31, 1776
"I have sometimes been ready to think that the passion for liberty cannot be equally strong in the breasts of those who have been accustomed to deprive their fellow creatures of theirs. Of this I am certain that it is not founded upon that generous and Christian principle of doing to others as we would that others should do unto us. . . . "

We are all created equal, so do not worry the least bit about that guy behind that curtain.

Oh, but Joe, you are so, so, so, so…

Right, I get that a lot. Suffice to say that if we lead ourselves by the examples set in our DNA, if not on stone tablets and hemp paper, per se, we thereby prove that we mean the original meaning to be equal justice under the law, not Equity enforced in Equity Courts run by Witch Hunters burning the disobedient alive, after torturing for false confessions.

More clues?

“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed.”

Sounds really nice, right?

Free stuff, right?

How about the following opposing viewpoint?

“Hallam says, "The relation established between a lord and his vassal by the feudal tenure, far from containing principles of any servile and implicit obedience, permitted the compact to be dissolved in case of its violation by either party. This extended as much to the sovereign as to inferior lords. If a vassal was aggrieved, and if justice was denied him, he sent a defiance, that is, a renunciation of fealty to the king, and was entitled to enforce redress at the point of his sword. It then became a contest of strength as between two independent potentates, and was terminated by treaty, advantageous or otherwise, according to the fortune of war. There remained the original principle, that allegiance depended conditionally upon good treatment, and that an appeal might be lawfully made to arms against an oppressive government. Nor was this, we may be sure, left for extreme necessity, or thought to require a long-enduring forbearance.

"In modern times, a king, compelled by his subjects' swords to abandon any pretension, would be supposed to have ceased to reign; and the express recognition of such a right as that of insurrection has been justly deemed inconsistent with the majesty of law. But ruder ages had ruder sentiments. Force was necessary to repel force; and men accustomed to see the king's authority defied by a private riot, were not much shocked when it was resisted in defence of public freedom." - 3 Middle Age, 240-2.”
Essay on The Trial by Jury, Lysander Spooner, 1852

There you were waving your False Federalist Flag like such a damn good patriot, following Fearless Leader, and boom, you read something that inspires you to shoot the messenger or worse, you may actually have to think for yourself?

If you can stop your knee from jerking long enough to read further, arrest that urge to scroll and click away from the awful weight of foreign assaulting suggestions of moral duty, take time out and engage that part of your soul that once upon a time bore the fruits of reward for the hard work of moral judgment that causes a bell to ring like a light bulb going off ringing true. Consider the remote possibility of someday seeing the light at the end of the tunnel when comparing the two messages one after the other in chronological order according to rules governing humanity, such as the rule of the original and genuine first encounter of a valuable new thing compared to a potentially counterfeit version where the original product has been altered by the counterfeiters.

That which was once good for all just so happens to free the cult members from moral responsibility now.

“There remained the original principle, that allegiance depended conditionally upon good treatment, and that an appeal might be lawfully made to arms against an oppressive government. Nor was this, we may be sure, left for extreme necessity, or thought to require a long-enduring forbearance.”

“Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient Causes; and accordingly all Experience hath shewn, that Mankind are more disposed to suffer, while Evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the Forms to which they are accustomed.”

BOOM?

No?

The bell cannot ring, there is no light at the end of the tunnel, no light bulb moment, no epiphany?

WHO will, other than The Slick Willies, determine the whole truth meaning of is, as is: is used by the snakes to slither back into the darkness of Treasonous Fraud Parasitic Predation?

Why on Earth would good people pay the first extortion payment, let alone demand everyone to do the same, Love it, or Leave it?

Why would anyone, ever, pay the Angry Mob Majority Rule Snake Oil Salesmen one thin dime on their watch over the infant's lives that constitute posterity?

The more you pay those Evil Monsters the closer they get to their ideal that they can eat babies right in front of God and everyone.

Oh, Joe, you can’t do that, it is beyond the boundaries of Aristocratic decorum.

Impolitic.

You and your big words.

Remember Caligula? No? Did you know that during the Kyle Rittenhouse Kangaroo Witch Hunt Witch Court Trial there was no independent Grand Jury check on criminal Witch Hunters? Did you know that the Black Robed Cult Member counterfeiting the office of Judge confessed his membership in the same Cult as Caligula?

In front of God and everyone, and on the official records that constitute Empire precedent, you know, A.K.A. Nationalism 101, the Witch Hunter Cult Member confessed.

If those other persons can’t read the rules, because we keep the rules secret, we can persecute them at will for their ignorance of the law that we hide from them.

He, he, he, he, and you have to use your imagination to conjure up an Evil Monster laughing.

BOOM:

“There are but two modes by which men are connected in society, the one which operates on individuals, this always has been, and ought still to be called, national government; the other which binds States and governments together (not corporations, for there is no considerable nation on earth, despotic, monarchical, or republican, that does not contain many subordinate corporations with various constitutions) this last has heretofore been denominated a league or confederacy. The term federalists is therefore improperly applied to themselves, by the friends and supporters of the proposed constitution. This abuse of language does not help the cause; every degree of imposition serves only to irritate, but can never convince. They are national men, and their opponents, or at least a great majority of them, are federal, in the only true and strict sense of the word.

“Whether any form of national government is preferable for the Americans, to a league or confederacy, is a previous question we must first make up our minds upon. . . .

“That a national government will add to the dignity and increase the splendor of the United States abroad, can admit of no doubt: it is essentially requisite for both. That it will render government, and officers of government, more dignified at home is equally certain. That these objects are more suited to the manners, if not [the] genius and disposition of our people is, I fear, also true. That it is requisite in order to keep us at peace among ourselves, is doubtful. That it is necessary, to prevent foreigners from dividing us, or interfering in our government, I deny positively; and, after all, I have strong doubts whether all its advantages are not more specious than solid. We are vain, like other nations. We wish to make a noise in the world; and feel hurt that Europeans are not so attentive to America in peace, as they were to America in war. We are also, no doubt, desirous of cutting a figure in history. Should we not reflect, that quiet is happiness? That content and pomp are incompatible? I have either read or heard this truth, which the Americans should never forget: That the silence of historians is the surest record of the happiness of a people. The Swiss have been four hundred years the envy of mankind, and there is yet scarcely an history of their nation. What is history, but a disgusting and painful detail of the butcheries of conquerors, and the woeful calamities of the conquered? Many of us are proud, and are frequently disappointed that office confers neither respect nor difference. No man of merit can ever be disgraced by office. A rogue in office may be feared in some governments - he will be respected in none. After all, what we call respect and difference only arise from contrast of situation, as most of our ideas come by comparison and relation. Where the people are free there can be no great contrast or distinction among honest citizens in or out of office. In proportion as the people lose their freedom, every gradation of distinction, between the Governors and governed obtains, until the former become masters, and the latter become slaves. In all governments virtue will command reverence. The divine Cato knew every Roman citizen by name, and never assumed any preeminence; yet Cato found, and his memory will find, respect and reverence in the bosoms of mankind, until this world returns into that nothing, from whence Omnipotence called it.

“That the people are not at present disposed for, and are actually incapable of, governments of simplicity and equal rights, I can no longer doubt. But whose fault is it? We make them bad, by bad governments, and then abuse and despise them for being so. Our people are capable of being made anything that human nature was or is capable of, if we would only have a little patience and give them good and wholesome institutions; but I see none such and very little prospect of such. Alas! I see nothing in my fellow-citizens, that will permit my still fostering the delusion, that they are now capable of sustaining the weight of SELF-GOVERNMENT: a burden to which Greek and Roman shoulders proved unequal. The honor of supporting the dignity of the human character, seems reserved to the hardy Helvetians alone.

“If the body of the people will not govern themselves, and govern themselves well too, the consequence is unavoidable - a FEW will, and must govern them. Then it is that government becomes truly a government by force only, where men relinquish part of their natural rights to secure the rest, instead of an union of will and force, to protect all their natural rights, which ought to be the foundation of every rightful social compact.

“Whether national government will be productive of internal peace, is too uncertain to admit of decided opinion. I only hazard a conjecture when I say, that our state disputes, in a confederacy, would be disputes of levity and passion, which would subside before injury. The people being free, government having no right to them, but they to government, they would separate and divide as interest or inclination prompted - as they do at this day, and always have done, in Switzerland. In a national government, unless cautiously and fortunately administered, the disputes will be the deep-rooted differences of interest, where part of the empire must be injured by the operation of general law; and then should the sword of government be once drawn (which Heaven avert) I fear it will not be sheathed, until we have waded through that series of desolation, which France, Spain, and the other great kingdoms of the world have suffered, in order to bring so many separate States into uniformity, of government and law; in which event the legislative power can only be entrusted to one man (as it is with them) who can have no local attachments, partial interests, or private views to gratify.

“That a national government will prevent the influence or danger of foreign intrigue, or secure us from invasion, is in my judgment directly
the reverse of the truth. The only foreign, or at least evil foreign influence, must be obtained through corruption. Where the government is lodged in the body of the people, as in Switzerland, they can never be corrupted; for no prince, or people, can have resources enough to corrupt the majority of a nation; and if they could, the play is not worth the candle. The facility of corruption is increased in proportion as power tends by representation or delegation, to a concentration in the hands of a few. . . .

“As to any nation attacking a number of confederated independent republics . . . it is not to be expected, more especially as the wealth of the empire is there universally diffused, and will not be collected into any one overgrown, luxurious and effeminate capital to become a lure to the enterprizing ambitious.

“That extensive empire is a misfortune to be deprecated, will not now be disputed. The balance of power has long engaged the attention of all the European world, in order to avoid the horrid evils of a general government. The same government pervading a vast extent of territory, terrifies the minds of individuals into meanness and submission. All human authority, however organized, must have confined limits, or insolence and oppression will prove the offspring of its grandeur, and the difficulty or rather impossibility of escape prevents resistance. Gibbon relates that some Roman Knights who had offended government in Rome were taken up in Asia, in a very few days after. It was the extensive territory of the Roman republic that produced a Sylla, a Marius, a Caligula, a Nero, and an Elagabalus. In small independent States contiguous to each other, the people run away and leave despotism to reek its vengeance on itself; and thus it is that moderation becomes with them, the law of self-preservation. These and such reasons founded on the eternal and immutable nature of things have long caused and will continue to cause much difference of sentiment throughout our wide extensive territories. From our divided and dispersed situation, and from the natural moderation of the American character, it has hitherto proved a warfare of argument and reason.”
A FARMER
March 7, 1788

That was a Monopoly Corporate Farmer dependent upon Aristocratic prerogatives and privileges, also known as benefits, from the OLD NATION-STATE known as The British Empire, as that Too Big to Fail Farming Cartel owner tried to tell his fellow Aristocrats that the PROBLEM is EMPIRE so the solution cannot be EMPIRE with a new set of Aristocrats hiding the original law of the land for all those other persons.

If you can’t get it, it is beyond your pay grade, because you are a CULT MEMBER.

Like it or not, you didn't love it, and you abdicated, YOU LEFT IT.

Love it or leave it, my ass.

Caveat Emptor