Or maybe: Is there a grownup that we can ask this question, who can answer it without an obvious lie or does the whole administration need to be taken out?
MAybe best start over from scratch and omit legislation and all that corruption. Surely omit anyone and anything else unelected such as IRS/CDC/FED/HHS/USDA/ATF/HUD/DOE/DoEd
The elites are very well positioned to own any new system. The masses will still be hypnotized. Will be super hard, even if getting over the first hurdle of them having the big guns.
Yes - Any 'new system' needs to be unownable. 'The masses' seem to be perpetually hypnotized. As such, it may be best to design around that factor. Defanging MSM+SM comes first.
I suppose this is where counter-economics becomes relevant. I may be misusing the term. Basically, don't seek "revolution", rather "evolution" of an alternative, start small.
Alternative media, alternative companies and so on, which are not subject to the law of the land. I have some ideas about this, but I am not sure it really can work.
First things first - there are permutations of sequences to choose from. Crypto replaces fiat - in progress. Next up are other components of tyranny ranked by urgency*feasibility
One urgent need I suppose is Covid early treatment with stuff that the bad guys pretend is not working, and hospitals do not dare touch. Like what Pierre Kory recommends and so on.
Yea, but it is a legal minefield. Legal fraud laws, medical fraud laws, illegal marketing, tax laws, ... . Even if you are provably perfect, you can be drowned in legal battles.
There are millons of localities where this can be done. They are places where legislation has little traction. Legal battles can become irrelevant when distance and costs prevail.
Rural places in Africa, South and Central America, and other locales where big-ticket hospital franchises cannot compete. They prefer big city insurance money, not crypto.
Also, people who seem quite willing to let millions die in order to get a bit richer, do you trust that they will not be willing to kill a few key people here and there?
They will indeed kill : many assassinations are underway now and will continue but the day shall come when self-defense becomes a 'household term' again.
People are being fired for not taking the "vaccine". I have been thinking that some of those are likely interested in a job "for the other side", even if steady pay is not guaranteed
After all, the bad guys are watching this stuff, and if the masses need to be able to use it, the bad guys will be able to study it. And they do not play nice. Laws are for us not them
Discussing in the open is what they do - very few people pay any attention. This can work just as well in reverse: frame discussions as "incrediblisms" addressing personal issues.
If this is gonna work (I don't know for sure it will) at least it is important to be "clean", as in no talk of violence/revolution and so on. Ghandi is a good role model I suppose.
To me, this is a complicated issue. There is danger of becoming what you fight if you use "their" tools. And I get the feeling your analysis while seemingly logical is too simplistic
A people get the government they deserve. I believe this has much to do with attitude and what they allow, and that if the people are properly against something, it cannot take root.
Some interesting trends in that regard: Australia is obviously getting what people (I know there) want: Utter Totalitarianism. Others seem ro be quietly slipping away from such.
And I am not so sure that violence is needed as long as the disease of accepting bad things is avoided. Or maybe some "violence as last resort" is needed, hard to know for sure.
Self-defense is a last resort should only be reverted to when there really is no other choice. It is far more profitable to pre-emptively outwit violents than to play their games.
I have zero issue with convincing sociopath tyrants and psyhopath tyrants to consume themselves with violence against each other while the rest of us observe from a safe disance
Personally I seek to take this a step further and reach some kind of meditating monk state while still being firm. Stress on "seek". I do not pretend to have achieved this.
Maybe I split hairs too much here, but to me a finer point is that "pushing" itself is not perfect. Effortless action is my ideal. Whenever you push, you create some resistance.
I have been talking to people on the street. So easy to fall into old pattern of "quarrel" instead of being calm and letting things unfold and so on. And there is a simple reason.
Basically it takes much more skill to not come out as a fool when you have to be kind/respectful to opposition, even if he is not to you. So much so that a pattern is drilled into us.
I used the wrong word "push". What I mean is pushing to find key points of leverage to revise the conversation from obey/disobey into more of a "we have a better way coming".
My take would be, govt should be super small, and stay that way. Much more direct (as opposed to representative) democracy. And proper system for punishments for politicians.
Politicians today do not at all fear the wrath of the people when pushed by special interests to do evil, they should. Anyway, no system will stay un-corrupted indefinitely.