• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Kings and kingdoms of our time

Jim

Nets of Wonder
It looks to me like the most vast and powerful kingdoms in the world today are some global corporations, and the true sovereigns of the world are their top executives. Decisions about how to use most of the world’s human and natural resources are made by the top executives of global corporations, and not by national governments. National governments have been completely subjugated by global corporations, and “national sovereignty” is nothing but empty words.
 

Altfish

Veteran Member
It looks to me like the most vast and powerful kingdoms in the world today are some global corporations, and the true sovereigns of the world are their top executives. Decisions about how to use most of the world’s human and natural resources are made by the top executives of global corporations, and not by national governments. National governments have been completely subjugated by global corporations, and “national sovereignty” is nothing but empty words.
I wouldn't disagree in many instances.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
It looks to me like the most vast and powerful kingdoms in the world today are some global corporations, and the true sovereigns of the world are their top executives. Decisions about how to use most of the world’s human and natural resources are made by the top executives of global corporations, and not by national governments. National governments have been completely subjugated by global corporations, and “national sovereignty” is nothing but empty words.
Your concern here is exactly the same as mine, and I very much prefer more localized cottage industries like Gandhi had fought for over all these huge multinationals. It also can be handled on a larger scale as well without throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim

Jim

Nets of Wonder
Until a day or two ago I was thinking of the subservience of national governments to global corporations as a major obstacle to human progress, but now I see ways of working around that, that are already happening, and how things might start getting better sooner than I thought was possible, maybe even in two or three more generations. Now I'm seeing the pretense of national sovereignty as dying convulsions, and I don't think that even the power of global corporations will be able to keep the people of the world divided against each other much longer than two or three more generations.
 

Jim

Nets of Wonder
It looks to me like what gives global corporations their power is largely the willingness of multitudes of people to sell their capacities to the highest bidder, putting what they mistakenly see as their own best interests ahead of all other considerations including the values and principles they pretend to believe in, in deciding how to develop and use their capacities..
 

Jim

Nets of Wonder
Also, the willingness of multitudes of people to violate their values and principles if they have any, in endless pursuit of the carrots dangled in front of them, perpetually out of reach.

(edit) I keep thinking of more ways that people give power to global corporations, but the list might never end, and it includes a lot of things I do myself :D, so I'll stop there.(end edit)
 

Nakosis

Non-Binary Physicalist
Premium Member
It looks to me like the most vast and powerful kingdoms in the world today are some global corporations, and the true sovereigns of the world are their top executives. Decisions about how to use most of the world’s human and natural resources are made by the top executives of global corporations, and not by national governments. National governments have been completely subjugated by global corporations, and “national sovereignty” is nothing but empty words.

I've always suspected the people you mainly hear about in the news aren't really the people running things. The smart folks I think usually stay out of the limelight. People like Hitler are probably manipulated behind the scenes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim

74x12

Well-Known Member
It looks to me like the most vast and powerful kingdoms in the world today are some global corporations, and the true sovereigns of the world are their top executives. Decisions about how to use most of the world’s human and natural resources are made by the top executives of global corporations, and not by national governments. National governments have been completely subjugated by global corporations, and “national sovereignty” is nothing but empty words.
The liberals go after corporations and the conservatives go after big government but neither touches the banks. That's how you know they're controlling both sides. I believe the banks own the governments and corporations. That's why politicians like Ron Paul were hopeless because he wanted to go after the Federal reserve. Not going to happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jim

Jim

Nets of Wonder
The liberals go after corporations and the conservatives go after big government but neither touches the banks. That's how you know they're controlling both sides. I believe the banks own the governments and corporations. That's why politicians like Ron Paul were hopeless because he wanted to go after the Federal reserve. Not going to happen.
Yes, I know about the banks. I think they figure in there somewhere. I think it's actually much more complicated than what I said. I said that the top executives of some of the global corporations are the kings, because they're the ones who decide how to use most of the earth's natural and human resources, but kings in the past didn't always make their own decisions. Sometimes they were playthings for their mother or their minister or some Rasputin, someone who had a hold on them psychologically. I don't know who the top decision makers really are. Banking is one of the global industries, so whoever its top decision makers really are, might count as kings in my picture. The ones who profit the most from ravaging and re-building are the weapons, construction, mercenary and banking industries. I'm not sure how it all fits together. There might be layers and layers of decoys and camouflage. I don't think that the rulers themselves really understand how it all works. Some of the manipulators might. Is that where you think the banks fit in? I don't think we really need to know all the details. Just that things are far from what they look like in media stories. Speaking of the media, it looks to me like the media provide some of the same services for the rulers that religious institutions did in the past.
 

Jim

Nets of Wonder
The liberals go after corporations and the conservatives go after big government but neither touches the banks. That's how you know they're controlling both sides.
The rulers need to keep their bankers happy, but it might be going too far to say that the banks own the rulers, and even if they do, that doesn't mean that they make all the decisions about how the earth's natural and human resources are used.

What brought this up for me was thinking about what I see people doing to try to influence the decisions and policies of governments, and wondering why they aren't going after the real decisions makers. In my mind that would include the top decisions makers in the banking industry. Actually, I would generalize that to investors in general. Anyone who wants to try to influence decision-making at a global level would need to look into that.
 
Last edited:

74x12

Well-Known Member
Yes, I know about the banks. I think they figure in there somewhere. I think it's actually much more complicated than what I said. I said that the top executives of some of the global corporations are the kings, because they're the ones who decide how to use most of the earth's natural and human resources, but kings in the past didn't always make their own decisions. Sometimes they were playthings for their mother or their minister or some Rasputin, someone who had a hold on them psychologically. I don't know who the top decision makers really are. Banking is one of the global industries, so whoever its top decision makers really are, might count as kings in my picture. The ones who profit the most from ravaging and re-building are the weapons, construction, mercenary and banking industries. I'm not sure how it all fits together. There might be layers and layers of decoys and camouflage. I don't think that the rulers themselves really understand how it all works. Some of the manipulators might. Is that where you think the banks fit in? I don't think we really need to know all the details. Just that things are far from what they look like in media stories. Speaking of the media, it looks to me like the media provide some of the same services for the rulers that religious institutions did in the past.
Yes, hidden power is what rules the world right now. If there are kings then they are not open about it. Just look at the book of Revelation the beast has 10 horns which are symbolic of 10 kings. They say money makes the world go around and I think that whoever controls the money controls the world.
 

Jim

Nets of Wonder
Yes, hidden power is what rules the world right now. If there are kings then they are not open about it. Just look at the book of Revelation the beast has 10 horns which are symbolic of 10 kings. They say money makes the world go around and I think that whoever controls the money controls the world.
I think that popular banking conspiracy theories are just another layer of decoys, camouflage and fairy tales, designed to confuse and distract us, and keep us divided against each other.

(edit) And advance some people's writing, speaking and YouTube careers. But I could be wrong. I've been wrong sometimes, before. Also, I don't mean that there's no truth in the theories. Just that they put storytelling ahead of actual information, as much as media stories do.(end edit)
 
Last edited:
Top