• 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!

What Could Someone Be Called If He Doesn’t Believe In The Existence Of ‘We, The People’?

KerimF

Active Member
There are actually several options if you don't believe in the concept of social contract (also known as constitution) and/or democratic rule.

You could go the absolute monarchy way where the State and the sovereign are one and the same.

You could go the theocracy way where god(s) through their chosen religious leader (prophet, high priest, pope, etc) are the only legitimate authority.

You could go the despotic way where the most powerful warlords rule through brute strength and intimidation.

You could go the anarcho-capitalist way where power belongs to those who own stuff and there are no society to speak off.

Unlike what some others have suggested like @fantome profane, you could not be a fascist since fascist believe in the concept of "nation" and even make it central and more important than individuals and families. Of course, you will notice that all of the above have a certain "taste of fascism" due to the fact that all those political regimes are different expression of "might makes right". The only difference is what exactly constitute "might" is it money, land or military strength.

Actually, it is not what I believe or not. I just tried revealing a fact that most people may not be aware of.
Would you please read my post #20.
 

epronovost

Well-Known Member
Actually, it is not what I believe or not. I just tried revealing a fact that most people may not be aware of.
Would you please read my post #20.

It's an extremely stupid post filled with a glaring fallacy. The idea that nobody in modern democracy has ever critiqued the system, which is farcically absurd, blamed politicians for failings, which is even more farcically absurd or their opposition which overpowered them which is the most absurd thing of them all. I don't see any chestnut of wisdom or even tautology in that post, I am sorry. Maybe you formulated it incorrectly and need to reframe it and if not, you seriously need to reconsider your grasp of the subject.
 

MikeF

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Politics means the art of controlling people without serious complains.
Does any real religious believer question any rule said of God? He just obeys it without complain.
So it was necessary to create a modern notion equivalent somehow to the notion of God. It was 'The People" which has worked very well till our days. How could a person of 'The People' complain about a rule which is supposed being approved by 'The People'?!
Now, in a democratic country, anytime the system does something wrong or bad to the nation, the only side that takes the blame is 'The People'... a very clever notion indeed.
Your criticism of modern democracies is not without some merit. In light of all of your posts that I have read, you do lean heavily toward conspiracy theory. This is not to take away from your comments here, only to say that you tend to focus on the negative and ignore any positive.

Systems must be created to manage large societies. No system to date is perfect, but some can be argued better than others, and yes, it is all subjective as to what is 'good' and what is 'bad', and that is one of the tasks of these systems, to facilitate collective agreement on goals and on what constitutes 'good' and what constitutes 'bad'.

I find it more helpful when people highlight problems and propose solutions, as opposed to just complaining and griping about how things suck for them personally.
 

KerimF

Active Member
It's an extremely stupid post filled with a glaring fallacy. The idea that nobody in modern democracy has ever critiqued the system, which is farcically absurd, blamed politicians for failings, which is even more farcically absurd or their opposition which overpowered them which is the most absurd thing of them all. I don't see any chestnut of wisdom or even tautology in that post, I am sorry. Maybe you formulated it incorrectly and need to reframe it and if not, you seriously need to reconsider your grasp of the subject.

Who dares among the People critique, in any way, the system after he was convinced, since he was a little kid, that He and The People made the system by FREE ELECTIONS!!!

So I used hearing from my American friends something like: ''We have to wait for the next term."
 

KerimF

Active Member
Your criticism of modern democracies is not without some merit. In light of all of your posts that I have read, you do lean heavily toward conspiracy theory. This is not to take away from your comments here, only to say that you tend to focus on the negative and ignore any positive.

Systems must be created to manage large societies. No system to date is perfect, but some can be argued better than others, and yes, it is all subjective as to what is 'good' and what is 'bad', and that is one of the tasks of these systems, to facilitate collective agreement on goals and on what constitutes 'good' and what constitutes 'bad'.

I find it more helpful when people highlight problems and propose solutions, as opposed to just complaining and griping about how things suck for them personally.

I am not complaining and there is no solution because this is how the world is created; a ruling system cannot survive without corruption. It is like a good surgeon cannot exist if he cannot cut the body's skin and see the blood without any trouble. The great majority of people cannot do it. Similarly, not anyone is ready to play the deceiver and/or be corrupted.

Not being corrupted while ruling millions of people is not a choice, but it is always better for the ordinary people believing that their system is clean of any corruption to have a better chance of a stable life... Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's;
 

epronovost

Well-Known Member
Who dares among the People critique, in any way, the system after he was convinced, since he was a little kid, that He and The People made the system by FREE ELECTIONS!!!

Many people apparently. Didn't you noticed a bunch of them stormed the Capitol hopping to overthrow an election. Then there is a vast group of homegrown terrorists who which to take the government by force, but they are usually stopped well before they can be even close to achieve anything notable. Then there is the about 30% to 40% of Americans who don't even participate in the electoral process since they see no use to it or don't have time for it. These people aren't necessarily pleased with the system and will often seek changes to it through protests, petitions and riots because yes protests, marches, riots and lobbying are also ways through which the system can be changed and those methods, sometime illegal do work.
 

KerimF

Active Member
Many people apparently. Didn't you noticed a bunch of them stormed the Capitol hopping to overthrow an election. Then there is a vast group of homegrown terrorists who which to take the government by force, but they are usually stopped well before they can be even close to achieve anything notable. Then there is the about 30% to 40% of Americans who don't even participate in the electoral process since they see no use to it or don't have time for it. These people aren't necessarily pleased with the system and will often seek changes to it through protests, petitions and riots because yes protests, marches, riots and lobbying are also ways through which the system can be changed and those methods, sometime illegal do work.

What you described could be found in every region around the world though in other forms.
And I use saying that even in the same family, there is no 'one will' though the will of the strongest (not necessarily by having the strongest muscles :) ) is usually respected (likely in certain holidays) to live a calm period of time, once a while.
 

epronovost

Well-Known Member
What you described could be found in every region around the world though in other forms.

That's also incorrect. What I described cannot be accomplished anywhere in the same way. For example, protests and demonstration are heavily restricted and met with extreme displays of violence in some part of the world. It's protests against the rising cost of life, especially water, housing and food prices, that started the Syrian Civil War for example. Similar protests in Lebanon and Israel over the exact same subject for the exact same reason (record drought) did not end in the same nor where met with the same sort of violence due to differences in the system they fought. It's also useful to note that lobbying is much easier in a democracy where representatives can lose power than in dictatorship where complaining is a crime and where only riots, illegal peaceful protests and outright rebellion are pretty much the only tools available to change the system or some feature of it.
 

KerimF

Active Member
That's also incorrect. What I described cannot be accomplished anywhere in the same way. For example, protests and demonstration are heavily restricted and met with extreme displays of violence in some part of the world. It's protests against the rising cost of life, especially water, housing and food prices, that started the Syrian Civil War for example. Similar protests in Lebanon and Israel over the exact same subject for the exact same reason (record drought) did not end in the same nor where met with the same sort of violence due to differences in the system they fought. It's also useful to note that lobbying is much easier in a democracy where representatives can lose power than in dictatorship where complaining is a crime and where only riots, illegal peaceful protests and outright rebellion are pretty much the only tools available to change the system or some feature of it.

I am afraid that what you described here is what the international news agencies tells the world, mainly since after 2011.

For example, any foreign tourists who visited Syria before March 2011 (when Obama urged the world to save the Syrian people from a tyrant dictator) can tell you that Syria was one of the safest places on earth; on any street and road, in daylight and night, for kids and women.
There were no real poor families (as the ones in USA for example). The families in the poorest neighborhoods had each an independent satellite reception system that receives thousands of sat TV channels (I, who was a citizen of the medium class, had two in my rest room and one for the guests).

Now, after being saved by the Russian and American Systems (thanks to their foreign mercenaries playing the Islamist terrorists for whom they came), Syria (and many other countries) was transformed to hell in almost all respects.
This was possible to happen in Syria because the local system had no choice, since always, but being fully submitted to the World's Elite Will (I had the chance to knew this in person since about 4 decades). In fact, an American ambassador was sent to Syria, a month before Obama called its president a dictator who kills his people (as in movies), to explain him (the president) in details the steps that should be followed for the destruction and division of Syria. In fact, the Syrian forces left all borders (with Turkey, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan and Iraq) across which thousands of foreign mercenaries (holding black flags on which it is written vertically Allah is the Messenger of Mohammad!; read from top to bottom) entered weekly and started terrorizing the civilians in the Syrian villages, towns and cities while UN presents them... rebels looking for freedom and democracy. I personally lived all these artificial tragic events (they need a thick book) and I am not complaining, in any way, because this is exactly how the world is created. While in the animal's jungle, the Golden Rule is 'Survival of the Fittest', in the human's jungle it is 'Survival of the most powerful rich Deceivers'.
Anyway, I advise you not to believe what I say if not approved by your system first. A wise material girl knows that it is always safer for her if she has no doubt, at all, in her men as long they provide her all what she needs in life in exchange of certain services. As I said, this is how the real world should run, we like it or not. The best thing one can do is to discover the world as it is. If someone wants to change it and impose his will on others he had to be evil first.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
So you are sure that those who run a ruling system can survive without being real rich and powerful. Do you really obey a rule made by poor powerless people; no matter how good they are educated? Do you really believe that the law is made for the ordinary people and not to protect the interests of the high class (which approves it) in the first place?
Sorry, when I was rather young, I also had dreams of ideals as yours. But after 7 decades, one can see better the real world. For example, those who run a ruling system (actually via their direct servants, as their politicians hired via elections, claimed free or not) cannot survive by being honest and sincere. They have to know how to control millions of people (civilians and forces), besides huge amount of money. Did you ever hear even a rich trader sharing others what he knows about trading?!
The problem is not government. The problem is the corruption of government by those few among us that want to own and control everything and everyone. They are few in number but they are singular in purpose, and they are driven. And they are united by their greed and willingness to do whatever it takes to succeed. And not only that, but their quest is insatiable.

So the solution is not to eliminate government, because all that does is allow these aggressors to act with impunity. They are the reason humans need governments: to reign them in, and protect everyone else from them. The goal, then, is to keep them from taking control of, or from effectively eliminating government. And that requires the unity of oversight of all the rest of the society. That requires that "we the people" awareness and mentality that you seem so intent to malign.
You are right, great nations cannot exist without convincing the people first that obeying the rules, made by their honorable trusted high class (please don't tell me an ordinary person can have the last word in approving any rule) lets someone be free. In fact, the best achievement a master can do is convincing his obedient slaves they are free. On the other hand, free independent people can never form a powerful nation and they can be attacked anytime by the well-paid free slaves of the great nations. This is how the world is created, we like it or not.
There are many different ways of establishing collective governance. The more common nowadays is representative democracy. Which is a system in which the society at large elects specific people to represent them in the social decision-making process. And these work well so long as the elections are fair, the candidates are honest, and the citizens are informed. But the aggressors are always among us, always chopping away at whatever systems we put in place to ensure these conditions. And in time they usually succeed in doing so, and in corrupting, perverting, and destroying effective collective governance.

I appreciate your anger, because it's obvious that these aggressors have succeeded in corrupting, perverting, and nearly destroying effective representational government here in the U.S., and elsewhere in the world. But the last thing we should be doing right now of calling for an end of government. What we need to be doing is calling as loudly as possible for government reforms that will stop the corruption, perversion, and ineffectiveness of our current collective representational governments. Because I can assure you that anarchy will be far, FAR, worse than anything we are experiencing, now.
 
Last edited:

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
It doesn't work :)
But because I don't believe in the existence of 'We, the United People", some friends here deduced that I am against 'The People' which doesn't exist as a real entity to me. At best, it refers to a number of people on which One Law is imposed, made and approved by some powerful rich persons.


It doesn't matter if Jesus is real or not because the story of Jesus is real on our hands :p
The whole Christian religion is based on Jesus being real
 

KerimF

Active Member
The problem is not government. The problem is the corruption of government by those few among us that want to own and control everything and everyone. They are few in number but they are singular in purpose, and they are driven. And they are united by their greed and willingness to do whatever it takes to succeed. And not only that, but their quest is insatiable.

So the solution is not to eliminate government, because all that does is allow these aggressors to act with impunity. They are the reason humans need governments: to reign them in, and protect everyone else from them. The goal, then, is to keep them from taking control of, or from effectively eliminating government. And that requires the unity of oversight of all the rest of the society. That requires that "we the people" awareness and mentality that you seem so intent to malign.

I am afraid that no one can let a region be without a ruling a government (or the like).
And, as the world is created, a government cannot exist for long (even if was created/started by the efforts of some good people though this is unlikely to happen in reality), if it is run by honest sincere persons.

So I use seeing a politician, addressing the multitudes, just a chosen actor to play a certain given role(s) in the international daily series 'Politics'. In other words, anytime I hear a politician, I just try to figure out how well he is capable to play his role(s) :D

By the way, mainly in these days (actually since the end of WW2), the world's top decision makers are not naive to show up. They have been content to play, behind the scenes, the producers and directors of the series 'Politics'. And the Free Elections are one of the tools that help them hire their chosen actors and change them periodically (or when necessary) without much trouble.
 

KerimF

Active Member
There are many different ways of establishing collective governance. The more common nowadays is representative democracy. Which is a system in which the society at large elects specific people to represent them in the social decision-making process. And these work well so long as the elections are fair, the candidates are honest, and the citizens are informed. But the aggressors are always among us, always chopping away at whatever systems we put in place to ensure these conditions. And in time they usually succeed in doing so, and in corrupting, perverting, and destroying effective collective governance.

I appreciate your anger, because it's obvious that these aggressors have succeeded in corrupting, perverting, and nearly destroying effective representational government here in the U.S., and elsewhere in the world. But the last thing we should be doing right now of calling for an end of government. What we need to be doing is calling as loudly as possible for government reforms that will stop the corruption, perversion, and ineffectiveness of our current collective representational governments. Because I can assure you that anarchy will be far, FAR, worse than anything we are experiencing, now.

Please note that I know very well what the definition of Democracy is.
And I have nothing against anyone who believes it could be applied on the ground and/or does exist where he lives.

Don't you know that in every destroyed country lately (while preserving its high class), its people were told exactly what you said:

"Go protest because you need calling as loudly as possible for government reforms that will stop the corruption, perversion, and ineffectiveness of our current collective representational governments."


This is a very clever tactic indeed to let a country be destroyed within itself and by the will of its own people (while preserving its high class almost intact). Such tactic needs just some well-trained intruders to keep flaming the country under a certain pretext (it differs from one country to another).

In other words, I don't need to be a prophet to predict that a country will be destroyed when I hear that its people were convinced to be out asking for reforms :(

By the way, before next summer, we will hear that the peoples in some far east countries will revolt in order to let them destroy themselves (though this will happen in one country after another). This was done with a great success in what is known as Arab Spring which was launched soon after the withdrawal of foreign troops from Iraq.

.
 

KerimF

Active Member
The whole Christian religion is based on Jesus being real

You are right. Jesus has to be real if one has to believe in Jesus based on faith.
On my side, I got from many sayings, said of Jesus, the logical answers of all important questions I was looking for concerning my own existence and the real world in which my human living flesh has to live temporarily. Anything else doesn't interest me too much :)

It is like when I accepted, for example, in my set of knowledge Pythagoras theorem without being interested in knowing if Pythagoras was real or not :D
 

PureX

Veteran Member
I am afraid that no one can let a region be without a ruling a government (or the like).
And, as the world is created, a government cannot exist for long (even if was created/started by the efforts of some good people though this is unlikely to happen in reality), if it is run by honest sincere persons.

So I use seeing a politician, addressing the multitudes, just a chosen actor to play a certain given role(s) in the international daily series 'Politics'. In other words, anytime I hear a politician, I just try to figure out how well he is capable to play his role(s) :D

By the way, mainly in these days (actually since the end of WW2), the world's top decision makers are not naive to show up. They have been content to play, behind the scenes, the producers and directors of the series 'Politics'. And the Free Elections are one of the tools that help them hire their chosen actors and change them periodically (or when necessary) without much trouble.
The aggressors will hire toadies to run for office and do their bidding if they can. Of course. But an informed and concerned citizenry can stop this by not electing them. Or by un-electing them the next election cycle. We get the government we allow to occur. When we vote for our own self-interest, and ignore the needs and well-being of our fellow citizens, and our nation, we put toadies and crooks in office. ... Because we are behaving like selfish fools. And of course the toadies and crooks will tell us anything we want to hear, to get our votes.

It's a problem that humanity still has not been able to solve, even after thousands of years and many attempts at self-governance. But anarchy is even worse. So we need to keep trying. Most of all we need to recognize the real problem, both in ourselves and in our society: ... that innate selfishness. The willingness to sacrifice the well-being of our fellow citizens, and fellow humans, for our own gain.
 

Jeremiah Ames

Well-Known Member
I repeat what I wrote on my previous post (addressed to MikeF)

Politics means the art of controlling people without serious complains.

Does any real religious believer question any rule said of God? He just obeys it without complain.

So it was necessary, for the modern politics, to create a modern notion equivalent somehow to the notion of God. It was 'The People" which has worked very well till our days.
Yes, how could a person of 'The People' complain about a rule which is supposed being approved by 'The People'?!

Now, in a democratic country, anytime the system does something wrong or bad for the nation, the only side that takes the blame is 'The People'... a very clever notion indeed.

thanks for that explanation, Kerim
 

KerimF

Active Member
The aggressors will hire toadies to run for office and do their bidding if they can. Of course. But an informed and concerned citizenry can stop this by not electing them. Or by un-electing them the next election cycle. We get the government we allow to occur. When we vote for our own self-interest, and ignore the needs and well-being of our fellow citizens, and our nation, we put toadies and crooks in office. ... Because we are behaving like selfish fools. And of course the toadies and crooks will tell us anything we want to hear, to get our votes.

It's a problem that humanity still has not been able to solve, even after thousands of years and many attempts at self-governance. But anarchy is even worse. So we need to keep trying. Most of all we need to recognize the real problem, both in ourselves and in our society: ... that innate selfishness. The willingness to sacrifice the well-being of our fellow citizens, and fellow humans, for our own gain.

I am afraid that your confusion about why things don't get better is that you like believing that ordinary people may have the power to change their ruling system. Actually, in every period of time, some members of a powerful rich class only can have such power. And the change is made to better control their people while convincing them it is for their good (much like upgrading a computer operating system with new useful functions but also to better control and watch its users whenever necessary... this becomes obvious in case of mobiles/smartphones).

I meant by this thread that while 'The Divided Powerless People' does exist in every country, 'The United Powerful Ruling People' that replaced the notion of 'The Supernatural Powerful Ruling Creator' doesn't exist anywhere as well.
.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
I think 'people' is a common theme with governments.

I woke up from that delusion, and admit that 'people' 99.9999% is none other than referring to the ruling class itself.
 

KerimF

Active Member
I think 'people' is a common theme with governments.

I woke up from that delusion, and admit that 'people' 99.9999% is none other than referring to the ruling class itself.

Alas, not 100% of The People refers to the ruling class :(

By the way, I recall now an Arabic saying: "If every one of us is a prince (Amir, in Arabic), who will drive the donkeys (Hamir, in Arabic)"? :D
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Alas, not 100% of The People refers to the ruling class :(

By the way, I recall now an Arabic saying: "If every one of us is a prince (Amir, in Arabic), who will drive the donkeys (Hamir, in Arabic)"? :D
Thing is, the working class is not in charge.
 
Top