Skip navigation

The Ron Paul revolution

When talking about the evolution of human consciousness and the Omega revolution, an important aspect is (world) politics. Ever since the beginning, western democracies are not much more than glorified dictatorships. These democracies are not about what the people want, but about using propaganda to let the people accept the regime; and when they think they elected the government, they do, without question. Edward Bernays portrays this in an excellent manner in his book "Propaganda". You could say that his book is the blue print of modern western democracy.

But, what we're seeing now, in the United States, is quite an extraordinary phenomena: The Ron Paul revolution. Out of the blue, a politician rises up which can safely be called unique: an honest politician. I mean, when did you last hear a presidential canditate object to the printing of worthless paper money (on which all western economies are based). And the support he gets is extensive, and growing, despite the fact that the mainstream media misrepresents or ignores him. The media have long since been the instrument used to control the population, but it is no longer working. Masses of people are waking up and are revolting against the corrupt status quo, against "Big Government".

Eight years ago, this was unheard of. Eight years seems like such a small period of time, but in this case, it represents an eternity of change.

I'll let Ron Paul explain it himself:

Tags: Government & Conspiracy, Ron Paul

3 Comments

  1. Posted January 24, 2008 at 1:14 am | Permalink

    Loved the video! It’s inspiring. When you’re talking about our western democracies, you say:

    Ever since the beginning, western democracies are not much more than glorified dictatorships. These democracies are not about what the people want, but about using propaganda to let the people accept the regime; and when they think they elected the government, they do, without question.

    Don’t you think that this is a bit harsh? I’m having trouble believing that our democracies are not representing us. They’re just not doing a very good job at it. And I think this is because we are not doing a very good job of communicating what we want. Thanks to the Internet, now we can. Governments will have to adapt to our (quickly changing) wishes and they will now that the organizational advantages of big government and other pyramid-shaped, authoritarian organizations are collapsing. We no longer have to organize strictly within pyramid frameworks to make communication effective or even possible. Just press the button and share the message! (The video you posted is indeed a great example of this power.)

    Getting together and organizing is getting easier and more effective every minute of each day. There’s no stopping that. So I agree with the main point of your post. I just don’t think that the origins of the current situation are as bleak as you paint them to be. Surely you wouldn’t think of the likes of Thomas Jefferson as trying to set up a dictatorship.

    A few more words on the communication issue: maybe the effectiveness of a democracy is dependent on the distance between the person on top and the person at the bottom of pyramid. Before the Internet, we’ve already reduced that distance with innovations such as special messengers, writing, printing, telegraphs and telephones. As a result, we together enjoy a great standard of living, which is unparalleled in human history!

    Anyway, you’ve given us some food for thought as I’d expected and you’ve even sparked a discussion already (with me). I’m glad to see your posting on this weblog so soon after my announcement. It willhas liven things up around here.

  2. Posted January 24, 2008 at 1:51 am | Permalink

    The republic of the founding fathers is indeed nothing like what I mean by glorified dictatorships; the U.S. is one of the only countries I know of with such a powerful constitution. After it’s foundation, the free nation of the U.S. gradually lost freedom because a power elite, mostly consisting of bankers, took over the nation. The most effective way of doing that, is controlling the nation’s money supply. Throughout history, bankers have repeatedly gained and lost control over this money supply, with the last example being the Federal Reserve system, which has been in use for more than 100 years now. However, this is kind of a long point to go into right now…

    As for the modern western democracies; take our nation, The Netherlands. We had a referendum about a European Constitution, which we rejected. They then changed the name so the people had no say in it anymore, and it was signed. Is that democratic?

    Or take the telecommunications retention laws. I don’t know anybody (among the “commoners”) who wants it, whilst I do know of a lot of opposition. Yet it has become law.

    And as for the opinion of the people, it has been shown that the people consider important whatever is in the media. If you as a politician are trying to communicate a point which would be vital to the people, but the media are ignoring it, no one is going to know about it, and therefore will not vote for you.

    But, I agree with you completely that the new media, the internet mostly, is a major improvement in this area. No longer is the public being informed from a single source. And, the public can now voice opinions much better, because the internet is two-way communication. But, this can only work in tandem with a population willing to use it. Luckily, this is happening, as I illustrated in my original post.

    I could (or should?) go into the subject matter more deeply, but I hope this explains my position a bit.

  3. Posted January 24, 2008 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

    It does explain your position a bit. It does. Thank you.

Post a Comment

Or use your OpenID: