(special article, part 2)
In the last part of this special article we laid down the basic principles and way of handling that a ciizen must possess not so much to be a correct citizen or some such philosophical ideal but in order to be able to protect him/herself from the vital and highly important threats and dangers of everyday life within the setting we call ‘civil life’. Just like in every process of learning and teaching, after the explaining of the logic and the basic principles, it is necessary to apply them practically so that we will understand and realize that we are not talking about something theoretical and untouchable or utopian but about the actual process to which we owe our existence at this time in a lawful state, and the only thing we have to do is apply it actively instead of pushing it aside for fear or manipulation. This actual process we described in the first part gave humanity concepts such as ‘Human Rights’, ‘Free Education’, ‘Welfare State’, ‘Social Insurance’. ‘Freedom of Thought and Speech’, ‘Self-Determination’, ‘Equality’, ‘Right to Vote’, ‘Constitutional Right’.
Every single one of these concepts and the applications derived from them is the result of the stance, attitude and action of people and later groups which followed faithfully the 10 Axioms of the article’s first part. We can infer/deduct this easily with a simple overview of their actions and a reading of their writings, if there are any. It is very important to keep in mind that before the establishment of such concepts as we mentioned the social situation was extreme, relentless and fully prohibitive towards elements opposing and following the 10 axioms, and worse than it is today. Even so, simple, everyday people who had lived for several decades in the obscurantist situation before the establishment of the concepts we mentioned decided that the conditions of their everyday life were unacceptable and against the law of Nature and God and as such, they were obliged to take measures so that they would be replaced with normal ones, congruent with God.
The most important of all which we must keep in our conscience is that these oppressors with the right of life and death over these people, with impunity and with superior technology not only could not overcome these people who were following the 10 Axioms but instead were forced to take to flight and disguise themselves and hide so that they would be as invisible as possible so that they would elude the attention of people who took away from them the authorities they had embezzled, so that they would use time and manipulation to take them back, swindling and deriding behind masks.
If we make an overview of World History from 1890 to present day we will see exactly this course of the process:
Stage 1: People follow the 10 Axioms, evaluate situations around them and decide to achieve certain goals towards the reinstitution of proper order according to Nature and/or God (as is presented through scriptures and not additional interpretations, explanations, analyses and decisions from a group of priests or other ecclesiastic agents).
Stage 2: People follow methodologies which are highly effective and in the same time express the level of their decision to reinstate order without fear or relenting to the bravado and threats and actions of the opponents seeking to maintain the situation existing.
Stage 3: People achieve the goals which have been derived from the 10 Axioms and the evaluation of situations, with the establishment of authorities and concepts as well as laws guarding their now-vested rights.
Stage 4: The opponents who lost their authorities which they had been embezzling as well as the privileges with which they were living parasitically, live in utmost secrecy and allow for a period of lull during which the laws and vested rights achieved in Stage 3 are upheld and are in force, so that the level of alertness of the people will lower because of a feeling of security and lack of need of control and guarding of their vested rights.
Stage 5: Very gradually and while the vested rights are not being guarded any longer, these opponents infiltrate positions of power, administration and responsibility via their representatives which they buy and who are traitorous and against the people and their vested rights, but present themselves demagogically as defenders and protectors of the people and their rights. While being in these positions, they gradually begin corrupting them and misleading the people from the ideas, the goals and the 10 Axioms which gave them the power they possess and which ensures increase of their well being and freedom through the introduction of fabricated needs which are phased in as progressive. Additionally, unfounded and irrational threats without object (e.g. ‘we will be characterized as inferior to others’ regardless of whether we are actually are or whether we are living with better quality of life than these others).
Stage 6: The social situation before Stage 1 comes back with acrimony and directly with driving and humiliating changes in legislation, institutions and social class, this time with a projection of the very concepts/values which were achieved and established in Stage 2 as ‘sacred’ and as such devalued, since now they have no impact or meaning to the people who are suffering, convinced they are weak and alone and powerless. For example, Freedom is projected as the most sacred and ultimate concept and motivation of the state / superpower of the U.S.A but in the name of Freedom and for the enforcement of it there is censorship within and out of USA borders, non-response to the wish of the American People in matters of life and death (such as an end to the war in Iraq and the return of troops home), the totalitarian international behavior which often manifests with invasion in foreign countries either with presumptuous diplomatic orders mixed with threats for internal affairs of every country for which they have no right to have a say, or with pure act of war and bloodshed of non-combatant population. All of these are actions of totalitarianism and menticide but are presented as expressions of the concept of Freedom, making the idea of Freedom from ridiculous to hated. In this manner the people are disarmed from their weapons since they are manipulated and taught to hate and abhor them.
A characteristic example from Greece are the concepts ‘Bread, Education, Liberty’ which have become associated with ‘anarchists/ communists’ and the ‘Hellas of Christian Hellenes’ which has been associated with the junta, dictatorship, totalitarianism, ridicule, inhumanity, exile and beatings.
If we examine closely these two mottos, actually analyzing the concepts they are promoting and projecting we will see that they contain the concept of welfare state, of critical thinking, of the need of belonging, the healthy system of evaluation regarding morals and daily dealing with our fellow man as well as the daily Greek life style which defended the bodily and mental health of the individual needing to adjust to everyday conditions according to the position of the country on the globe, as well as the ensuring of the survival of the people through the ages even under the state of occupation of other nations and cultures, as was proven historically with the Turkish and later the German occupation.
With the propaganda and the social unrest which intentionally associated these mottos either every directly opposite concept to which the Greek person rebels (without allowing the analysis of what these concepts under attack describe and defend), the Greek People was robbed from the weapons which helped its survival through the ages and the preservation of the enlightened spirit which was bequeathed from antiquity and which promotes and has been promoting Freedom of Thought with the goal of the well being and happiness of the individual.
In the same time, the Greek citizen sustained a cultural rape from others presenting themselves as Greeks who, however, were and are opposed and serving those who Greeks have always been throwing off: propaganda in the form of books, published newspaper stories and others such as ‘The Misery of Being Greek’ by N. Dimou or the song ‘Fuck’n Greeks’ by D. Savopoulos or additions to daily vocabulary of words like ‘big greek’ (Ελληνάρας) which is synonymous to a bad mannered, uncivilized, coarse and debased person who is sly and conniving, teach the Greek person and manipulate him/her into hating and being ashamed of his/herself and his/her name and identity, and all that is related to it which in this case is all the wealth of philosophy and intellect keeping him/her Free and Intact for eons. So the Greek person looks for another identity for which he/she will not feel ashamed and hooks him/herself from the one foisted with arguments such as ‘that’s what progressive people do’, ‘that’s what Europeans do’, ‘that’s how you will be in and not backwards’.
Today, in 2008 society internationally and globally is at Stage 6 and rapidly returning not only to the totalitarian conditions and regimes (devaluing the concept of Democracy and Liberalism in the process) but also to the low level of thought with the overabundance and introduction of customs and beliefs which obfuscate such as running to mediums and astrologers, having faith in convictions and supernatural beings such as demons, vampires and ghosts, application of dark magic and voodoo (as it is projected through the mass media and not the actual light-side philosophy of the particular creed) and a plethora of other fatalistic acts and philosophies promoting fear and desperation because of the sense of lack of control in our hands (internal vs. external locus of control).
Today in 2008 we have just entered a process of economic depression which is eradicating the middle social class so that there will only be ‘aristocracy’ and ‘lower working class’ (lumpenproletariat) as in the age before Enlightenment and earlier. This depression which internatially is ruining lives and families and in one stroke eradicates the work and striving of generations is fabricated and imposed exactly as we have described in Stage 6, since it does not stem from the law ‘of supply and demand’ of economy (i.e. lack of supply means raising of the prices, high supply means lowering of the prices). With today’s technology but also on the basis of the energy resourses of the planet, there is a surplus in food and services (as one can tell from the level of unemployment of professionals as well as the vast quantities of food which, though fit for consumption, are destroyed and do not enter the market) which covers more than enough the demand and therefore there should exist a drop in prices.
Despite the fact that even officially it is announced that the reason for the high price rate is not supply and demand but profiteering (of course not on the part of simple traders or producers of goods but the rest of the parasitic elements in society and the market), people like prime minister K. Karamanlis and his counterparts/colleages in the European Union claim and declare that there are “no magic solutions” in the problem of high price rates. If we apply in the process of our evaluation the principles of critical thought and the 10 Axioms we listed in the first part of the article, we will easily conclude that the people who rose up or were imposed with special, highly expensive election campaigns as well as unclear procedures of election, sponsored overtly or covertly from private individuals who are hiding behind Corporations are incompetent, inexperienced regarding the management of funds and un-free, since they are funded and are depended from their sponsors. They therefore have every interest to well represent each businessperson/ individual who has taken it upon him/herself to sustain them.
That which we must realize again as our ancestors of Stage 1 is that we don’t need nor require magical solutions, since these problems did not arise “magically” and out of the blue. As in every business or household (which, according to the logic of the babushka we follow, is a miniature state with the entrepreneur or home maker in the position of the prime minister, but with more difficulties than the real one who has the capacity to shape conditions and resources as he/she wants within the state) so can the problems within a state be resolved immediately (within weeks) and remain solved in the interest of every individual, of course with the necessary proviso that the goal of the people assuming the reins of the state truly do target this and not to turn the state in an enrichment machine for the few.
In our next article we will show the truth of the above words by beginning to describe the methodology of the proper governance which will solve all of the above and more without the minutest deprivation/destitution on the level of middle and upper middle social class, which is the best level of living for every normal individual regardless of profession (from farmer to doctor and from tradesman to professor).
Showing posts with label independence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label independence. Show all posts
Sunday, July 6, 2008
Sunday, June 29, 2008
Regarding the Home, the Demos and their Commissaries
( special article)
Common logic, which ensures the survival and welfare of all the entities on earth belonging at least to the fauna, in which humans are also included, is something which we have many times said we possess from birth as our basic weapon of survival and we are obliged to practice it and develop it throughout our lives.
We are also obliged to use to the fullest the general common logic as it has become shaped through the eons so that it can accommodate and protect as much as possible the coming generations, based on the essence of experience of the departing ones.
Great attention is required in order to have a vertical and clear separation between common logic (which is priceless and necessary) and common opinion (which is confounded, rarely confirmable and usually destructive as it is presented). While common logic is in essence simple but fundamental positions based on the knowledge of the relationship of action-reaction and prediction exactly as in the results of a longitudinal and wide-sample research (and therefore very reliable and representative, almost at the level of natural law), common opinion is the exact opposite of that since it is based on subjective and superficial evaluation of situations and values on the basis of influence and imposition: common opinion is not driven by a need for objective representation of reality geared to correct conclusion drawing but by a need for inclusion to the general group with unconditional agreement and consent to anything that is presented as position of the general group as a ticket in.
For example: a child who wants to be included in the game during recess by the big group of kids will agree or copy the behavior the big group of kids has towards another child/ the teachers/ the cleaning staff/ etc regardless of whether this same child considers this behavior correct/ prudent/ constructive or not (that is why many children feel bad after school).
On the same token which is exactly what drives common opinion, operates every person who needs ‘to be included in the game’ and for the sake of this big group he/she sacrifices principles, time, money, family, self esteem and even his/her body and life- against his/her common logic, the first priority of which is the protection and well being of the aforementioned things.
Yes, but man is a social being, therefore man cannot survive on his/her own and the ones who can are ‘unnatural’ and unhappy. Therefore I am not going against common logic by following common opinion. Isn’t that so?
Unfortunately it is not so. We will follow common logic to prove why not. For certain, man is a social being. But have we realized what we mean by this term? We must always be careful with terms and concept we are told because many times they are presented in a way that they are undefined and each one infers what each ones already believes/is afraid the term or concept means and not the meaning under discussion.
So, when we say that man is a social being we mean that man is made to be an independent part of a group of equally independent individuals so that man will be able to contribute along with the contributions of all the other people for the achievement of a common goal which is clear and commonly accepted by all the individuals of the group and equally constructive for everyone. Man, therefore, is the agent of an idea/ goal/ policy which will yield fruit for him/herself as well as the other people equally well: man, that is, is socially positively oriented, a social being.
However, what happens on the basis of need for someone to be included in a group which is driven by common opinion and the policy of this common opinion does not render man a social but an anti-social being: it renders him a dependent person seeking the lending of his/her potential to some other individual (which spells out blind obeisance and following without the contribution of any estimation/ constructive thought to anything) in the form of contribution, aiming at the reward of waiving of responsibility but also any further participation and contribution in common affairs. Therefore with the consent of any ‘common opinion’ without any presence of evaluation process regarding the quality and correctness of that opinion, the people who follow it (and are ‘in’/ ‘trendy’/ ‘opinionated’/ ‘progressive’/ ‘liberal’/ ‘open-minded’/ ‘intellectual’/ ‘clever’ / etc) buy out their obligation to oversee and protect the interest of their own selves and society, indifferent to the fate of this society and their own person. Therefore these people are extremely anti-social and therefore against the nature of man to be a social being. Therefore, these are the people who are unnatural, sick and harmful.
The man who is truly a social being (i.e. a healthy representative of his/her kind) is the one interested primarily to protect and promote natural health, mental health and psychological health as well as the potential for development in a positive and augmenting trajectory regarding intellect which, in its own turn, will defend even more the types of health I mentioned. This cannot be achieved with technical education alone (i.e. studies of all kinds) but with full use and understanding of common logic and its principles.
And what are those?
The basic principles of common logic are universal and absolute and very simple. In particular:
1. I do not consent to anything before I examine it thoroughly. Time which is invested in the examining before the decision is made is a fraction of the time saved by avoiding future problems which would arise from a forced, superficial or ignorant decision, the resolving of which is time consuming, energy consuming and high cost.
2. If I am burdened with time constraints to ‘hurry and catch an opportunity’ then 99.9% of the cases there is a trap or other kind of foul play which if I was allowed to exercise principle 1, I would immediately see. Therefore I prefer to ‘lose the opportunity’ and keep my possessions.
3. If I am being psychologically blackmailed to take back or not act according to a decision I have made based on principle 1 because I am being threatened I will be badly characterized, or turned away from the group or lose some priviledges or appreciation or anything else which is unfounded and non-tangible, supported by the opinion of third parties and many times undefined third parties, then I know my decision is very correct and it will yield me power and status for me and my real group.
4. I do not under any circumstances accept the existence of so called ‘gray areas’. The gray area is synonymous to anarchy, anomy, lawlessness as well as a lack of logic and positive motive and goals from those endorsing and enforcing it (and from which they benefit in one way or the other). If the so called gray area does not clear our in fully understandable black and whites then I refuse to be part of and participate in the process as it will not be in my control and that of my common logic and therefore I am in danger personally as well as the ones I am representing.
5. I do not accept and I oppose anyone trying to avoid clearing out the gray area for me, claiming that I am not capable of grasping it, it is impossible to be explained in simpler terms, it is not my jurisdiction to understand it, he/she has no time to explain it to me, or for any other reason does not accept to make it clear. If the process of action – reaction (that is, how the action about to take place will have the result it claims it will) is not clear in all individuals without exception, regardless of their socio-political and educational level and who have not suffered brain damage, then there is possible foul play or unclear action and we are obligated for the sake of our interests and those of the group we represent not to consent and bring opposition.
6. I do not accept that actions necessary for my survival and that of my social group like principle 5 is impractical, utopian or impossible. The being possessing the capacity to discover the way to split the atom, live in all the range of geological/climatic conditions, discover the way to cancel out gravity, viruses and bacteria can find the way and the method to explain methods, policies, strategies, reports, balances and so on so that principle 5 and all the others can be achieved.
7. I do not accept any kind of violent enforcement upon my person and my intellect whether this is attempted by few or many, by regimes, governments, committees, councils, newspapers, magazines, television, authors, awars, scientists, high profile people and others: all without fail will have to be able to convince on the basic of common logic without implicating technical knowledge that is none of my concern, and without pressuring me through propaganda and blackmail or lack of time so I can make my estimations.
8. I do not accept the concept of ‘done deals’ or ‘drawn conclusions/ complete processes/ perpetual conditions’: the being having managed to turn away age-old torrential rives, change the shape of shores created after millennia and be enforced only on the force of his/her common logic against the natural weapons of other predators has the capacity and obligation to reform anything undermining his/her existence.
9. I am not deterred from my course by blackmail that I will be alone. I am a social being and by following the above principles I show that I possess the power and force to support constructively other social beings who by nature will be attracted to me. Therefore I shall never be isolated. On the contrary, the other, anti-social beings trying to blackmail me in this way are the ones ravaged by alienation, isolation and loneliness.
10. I do not accept that there are dead ends, unsolvable situations, inert situations because of the concept of ‘between a rock and a hard place’. All the situations have a positive solution which is fully constructive and the only reason that anti-social beings try to thwart the solution is because in a truly constructive solution, their weakness and lack of intellect would become apparent and therefore they would have a position no higher of that of a dependent in the social group.
These basic principles of common logic hold for our selves and all the social groups from the family to the state to international alliances. Based, then, on these principles of common logic, we will analyze the current statements of several people who improperly hold positions of leadership or responsibility in the Greek state. Of course, given that the profile of these people is the same internationally, the only thing changing for other countries in terms of content in this blog, is the names.
Common logic, which ensures the survival and welfare of all the entities on earth belonging at least to the fauna, in which humans are also included, is something which we have many times said we possess from birth as our basic weapon of survival and we are obliged to practice it and develop it throughout our lives.
We are also obliged to use to the fullest the general common logic as it has become shaped through the eons so that it can accommodate and protect as much as possible the coming generations, based on the essence of experience of the departing ones.
Great attention is required in order to have a vertical and clear separation between common logic (which is priceless and necessary) and common opinion (which is confounded, rarely confirmable and usually destructive as it is presented). While common logic is in essence simple but fundamental positions based on the knowledge of the relationship of action-reaction and prediction exactly as in the results of a longitudinal and wide-sample research (and therefore very reliable and representative, almost at the level of natural law), common opinion is the exact opposite of that since it is based on subjective and superficial evaluation of situations and values on the basis of influence and imposition: common opinion is not driven by a need for objective representation of reality geared to correct conclusion drawing but by a need for inclusion to the general group with unconditional agreement and consent to anything that is presented as position of the general group as a ticket in.
For example: a child who wants to be included in the game during recess by the big group of kids will agree or copy the behavior the big group of kids has towards another child/ the teachers/ the cleaning staff/ etc regardless of whether this same child considers this behavior correct/ prudent/ constructive or not (that is why many children feel bad after school).
On the same token which is exactly what drives common opinion, operates every person who needs ‘to be included in the game’ and for the sake of this big group he/she sacrifices principles, time, money, family, self esteem and even his/her body and life- against his/her common logic, the first priority of which is the protection and well being of the aforementioned things.
Yes, but man is a social being, therefore man cannot survive on his/her own and the ones who can are ‘unnatural’ and unhappy. Therefore I am not going against common logic by following common opinion. Isn’t that so?
Unfortunately it is not so. We will follow common logic to prove why not. For certain, man is a social being. But have we realized what we mean by this term? We must always be careful with terms and concept we are told because many times they are presented in a way that they are undefined and each one infers what each ones already believes/is afraid the term or concept means and not the meaning under discussion.
So, when we say that man is a social being we mean that man is made to be an independent part of a group of equally independent individuals so that man will be able to contribute along with the contributions of all the other people for the achievement of a common goal which is clear and commonly accepted by all the individuals of the group and equally constructive for everyone. Man, therefore, is the agent of an idea/ goal/ policy which will yield fruit for him/herself as well as the other people equally well: man, that is, is socially positively oriented, a social being.
However, what happens on the basis of need for someone to be included in a group which is driven by common opinion and the policy of this common opinion does not render man a social but an anti-social being: it renders him a dependent person seeking the lending of his/her potential to some other individual (which spells out blind obeisance and following without the contribution of any estimation/ constructive thought to anything) in the form of contribution, aiming at the reward of waiving of responsibility but also any further participation and contribution in common affairs. Therefore with the consent of any ‘common opinion’ without any presence of evaluation process regarding the quality and correctness of that opinion, the people who follow it (and are ‘in’/ ‘trendy’/ ‘opinionated’/ ‘progressive’/ ‘liberal’/ ‘open-minded’/ ‘intellectual’/ ‘clever’ / etc) buy out their obligation to oversee and protect the interest of their own selves and society, indifferent to the fate of this society and their own person. Therefore these people are extremely anti-social and therefore against the nature of man to be a social being. Therefore, these are the people who are unnatural, sick and harmful.
The man who is truly a social being (i.e. a healthy representative of his/her kind) is the one interested primarily to protect and promote natural health, mental health and psychological health as well as the potential for development in a positive and augmenting trajectory regarding intellect which, in its own turn, will defend even more the types of health I mentioned. This cannot be achieved with technical education alone (i.e. studies of all kinds) but with full use and understanding of common logic and its principles.
And what are those?
The basic principles of common logic are universal and absolute and very simple. In particular:
1. I do not consent to anything before I examine it thoroughly. Time which is invested in the examining before the decision is made is a fraction of the time saved by avoiding future problems which would arise from a forced, superficial or ignorant decision, the resolving of which is time consuming, energy consuming and high cost.
2. If I am burdened with time constraints to ‘hurry and catch an opportunity’ then 99.9% of the cases there is a trap or other kind of foul play which if I was allowed to exercise principle 1, I would immediately see. Therefore I prefer to ‘lose the opportunity’ and keep my possessions.
3. If I am being psychologically blackmailed to take back or not act according to a decision I have made based on principle 1 because I am being threatened I will be badly characterized, or turned away from the group or lose some priviledges or appreciation or anything else which is unfounded and non-tangible, supported by the opinion of third parties and many times undefined third parties, then I know my decision is very correct and it will yield me power and status for me and my real group.
4. I do not under any circumstances accept the existence of so called ‘gray areas’. The gray area is synonymous to anarchy, anomy, lawlessness as well as a lack of logic and positive motive and goals from those endorsing and enforcing it (and from which they benefit in one way or the other). If the so called gray area does not clear our in fully understandable black and whites then I refuse to be part of and participate in the process as it will not be in my control and that of my common logic and therefore I am in danger personally as well as the ones I am representing.
5. I do not accept and I oppose anyone trying to avoid clearing out the gray area for me, claiming that I am not capable of grasping it, it is impossible to be explained in simpler terms, it is not my jurisdiction to understand it, he/she has no time to explain it to me, or for any other reason does not accept to make it clear. If the process of action – reaction (that is, how the action about to take place will have the result it claims it will) is not clear in all individuals without exception, regardless of their socio-political and educational level and who have not suffered brain damage, then there is possible foul play or unclear action and we are obligated for the sake of our interests and those of the group we represent not to consent and bring opposition.
6. I do not accept that actions necessary for my survival and that of my social group like principle 5 is impractical, utopian or impossible. The being possessing the capacity to discover the way to split the atom, live in all the range of geological/climatic conditions, discover the way to cancel out gravity, viruses and bacteria can find the way and the method to explain methods, policies, strategies, reports, balances and so on so that principle 5 and all the others can be achieved.
7. I do not accept any kind of violent enforcement upon my person and my intellect whether this is attempted by few or many, by regimes, governments, committees, councils, newspapers, magazines, television, authors, awars, scientists, high profile people and others: all without fail will have to be able to convince on the basic of common logic without implicating technical knowledge that is none of my concern, and without pressuring me through propaganda and blackmail or lack of time so I can make my estimations.
8. I do not accept the concept of ‘done deals’ or ‘drawn conclusions/ complete processes/ perpetual conditions’: the being having managed to turn away age-old torrential rives, change the shape of shores created after millennia and be enforced only on the force of his/her common logic against the natural weapons of other predators has the capacity and obligation to reform anything undermining his/her existence.
9. I am not deterred from my course by blackmail that I will be alone. I am a social being and by following the above principles I show that I possess the power and force to support constructively other social beings who by nature will be attracted to me. Therefore I shall never be isolated. On the contrary, the other, anti-social beings trying to blackmail me in this way are the ones ravaged by alienation, isolation and loneliness.
10. I do not accept that there are dead ends, unsolvable situations, inert situations because of the concept of ‘between a rock and a hard place’. All the situations have a positive solution which is fully constructive and the only reason that anti-social beings try to thwart the solution is because in a truly constructive solution, their weakness and lack of intellect would become apparent and therefore they would have a position no higher of that of a dependent in the social group.
These basic principles of common logic hold for our selves and all the social groups from the family to the state to international alliances. Based, then, on these principles of common logic, we will analyze the current statements of several people who improperly hold positions of leadership or responsibility in the Greek state. Of course, given that the profile of these people is the same internationally, the only thing changing for other countries in terms of content in this blog, is the names.
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Security
From very early in the upbringing and socialization of each one of us we are taught to sustain a perpetual intimidation and twisting of the proper concept for action, reaction and feedback of a person with its environment on a social but also physical level. Today, instead of starting by demonstrating what is the wrong take and then what is the proper standing of things, regardless of propaganda or philosophy, we will begin by showing what truly and invariantly holds for humans and their effect on society and the environment and in no case can change, whether we take it into account or not.
From the moment of birth or even conception, the person has a great effect on his/her environment because on an already existing situation (regardless of the quality of this situation) is inserted the self as a new factor and primarily as a much-promising undefined variable. Always and in every case the new person arriving acts as a catalyst for the far more intense behavior and alignment of all the people of his/her direct and then soon enough his/her greater social circle. But just like every catalyst on all levels and aspects of nature, from chemistry to psychology DOES NOT ACT AS A TRANSFORMER OF PEOPLE AND SITUATIONS BUT AS A FORCE MAKING THE ALREADY EXISTING PROCESS AND REACTION COME ABOUT FASTER AND MORE INTENSELY.
That is to say, a baby arriving to a couple which does not have a base of cohesion and harmony between themselves (not in the case that manipulation is potentially masking the true relationship existing) will, as a catalyst, bring to the fore the lack of cohesion and harmony that pre-existed, in very vivid colours. A baby arriving to a couple having the base of cohesion and harmony even if under attack by manipulation of third parties, will act as a catalyst and bring to the fore this cohesion and harmony in equally vivid colours.
The arrival of a new person will greatly strengthen the already existing positions and alignments of his/her environment BUT IN NO CASE WILL HE/SHE CHANGE OR TRANSFORM AN ALREADY EXISTING STANCE INTO A DIFFERENT ONE. It is possibly that the surface behavior change drastically but this change of ‘course’ takes place only so that it will coincide with the alignment and motivation already pre-existing. E.g. a mother who truly and actually as her children as first priority and not her husband or her parents or herself may, before the arrival of her offspring or even during carrying or the first stages of upbringing, consent to and act in ways that do not give priority to this offspring if she herself is manipulated into believing that it is ‘for the good of the children/ so that she won’t harm them/ so that she won’t hold them back/ so that she won’t make them weird/ so that she won’t make them like herself/ etc’. However, from the moment that this mother realizes that what she is pushed to do for her child are not only not correct but also very harmful, the catalytic effect of the child is triggered since the mother acts according to her always existing priority of her offspring’s wellbeing and does not allow anything that is harmful to them exist in their environment. If the realization of the harmful effect of the environment on the child does not push the parents to stake a direct and drastic stance to protect the child, then immediately and by default they have taken a stance and demonstrated in high relief the true order of priority/ loyalty/ faith/ values driving them regardless of what they profess. That is the exact catalytic effect of a person on his/her environment and it is unavoidable.
Why did we present all of the above and how do they serve as an illustration of the true essence, action, reaction and feedback of the person within society?
With the above example which is universally in effect in all cases without exception, regardless of culture or socio-economic level, we demonstrate directly that a person, by his/her mere existence alone, has huge impact on his/her environment equaling the chain reaction of a nuclear explosion. Also, we demonstrated that this type of impact takes place whether we decide to act/react or whether we get scared and remain idle: in both occurrences we characterize ourselves and the matching responsibilities to that characterization is noted one way or the other.
What do we want to say with this?
We want to say and demonstrate the very simple but in the same time terribly threatening truth for several people that nobody, regardless and despite efforts to throw off responsibility, is relieved of responsibility but is answerable to it.
Why is this threatening?
Because from a very young age we are taught that responsibility is an axe hovering over the head of every person, ready to lop it off, and the intelligent thing to do in this society is to manage to push your own axe away so that it hovers over someone else’s head, regardless if that axe still remains yours. Therefore, to be told that this axe will not cease to hover over your head but will remain and possibly become even bigger is absolutely threatening.
Yes, but so many manage (from politicians, business people, royalty to parents, relatives and friends) to throw off their responsibilities and heap them on someone else, making others pay for them. How then, is it impossible to throw off responsibility?
Responsibilities are never thrown off and this can be proven in all occasions, but especially in the cases of leaders of all shapes and sizes, since everyone can clearly and directly demonstrate or reveal the culprit for many conditions from high price rate to migration status around the world, and since everyone agrees to phrases like ‘all politicians are dirty/ bought/ servants of big money’. So what is going on?
What is going on is that immediately after the very accurate estimation and ascription of responsibility, follows the rhetorical question ‘and what can one do?’ or some comment declaring inability/ weakness of the type ‘let’s not look at that/ one can’t do a thing/ a lost cause/ etc’.
Therefore?
Therefore, just like in the case of the parent who does not have his/her offspring as first priority, even if claiming he/she does, the politician and any other type of leader acts as a catalyst and demonstrates fully that the true alignment of the citizen is not towards personal and general improvement of daily life but on the contrary, towards the maximization of hardship and objectification of the fellow man, and therefore the citizen’s own self as well. Every single citizen, by the lack of actual reaction and control of the representatives who obviously do not assume responsibilities or keep their promises shows that this citizen consents and approves of the condition being enforced. This now is broadcasted even through the mass media and the statements of state representatives when they claim, and rightfully so in this case, that ‘the people approves/ consents/ orders/ wants the behavior they are displaying’
But how can you say that when all the world is in upheaval with strikes, demonstrations and ‘boycotts’?
Unfortunately, all of this is a smoke screen and an excuse so that all the world can feel they have done their duty and will not be asked to answer for or will not be blamed that in reality they are consenting to the subjugation that is happening, while in the same time will achieve nothing so that they and their neighbour (who is a measure of primary importance) will be subjugated and integrated in a status quo in which somehow, everyone has someone oppressing them and someone whom they oppress in their own turn (even if that someone is the homeless person on the street or the stray cat).
The strikes, marches, demonstrations and partial (not full and complete) boycotts consist the first part of a threat from the people to its representatives which threat, however, never (since 1970) actualizes. The strike or the demonstration has an effect when every single one of the strikers or members of the demonstration is fully prepared not to engage the police or SWAT team forces, but to see all the slogans on the pickets he/she is carrying come to pass. That is, when the picket says that ‘the social security reform will not pass’, it will have to be set in stone and when the representative/ politician call the bluff, it must be shown that it is not a bluff by completely ignoring the reform laws, including refusal to pay taxes and conform to anything the reform will attempt to enforce.
Every single protester must be prepared to do this even if he/she stands alone.
So, I will fight so that some millions of insured in the social security will benefit from me?
You will be fighting for your own self. The first and many times only one benefiting will be you and those you love. Only if you truly hate your own self will you not look to end the abuse taking place in your face just because there is chance for someone else to benefit as well (like the neighbour). Only if truly deep down you like to suffer and watch others suffer will you continue to consent to this situation.
Which situation could be stopped dead in 3 to 4 days if these thousands of protestants claiming to be determined to truly refuse to obey to an authority the power of which exists in the agreement of these same people to obey and suffer. Thousands of people refusing to pay a tax cannot be persecuted for it.
A simple and completely painless decision to have an entire city remain at home and not spend a single euro (or dollar or pound) for 24 hours is enough to arrest this whole apparent ‘rampant’ condition of augmenting prices of oil, food, services since, for the average merchant or business person it would constitute an arbitrary loss of a single day’s income but for the international corporations and great off short companies it would constitute loss of several millions of euro and a definite stop of their course.
This action alone from the several that exist is enough leverage to control the social situation and show to the political representatives that the only thing they truly are is servants with uncertain power and jurisdiction.
Historically the above has been proven to be fully successful and effective even with a less that full participation or even with a less than 50% of the population participating in completely totalitarian regimes.
And what when I am completely alone?
Then you are even stronger if you use other avenues meant for single units.
And which are those?
Although we are going to examine these with greater depth in the next article, I will mention one of the Basic Truths from which a very powerful method is derived:
Basic Truth number 4: “The state avoids the laws and therefore tries to maintain ignorance of the law in the citizens.”
The first thing you must do (not in general but only regarding to the particular case concerning you personally) is to be informed and read the four or five law and two or three legislations concerning your matter on any given time.
Attention: we must not read the laws and legislations with fear, seeking to see what we are forbidden to do, but with care and critical thought to see through which avenue we will succeed to defend or achieve what we want (fact which is applied broadly but sloppily by all of those embezzling and abusing. We simply are going to learn in the next article how we will do the same cleverly in order to retain our freedom, independence and well being).
From the moment of birth or even conception, the person has a great effect on his/her environment because on an already existing situation (regardless of the quality of this situation) is inserted the self as a new factor and primarily as a much-promising undefined variable. Always and in every case the new person arriving acts as a catalyst for the far more intense behavior and alignment of all the people of his/her direct and then soon enough his/her greater social circle. But just like every catalyst on all levels and aspects of nature, from chemistry to psychology DOES NOT ACT AS A TRANSFORMER OF PEOPLE AND SITUATIONS BUT AS A FORCE MAKING THE ALREADY EXISTING PROCESS AND REACTION COME ABOUT FASTER AND MORE INTENSELY.
That is to say, a baby arriving to a couple which does not have a base of cohesion and harmony between themselves (not in the case that manipulation is potentially masking the true relationship existing) will, as a catalyst, bring to the fore the lack of cohesion and harmony that pre-existed, in very vivid colours. A baby arriving to a couple having the base of cohesion and harmony even if under attack by manipulation of third parties, will act as a catalyst and bring to the fore this cohesion and harmony in equally vivid colours.
The arrival of a new person will greatly strengthen the already existing positions and alignments of his/her environment BUT IN NO CASE WILL HE/SHE CHANGE OR TRANSFORM AN ALREADY EXISTING STANCE INTO A DIFFERENT ONE. It is possibly that the surface behavior change drastically but this change of ‘course’ takes place only so that it will coincide with the alignment and motivation already pre-existing. E.g. a mother who truly and actually as her children as first priority and not her husband or her parents or herself may, before the arrival of her offspring or even during carrying or the first stages of upbringing, consent to and act in ways that do not give priority to this offspring if she herself is manipulated into believing that it is ‘for the good of the children/ so that she won’t harm them/ so that she won’t hold them back/ so that she won’t make them weird/ so that she won’t make them like herself/ etc’. However, from the moment that this mother realizes that what she is pushed to do for her child are not only not correct but also very harmful, the catalytic effect of the child is triggered since the mother acts according to her always existing priority of her offspring’s wellbeing and does not allow anything that is harmful to them exist in their environment. If the realization of the harmful effect of the environment on the child does not push the parents to stake a direct and drastic stance to protect the child, then immediately and by default they have taken a stance and demonstrated in high relief the true order of priority/ loyalty/ faith/ values driving them regardless of what they profess. That is the exact catalytic effect of a person on his/her environment and it is unavoidable.
Why did we present all of the above and how do they serve as an illustration of the true essence, action, reaction and feedback of the person within society?
With the above example which is universally in effect in all cases without exception, regardless of culture or socio-economic level, we demonstrate directly that a person, by his/her mere existence alone, has huge impact on his/her environment equaling the chain reaction of a nuclear explosion. Also, we demonstrated that this type of impact takes place whether we decide to act/react or whether we get scared and remain idle: in both occurrences we characterize ourselves and the matching responsibilities to that characterization is noted one way or the other.
What do we want to say with this?
We want to say and demonstrate the very simple but in the same time terribly threatening truth for several people that nobody, regardless and despite efforts to throw off responsibility, is relieved of responsibility but is answerable to it.
Why is this threatening?
Because from a very young age we are taught that responsibility is an axe hovering over the head of every person, ready to lop it off, and the intelligent thing to do in this society is to manage to push your own axe away so that it hovers over someone else’s head, regardless if that axe still remains yours. Therefore, to be told that this axe will not cease to hover over your head but will remain and possibly become even bigger is absolutely threatening.
Yes, but so many manage (from politicians, business people, royalty to parents, relatives and friends) to throw off their responsibilities and heap them on someone else, making others pay for them. How then, is it impossible to throw off responsibility?
Responsibilities are never thrown off and this can be proven in all occasions, but especially in the cases of leaders of all shapes and sizes, since everyone can clearly and directly demonstrate or reveal the culprit for many conditions from high price rate to migration status around the world, and since everyone agrees to phrases like ‘all politicians are dirty/ bought/ servants of big money’. So what is going on?
What is going on is that immediately after the very accurate estimation and ascription of responsibility, follows the rhetorical question ‘and what can one do?’ or some comment declaring inability/ weakness of the type ‘let’s not look at that/ one can’t do a thing/ a lost cause/ etc’.
Therefore?
Therefore, just like in the case of the parent who does not have his/her offspring as first priority, even if claiming he/she does, the politician and any other type of leader acts as a catalyst and demonstrates fully that the true alignment of the citizen is not towards personal and general improvement of daily life but on the contrary, towards the maximization of hardship and objectification of the fellow man, and therefore the citizen’s own self as well. Every single citizen, by the lack of actual reaction and control of the representatives who obviously do not assume responsibilities or keep their promises shows that this citizen consents and approves of the condition being enforced. This now is broadcasted even through the mass media and the statements of state representatives when they claim, and rightfully so in this case, that ‘the people approves/ consents/ orders/ wants the behavior they are displaying’
But how can you say that when all the world is in upheaval with strikes, demonstrations and ‘boycotts’?
Unfortunately, all of this is a smoke screen and an excuse so that all the world can feel they have done their duty and will not be asked to answer for or will not be blamed that in reality they are consenting to the subjugation that is happening, while in the same time will achieve nothing so that they and their neighbour (who is a measure of primary importance) will be subjugated and integrated in a status quo in which somehow, everyone has someone oppressing them and someone whom they oppress in their own turn (even if that someone is the homeless person on the street or the stray cat).
The strikes, marches, demonstrations and partial (not full and complete) boycotts consist the first part of a threat from the people to its representatives which threat, however, never (since 1970) actualizes. The strike or the demonstration has an effect when every single one of the strikers or members of the demonstration is fully prepared not to engage the police or SWAT team forces, but to see all the slogans on the pickets he/she is carrying come to pass. That is, when the picket says that ‘the social security reform will not pass’, it will have to be set in stone and when the representative/ politician call the bluff, it must be shown that it is not a bluff by completely ignoring the reform laws, including refusal to pay taxes and conform to anything the reform will attempt to enforce.
Every single protester must be prepared to do this even if he/she stands alone.
So, I will fight so that some millions of insured in the social security will benefit from me?
You will be fighting for your own self. The first and many times only one benefiting will be you and those you love. Only if you truly hate your own self will you not look to end the abuse taking place in your face just because there is chance for someone else to benefit as well (like the neighbour). Only if truly deep down you like to suffer and watch others suffer will you continue to consent to this situation.
Which situation could be stopped dead in 3 to 4 days if these thousands of protestants claiming to be determined to truly refuse to obey to an authority the power of which exists in the agreement of these same people to obey and suffer. Thousands of people refusing to pay a tax cannot be persecuted for it.
A simple and completely painless decision to have an entire city remain at home and not spend a single euro (or dollar or pound) for 24 hours is enough to arrest this whole apparent ‘rampant’ condition of augmenting prices of oil, food, services since, for the average merchant or business person it would constitute an arbitrary loss of a single day’s income but for the international corporations and great off short companies it would constitute loss of several millions of euro and a definite stop of their course.
This action alone from the several that exist is enough leverage to control the social situation and show to the political representatives that the only thing they truly are is servants with uncertain power and jurisdiction.
Historically the above has been proven to be fully successful and effective even with a less that full participation or even with a less than 50% of the population participating in completely totalitarian regimes.
And what when I am completely alone?
Then you are even stronger if you use other avenues meant for single units.
And which are those?
Although we are going to examine these with greater depth in the next article, I will mention one of the Basic Truths from which a very powerful method is derived:
Basic Truth number 4: “The state avoids the laws and therefore tries to maintain ignorance of the law in the citizens.”
The first thing you must do (not in general but only regarding to the particular case concerning you personally) is to be informed and read the four or five law and two or three legislations concerning your matter on any given time.
Attention: we must not read the laws and legislations with fear, seeking to see what we are forbidden to do, but with care and critical thought to see through which avenue we will succeed to defend or achieve what we want (fact which is applied broadly but sloppily by all of those embezzling and abusing. We simply are going to learn in the next article how we will do the same cleverly in order to retain our freedom, independence and well being).
Sunday, June 15, 2008
Policemen
A great inhibitor which stops the full influence and power a person can have on his/her environment is the concept of ‘protector and avenger of the weak’. In every culture and mythology we can see such figures (e.g. Robin Hood, Zorro and others) which embody the nemesis and shield of an otherwise idle, incompetent and not particularly bright mass with limited usefulness.
And why is a figure or symbol bringing hope and relief to an oppressed people inhibitory?
In psychology a very important element affecting the prognosis of any incident of psychopathology or problem/crisis management in the person’s environment is what we call ‘locus of control’: that is, the concept of the control node, so to speak, of our self and our environment. If we are truly and soundly convinced that we do not have control over the things happening to us, our destiny and the potential effect we can have around, then we truly cannot resolve anything obstructing our daily ‘all’s well’. But if we are truly and soundly convinced that we have or can acquire control and influence on what is happening to us, our destiny and our environment, then we become powerful, actually individuals and elements of society who can ensure the ‘all’s well’ of daily like of ourselves and others.
The symbol or figure of Zorro and any type of Zorro steals exactly this element which makes a person a powerful fighter and successful defender of all who are important and valuable to him/her. With the concept of Zorro, people do not think how to correct themselves their problems but, at best, how to find someone else who will solve them for them while they stand idle or, at worst, how God abandoned them because He did not have a fighter drop from the sky to solve their problems and does not accept or even imagine that God has made them, themselves, fighters and defenders.
Even in the actual case of the myths of Zorro or Robin Hood, let’s imagine what would happen if those heroes, instead of acting as they saw fit and felt they could, they began brooding over how there is nobody to defend them…
But isn’t it smart or safe to sit at the sidelines and let someone else ‘pull the coals out of the fire’?
Of course the answer is no, but let’s explore the assumption. Is it truly safe to sit idle, passive or inert? What do I salvage is I do not take corrective action for my environment and my self?
In essence, I salvage nothing. What I do not want to happen to me happens easily and quickly and instead of making my own life easier, I make it easy for the ones who are making mine harder. That which I salvage is the illusion that I am not under siege and nobody is after me, exactly like the ostrich relieves itself psychologically by hiding its head and not seeing the predator coming for it. The ostrich convinces itself that it is safe. Of course, up until the first time the predator’s teeth sink in its flesh.
By the same logic, the citizen sits idle and passive, just nagging about the price rate, the bad foreign policy, the bad coordination, the embezzling and stealing of public funds and the great level of corruption while waiting for the one who will stop all that for him/her. But nobody comes, Zorro and Robin Hood exist only in books and movies and the citizen allows everything that is hurting him/her slowly but certainly kill him/her.
Yes, but if I try to take the coals out of the fire, I will be the imbecile who got burned for everyone else who is going to reap the gains from my efforts, if I succeed.
Primarily, the ‘coals’ in all the forms they may take never sit idly in the fire without bothering anyone. On the contrary, the coals burn continually and without limit everyone without exception, whether the people are trying to pull them out of the fire or not. In all facets of everyday life this occurs, but let us pick one which occupies everyone’s thoughts strongly: the tax revenue service.
The tax revenue service is a coal feared by many people. Since forever, since I was a little girl I was told stories by my father and my mother who were working in the tax revenue service and the public contribution / cashtill office (for the chemical/pharmaceutical and anonymous companies respectively) and which stories showed vividly how this ‘coal’ would protect the big capital-holding parties and mercilessly chased after everyone else. Everyone else trembled and with great fear lest they anger, intimidate, draw the attention of or oppose the ‘coal’ was trying to hide from it with great percentages of failure. Especially in the case where mercy, humanity or compassion was invoked by everyone else, the ‘coal’ was particularly hard and merciless, fact which pushed my father to put stoppers to it and managed to, for everyone who was not scared and followed his advice, right up to a few days before he was murdered.
So what do we conclude, therefore? That not pulling your own coals from the fire simply feeds them and brazen it out so that from a simple coal it becomes a flaming boulder. To resist and be fully prepared to pull the coal out of the fire makes the coal panic and react in a way making it even more vulnerable.
Yes, but your father who resisted the ‘coal’ got killed by it.
That is not entirely accurate. My father was indeed murdered by these ‘coals’ as we call them today, but this happened because he didn’t behave in general in the manner he acted in his area of expertise, tax and accounting economics. When we do decide to pull the coals out of the fire, we also decide to pull on the appropriate gloves and approach with the proper manner instead of offering a target when we do not need to. That means that every action we take must be calmly and coolly designed in the frame of strategy of the defensive/protective policy we are following. Also, we will have to be clearly aware that we are up against something sly and shameless which has very specific weapons and way of using them. We protect ourselves from these weapons with a few acts of common sense and prevention. From then on, the ‘coals’ are powerless and the only thing they will be able to do is show us all the ways we can extinguish them. That which my father did not do while he had been warned by me was avoid the dangerous moments of ‘thin ice’ allowing the ‘coals’ to be sly and do what they are afraid to do while hiding behind a smoke screen, like that day of November 17, 1973 was.
So what is the general conclusion of all of the above?
The general conclusion is that all of us have already experienced the worst and every day this ‘worst’ is worsening, leading with certainty to haunting scenarios which coincide with those of prisoners, hostages, serfs, concentration camp inmates or exiles in barren islands. This is unavoidable if we continue like this, that is waiting for someone else (liberator, anarchist, delegate, organization, philanthropist, personage, politician, king, appointed religious leader, state, international schemas, etc) to correct for us the wrongdoings and return to us the well being and the dignity that is being stolen from us daily. This ‘someone else’ will do it on the surface and for a reward/compensation he/she will ask for him/herself alone that very same amount or more of what was stolen. Historical examples of such ‘protectors’ of the People are numerous, such as Napoleon, Julius Caesar, George Washington, Lenin, Hitler, King Otto of Greece and all the ‘agents of freedom and/or change’ of Greek post-war and post-change-over.
Therefore it is much safer and much more definitely directed to daily well being and quality of life if we are decided each one of us on his/her own and regardless of organization/coordination/contribution by others/ ratification of our actions by the environment to resist and deny to concede to the egregious law-breaking, law-bending and abuse of every representative of the ‘coals’ so that we will be forcing the coals to pull themselves out of the fire.
Is this possible?
It is not only possible it is certain. Persistence and refusal to accept intimidatory moves and blackmail which in essence have no object (to be threatened to be made poorer when the blackmailer is already doing it to you with geometric speed is not intimidatory if you are aware that the blackmailer is already doing to you what he/she is threatening to do) make the adversary take to his/her heels, while protesting of course, because this adversary is impudent and cowardly and his/her unchanging policy is ‘shoot in the dark and hope it works’. The shot lands only when we become frightened and we get the target shot for the adversary on our own instead of showing to him/her that if he/she does not behave properly, he/she will be dismissed from the social group.
How can I do this alone without organization or support from my environment?
By keeping in mind the following Basic Truths:
The state is dirty and therefore is afraid of clarity.
The state is dirty but maintains a superficial semblance of clarity and modesty which it wants to keep at all costs, even with a threadbare excuse.
The state is afraid of its own citizens.
The state is afraid of its responsibilities.
The state avoids the laws and therefore tries to maintain ignorance of the law in the citizens.
The state threatens and manipulates, therefore just as we have previously displayed about those who want and seek the creation and maintenance of Free Bondsmen, it feels weak and incapable to face any actual opposition.
By applying the actions derived from the Basic Truths daily in our life and routine, something which we will analyze in extent with concrete directions in the next article, demonstrating how every citizen can easily police (that is, enforce proper functioning according to the principles of Human Rights, the Constitution and the derived laws) all the agents, representatives and functionaries he/she is funding in order to be served, as well as other citizens who are dysfunctioning.
Generally, what we must draw and realize today, letting it sink in and become part of our reality so that we will be able to move on further and become actually, not only potentially, forceful and powerful, is that the only police person who will truly do the job well and always for us is us, ourselves, alone. If we rest easy or trust that someone else will guard our back, someone who has given no proof or guarantee that he/she has ever done so (on the contrary he/she has shown greatly that he/she is doing the opposite), we will end up one way or the other like my father who, while a fighter, lowered his shield in the midst of battle, or like the anonymous deceased of the mass grave where they bury the subdued of the non-combatant population.
And why is a figure or symbol bringing hope and relief to an oppressed people inhibitory?
In psychology a very important element affecting the prognosis of any incident of psychopathology or problem/crisis management in the person’s environment is what we call ‘locus of control’: that is, the concept of the control node, so to speak, of our self and our environment. If we are truly and soundly convinced that we do not have control over the things happening to us, our destiny and the potential effect we can have around, then we truly cannot resolve anything obstructing our daily ‘all’s well’. But if we are truly and soundly convinced that we have or can acquire control and influence on what is happening to us, our destiny and our environment, then we become powerful, actually individuals and elements of society who can ensure the ‘all’s well’ of daily like of ourselves and others.
The symbol or figure of Zorro and any type of Zorro steals exactly this element which makes a person a powerful fighter and successful defender of all who are important and valuable to him/her. With the concept of Zorro, people do not think how to correct themselves their problems but, at best, how to find someone else who will solve them for them while they stand idle or, at worst, how God abandoned them because He did not have a fighter drop from the sky to solve their problems and does not accept or even imagine that God has made them, themselves, fighters and defenders.
Even in the actual case of the myths of Zorro or Robin Hood, let’s imagine what would happen if those heroes, instead of acting as they saw fit and felt they could, they began brooding over how there is nobody to defend them…
But isn’t it smart or safe to sit at the sidelines and let someone else ‘pull the coals out of the fire’?
Of course the answer is no, but let’s explore the assumption. Is it truly safe to sit idle, passive or inert? What do I salvage is I do not take corrective action for my environment and my self?
In essence, I salvage nothing. What I do not want to happen to me happens easily and quickly and instead of making my own life easier, I make it easy for the ones who are making mine harder. That which I salvage is the illusion that I am not under siege and nobody is after me, exactly like the ostrich relieves itself psychologically by hiding its head and not seeing the predator coming for it. The ostrich convinces itself that it is safe. Of course, up until the first time the predator’s teeth sink in its flesh.
By the same logic, the citizen sits idle and passive, just nagging about the price rate, the bad foreign policy, the bad coordination, the embezzling and stealing of public funds and the great level of corruption while waiting for the one who will stop all that for him/her. But nobody comes, Zorro and Robin Hood exist only in books and movies and the citizen allows everything that is hurting him/her slowly but certainly kill him/her.
Yes, but if I try to take the coals out of the fire, I will be the imbecile who got burned for everyone else who is going to reap the gains from my efforts, if I succeed.
Primarily, the ‘coals’ in all the forms they may take never sit idly in the fire without bothering anyone. On the contrary, the coals burn continually and without limit everyone without exception, whether the people are trying to pull them out of the fire or not. In all facets of everyday life this occurs, but let us pick one which occupies everyone’s thoughts strongly: the tax revenue service.
The tax revenue service is a coal feared by many people. Since forever, since I was a little girl I was told stories by my father and my mother who were working in the tax revenue service and the public contribution / cashtill office (for the chemical/pharmaceutical and anonymous companies respectively) and which stories showed vividly how this ‘coal’ would protect the big capital-holding parties and mercilessly chased after everyone else. Everyone else trembled and with great fear lest they anger, intimidate, draw the attention of or oppose the ‘coal’ was trying to hide from it with great percentages of failure. Especially in the case where mercy, humanity or compassion was invoked by everyone else, the ‘coal’ was particularly hard and merciless, fact which pushed my father to put stoppers to it and managed to, for everyone who was not scared and followed his advice, right up to a few days before he was murdered.
So what do we conclude, therefore? That not pulling your own coals from the fire simply feeds them and brazen it out so that from a simple coal it becomes a flaming boulder. To resist and be fully prepared to pull the coal out of the fire makes the coal panic and react in a way making it even more vulnerable.
Yes, but your father who resisted the ‘coal’ got killed by it.
That is not entirely accurate. My father was indeed murdered by these ‘coals’ as we call them today, but this happened because he didn’t behave in general in the manner he acted in his area of expertise, tax and accounting economics. When we do decide to pull the coals out of the fire, we also decide to pull on the appropriate gloves and approach with the proper manner instead of offering a target when we do not need to. That means that every action we take must be calmly and coolly designed in the frame of strategy of the defensive/protective policy we are following. Also, we will have to be clearly aware that we are up against something sly and shameless which has very specific weapons and way of using them. We protect ourselves from these weapons with a few acts of common sense and prevention. From then on, the ‘coals’ are powerless and the only thing they will be able to do is show us all the ways we can extinguish them. That which my father did not do while he had been warned by me was avoid the dangerous moments of ‘thin ice’ allowing the ‘coals’ to be sly and do what they are afraid to do while hiding behind a smoke screen, like that day of November 17, 1973 was.
So what is the general conclusion of all of the above?
The general conclusion is that all of us have already experienced the worst and every day this ‘worst’ is worsening, leading with certainty to haunting scenarios which coincide with those of prisoners, hostages, serfs, concentration camp inmates or exiles in barren islands. This is unavoidable if we continue like this, that is waiting for someone else (liberator, anarchist, delegate, organization, philanthropist, personage, politician, king, appointed religious leader, state, international schemas, etc) to correct for us the wrongdoings and return to us the well being and the dignity that is being stolen from us daily. This ‘someone else’ will do it on the surface and for a reward/compensation he/she will ask for him/herself alone that very same amount or more of what was stolen. Historical examples of such ‘protectors’ of the People are numerous, such as Napoleon, Julius Caesar, George Washington, Lenin, Hitler, King Otto of Greece and all the ‘agents of freedom and/or change’ of Greek post-war and post-change-over.
Therefore it is much safer and much more definitely directed to daily well being and quality of life if we are decided each one of us on his/her own and regardless of organization/coordination/contribution by others/ ratification of our actions by the environment to resist and deny to concede to the egregious law-breaking, law-bending and abuse of every representative of the ‘coals’ so that we will be forcing the coals to pull themselves out of the fire.
Is this possible?
It is not only possible it is certain. Persistence and refusal to accept intimidatory moves and blackmail which in essence have no object (to be threatened to be made poorer when the blackmailer is already doing it to you with geometric speed is not intimidatory if you are aware that the blackmailer is already doing to you what he/she is threatening to do) make the adversary take to his/her heels, while protesting of course, because this adversary is impudent and cowardly and his/her unchanging policy is ‘shoot in the dark and hope it works’. The shot lands only when we become frightened and we get the target shot for the adversary on our own instead of showing to him/her that if he/she does not behave properly, he/she will be dismissed from the social group.
How can I do this alone without organization or support from my environment?
By keeping in mind the following Basic Truths:
The state is dirty and therefore is afraid of clarity.
The state is dirty but maintains a superficial semblance of clarity and modesty which it wants to keep at all costs, even with a threadbare excuse.
The state is afraid of its own citizens.
The state is afraid of its responsibilities.
The state avoids the laws and therefore tries to maintain ignorance of the law in the citizens.
The state threatens and manipulates, therefore just as we have previously displayed about those who want and seek the creation and maintenance of Free Bondsmen, it feels weak and incapable to face any actual opposition.
By applying the actions derived from the Basic Truths daily in our life and routine, something which we will analyze in extent with concrete directions in the next article, demonstrating how every citizen can easily police (that is, enforce proper functioning according to the principles of Human Rights, the Constitution and the derived laws) all the agents, representatives and functionaries he/she is funding in order to be served, as well as other citizens who are dysfunctioning.
Generally, what we must draw and realize today, letting it sink in and become part of our reality so that we will be able to move on further and become actually, not only potentially, forceful and powerful, is that the only police person who will truly do the job well and always for us is us, ourselves, alone. If we rest easy or trust that someone else will guard our back, someone who has given no proof or guarantee that he/she has ever done so (on the contrary he/she has shown greatly that he/she is doing the opposite), we will end up one way or the other like my father who, while a fighter, lowered his shield in the midst of battle, or like the anonymous deceased of the mass grave where they bury the subdued of the non-combatant population.
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
For the Anniversary of March 25th, 1821
With the opportunity of the anniversary of our nation’s liberation through the declaration of the revolution of 1821, act which is the climax of a continuous effort by the Greeks, through the centuries of Turkish occupation, to reclaim a right which had violently been taken from them by Westerners (Veneti, Franks, etc) first and then by the Ottoman Turks, we will celebrate this testament of blood on a national level by detecting it on the personal level according to the example with the babushkas.
The Revolution of 1821 was not a sudden event but the successful attempt after at least two more (1611: the movement in Epirus by Dionysius, Eparch of Larissa who was named by the pro-Turkish and the kontzabasides [Greek origin supervisors approved by the Turks to oversee Greek areas] called him Skylosophos – dog philosopher , 1769: the revolutionary movement of Theodore Orlov , 1790-1792: the revolutionary movement of Lambros Katsonis and Androutsos) which were bathed in blood but from which the Greeks learned what not to do and what to do in order to be successful next time.
We must not forget that the war for the independence of the Hellenic Nation started off completely unsupported, not only by other states, but also by the very units of governance/ administration presenting themselves as Greek but, as we have demonstrated in past articles were not truly members of the Greek group. We are referring to the various officials (Phanariotes [Rich and prominent Greek origin families living in Phanar of Constantinople], Dragoumans [translators for the Sultan and ministers of foreign policy for the Turks], elders, prefects, kontzabasides, kapoi/armatoloi [policing officials of Greek origin appointed by the Turks]) who evidently put as first priority their personal economic gain and the acquisition of power and not the interests of the social group they were supposed to represent (simple examples to illustrate the truth: the fierce war since the end of the 18th century and up to 1821 that was waged by the Patriarchate, the Phanariotes, the kontzabasides and their representatives, trying to enforce menticide and stifle any form or expression of the Greek Enlightenment using slander, libel, abuse, threats, circulars, suppressive measures, terrorism, persecution of the intellectual and spiritual leaders of the Hellenic Nation even to the point of executing them and shutting down schools and universities).
Additionally, we must mention that the revolution sprung up from the Greek people, both inside and outside the borders, fact which can be ascertained by the first sources of its funding [it was funded by the Greeks of the communities abroad who had a great interest in the intellectual and cultural development of the villages/towns they originated from and who repeatedly sent money to build educational institutions there (The School of Karpenisi, the ‘Museum of Agrafa’ School, schools in Ioannina, in Zagora of mt. Pilio and elsewhere became small academies where the new liberal ideas circulated and disseminated, as well as the political speeches which had been delivered by the revolutionary France of 1789-1792) to pay the teachers, to build libraries and to send several books for the education of their fellow countrymen] and its armament.
Efforts to quench the Revolution of 1821 (Excommunication by the Patriarch, May 7th 1821: the razing to the ground of the villages of Pilio by the Pasha of Larissa Machmut Dramalis in retaliation of the declaration of the revolution in Pilio by Anthimos Gazis; June 7th 1821: the battle of Dragatsani and the decimation of the ‘Sacred Band’, a battalion founded by Alexandros Ypsilantes, massacres in Serres, Chalkidiki and elsewhere; April 20th 1821: the battle of the Alamana bridge of Sperchios River, near the pass of Thermopylae, where while wounded Athanasios Diakos fought and was captured and was transported covered in blood to Lamia to be tortured) were made once more but the organization through the experience of trial and error did not allow the revolution to be quenched but instead each betrayal and atrocity gave more reasons for its strengthening.
When, therefore, it became obvious that the Revolution was not possible to be quenched and not only that, but that the Nation that gave rise to it had began immediately and effectively to create and staff on the basis of meritocracy administrative state positions (summoning of the Parliament of Thettalomagnisia, surrender of Tripole and its monetary and other treasures, etc) setting the bases for a state truly from the people by the people, the established governing class moved on to plan B: pandering (May 26th 1821: ‘Act of Kaltetzon’, September 4th 1821: ‘convention of Western Greek Peninsula’ and ‘convention of Eastern Greek Peninsula’, January 1st 1822: lecture on the subject of the independence of the Greek Nation by the First National Council in Piada, next to the Ancient Epidavros, and voting of the ‘Consolidating Law’, March 1823: Second National Council in Astros)
This class which serves, caters to and is only after the money and power of rule regardless of colour, ideology, origin, nationality, etc, began making steps of support towards the cause, giving (always insufficient) sources of funding, armament, connections and army directing.
But in the same time it undermined the cause by giving to the people ‘benefits’ incompatible with the Nation and its people as well as the people’s way of thinking, undercutting in this manner a fight for independence which had been wreathed in laurels when it didn’t have ‘help’ from agents of abroad who a little while ago supported and had excellent socioeconomic relationships with the enemy the Greeks were facing and subjugating from the moment of its birth with loans and dependencies (‘Deed of Sold Greece’ : the report to the English government signed by the prefects and marshals with which the British protection, as well as the dispensation of loans from England to embattled Greece within the framework of George Canning for the creation of British protectorates in the Mediterranean) which were not used but squandered by themselves for their own personal establishment in the new schema which Greeks had enforced by their blood in the first years of the revolution.
How can we transfer this inhumane and undermining attack and combating which happened and is happening on an international and national level at the personal level of the citizen’s everyday life (not just the Greek citizen but any conscientious citizen who truly represents his/her Nation and state as we have described before)?
As we have said in the example with the babushkas, exactly the same forces and powers of interpersonal relationships but also manipulation permeate all the levels of human existence from the personal to the international. Let us therefore see the complete example of an existing person commemorated in history the identity of whom we will reveal in the end of this article so that we will be given the opportunity to realize that several aspects of his life are common with all of Greek citizens who truly represent the group they officially belong to.
Born in the early 20th century within social upheavals which tore his family apart and forced him to migrate so that he would be able to survive, this man was raised under very strenuous circumstances in terms of family environment: irrevocably hurt by the violent circumstances which led to his being uprooted but also to the death of his wife, the living father of this man did try to offer this man family support and stability in the new land. However, he broke down because all his efforts were thwarted and undermined by the theoretically support forces of the state but also his social circle from the closer to the wider (meaning, neighbours, relatives, benefit agents of the state to immigrants). Very soon this man, after he had grown up in underprivileged conditions, decided that if he truly wanted to go forward and improve he would have to rely on his own self and not allow any other person to determine what his position in society would be, which position was at the time just like the one of the Greeks at the eve of the Revolution of 1821: financially dire circumstances, outrageous demands to his person by people who claimed to be family but were deeply undermining, and an active combating of this man in all his efforts to gain an education and escape poverty.
This man, after he decided to rely on himself he declared himself head of his family, took upon himself its financial and administrative reins and plotted down a strategic plan for the improvement of his situation but also of all those willing to follow him and especially of those who were weak, namely children.
In the course of his life this man was accosted ideologically by many forces which, seeing his impetus and the potential he had in setting the proper example to his environment about what is feasible in society, considered him a dangerous element requiring integration and manipulation, exactly in the same manner Greeks demonstrated with the Revolution of 1821 and before it what was feasible despite the flaunting of power by those who seek to enforce social, personal and historical subjugation.
Through the process of trial and error this man saw through the attempt for manipulation and control both in the case of war as well as in the case of peace.
Especially in the case of peace he saw how much he was combated with weapons such as bureaucracy, minister’s decrees, jobbery, socially destructive ‘reforms’ which despite his efforts from the central positions he held (as civil servant in the Greek IRS where he had studied all stipulations in order to use them to protect the citizen personally as well as the social group in general) everything he built was torn down with a despotic and completely unsolicited signing by ‘authorities’ which were staffed by exactly the same people and families serving the enemy and themselves before 1821.
Having realized as much this man decided to abandon the usual ideological ways and follow the most dangerous and least used way of peace and freedom which of course leads to the liberation of Free Bondsmen in a personal but also later social revolution of the same scope as the one of 1821.
Using the scientific method he cultivated this way but just as the Hellenic Nation, he trusted that his so-called familial circle would support and cover for him and he didn’t check with the way we have described in previous articles whether the apparent family group was also actual. Therefore he didn’t calculate correctly and he trusted wrongly and consequently all his work and struggle was undermined exactly as the independence of the Nation was undermined and is being undermined even now.
This prolonged undermining led to him being murdered and his murder be covered up in such a way that the circumstances of his death remain a mystery with continual to this date threadbare ‘official’ explanations by the state which imply the level and scope of those who benefited from his death and the arresting of his activities, just like it is obvious who benefit from the mismanagement and the social but also often actual execution of entire peoples, but only if we ask the correct questions we listed in previous articles and then have the stamina to answer them objectively.
To this profile of a positive person and fighter in the covert war being waged on the individual during peace fits everyone who wishes for freedom of the body, the mind and the spirit without the hypocrisy, waylaying and oppressive compromise/subjugation which characterizes Free Bondsmen.
This existing person is named George Alexiou Geritsidis, worked as an IRS servant in the public sector protecting from financial bankruptcy several citizens and limiting the illicit activity of other agents, was decorated during a war he hated (and called his medal which was thrown in the deepest part of the occasional closet or drawer ‘tin’) and supported from the background and through ideological teaching the movement for Peace which was represented brilliantly by Gregory Lambrakis and was murdered while serving as an IRS inspector in the division for chemical – related companies on November 17th 1973. To this day his murder is mentioned annually among the victims of the Polytechnic (the 1973 Rise against the Junta) and with regard to his work as a civil servant he is commemorated as ‘fallen in the line of duty and because of it.’
The reason this man was selected (among the several unsung Greeks who could just as easily be commemorated) as a representative example for our anniversary of the declaration of independence of the Hellenic Nation is because we will use him again as actual model for the declaration for which we are beginning today, on March 25th 2008, preparing with the correct knowledge of what has taken place but also correct knowledge of ourselves and our environment so that we become able to support and guard for it:
When George Geritsidis received his first paycheck for the first time (as an employee in the salt pans of Xanthi) and returned home, his father who was alive (who as we mention was broken down and had proven that he could not face the responsibilities and tasks of the role of head of family) was standing at the door and asked reaching out with his hand with an authoritarian move that he hand over his salary. George Geritsidis gave him an amount for pocket money and told him that the time had come for him to step down and relinquish his position as head of family to George, including of course management of the financial income which George himself was procuring- a role he served and responsibilities he met brilliantly during the course of his life, pushing upwards in the social ladder all the members of both his nuclear as well as extended family so they led a decent and respectable life.
Following therefore his example, on a national scale (and for sure on a global one), the time has come for the oppressed Hellenic People (and all other Peoples no matter their name) to declare its coming of age, fact which means that the People don’t need guardians and managers of their resources which they are procuring (all the more so since from 1821 to 2008 it has been proven with p<0.001>statistical significance that the guardians and managers of this level and to that scope are completely incompetent, useless and abusive and therefore obsolete and downrated in the roles and positions they claim and possess, as they are responsible for the conscious and sought for interception of the ‘coming of age’ of the dependent peoples, the heritage, fortune and toil they manage, pander and squander) and for the Greek citizen him/herself to take over (just like the citizen of all Nations around the globe) the reconstruction and tiding up of his/her house which he/she is obligated to claim, demarcate, develop and actualize so that he/she ensures to him/herself as well as the future generations, the future beneficiaries of this house, the life he/she is truly entitled to provide for him/herself as a human being and the future generations are entitled as human beings to have.
The Revolution of 1821 was not a sudden event but the successful attempt after at least two more (1611: the movement in Epirus by Dionysius, Eparch of Larissa who was named by the pro-Turkish and the kontzabasides [Greek origin supervisors approved by the Turks to oversee Greek areas] called him Skylosophos – dog philosopher , 1769: the revolutionary movement of Theodore Orlov , 1790-1792: the revolutionary movement of Lambros Katsonis and Androutsos) which were bathed in blood but from which the Greeks learned what not to do and what to do in order to be successful next time.
We must not forget that the war for the independence of the Hellenic Nation started off completely unsupported, not only by other states, but also by the very units of governance/ administration presenting themselves as Greek but, as we have demonstrated in past articles were not truly members of the Greek group. We are referring to the various officials (Phanariotes [Rich and prominent Greek origin families living in Phanar of Constantinople], Dragoumans [translators for the Sultan and ministers of foreign policy for the Turks], elders, prefects, kontzabasides, kapoi/armatoloi [policing officials of Greek origin appointed by the Turks]) who evidently put as first priority their personal economic gain and the acquisition of power and not the interests of the social group they were supposed to represent (simple examples to illustrate the truth: the fierce war since the end of the 18th century and up to 1821 that was waged by the Patriarchate, the Phanariotes, the kontzabasides and their representatives, trying to enforce menticide and stifle any form or expression of the Greek Enlightenment using slander, libel, abuse, threats, circulars, suppressive measures, terrorism, persecution of the intellectual and spiritual leaders of the Hellenic Nation even to the point of executing them and shutting down schools and universities).
Additionally, we must mention that the revolution sprung up from the Greek people, both inside and outside the borders, fact which can be ascertained by the first sources of its funding [it was funded by the Greeks of the communities abroad who had a great interest in the intellectual and cultural development of the villages/towns they originated from and who repeatedly sent money to build educational institutions there (The School of Karpenisi, the ‘Museum of Agrafa’ School, schools in Ioannina, in Zagora of mt. Pilio and elsewhere became small academies where the new liberal ideas circulated and disseminated, as well as the political speeches which had been delivered by the revolutionary France of 1789-1792) to pay the teachers, to build libraries and to send several books for the education of their fellow countrymen] and its armament.
Efforts to quench the Revolution of 1821 (Excommunication by the Patriarch, May 7th 1821: the razing to the ground of the villages of Pilio by the Pasha of Larissa Machmut Dramalis in retaliation of the declaration of the revolution in Pilio by Anthimos Gazis; June 7th 1821: the battle of Dragatsani and the decimation of the ‘Sacred Band’, a battalion founded by Alexandros Ypsilantes, massacres in Serres, Chalkidiki and elsewhere; April 20th 1821: the battle of the Alamana bridge of Sperchios River, near the pass of Thermopylae, where while wounded Athanasios Diakos fought and was captured and was transported covered in blood to Lamia to be tortured) were made once more but the organization through the experience of trial and error did not allow the revolution to be quenched but instead each betrayal and atrocity gave more reasons for its strengthening.
When, therefore, it became obvious that the Revolution was not possible to be quenched and not only that, but that the Nation that gave rise to it had began immediately and effectively to create and staff on the basis of meritocracy administrative state positions (summoning of the Parliament of Thettalomagnisia, surrender of Tripole and its monetary and other treasures, etc) setting the bases for a state truly from the people by the people, the established governing class moved on to plan B: pandering (May 26th 1821: ‘Act of Kaltetzon’, September 4th 1821: ‘convention of Western Greek Peninsula’ and ‘convention of Eastern Greek Peninsula’, January 1st 1822: lecture on the subject of the independence of the Greek Nation by the First National Council in Piada, next to the Ancient Epidavros, and voting of the ‘Consolidating Law’, March 1823: Second National Council in Astros)
This class which serves, caters to and is only after the money and power of rule regardless of colour, ideology, origin, nationality, etc, began making steps of support towards the cause, giving (always insufficient) sources of funding, armament, connections and army directing.
But in the same time it undermined the cause by giving to the people ‘benefits’ incompatible with the Nation and its people as well as the people’s way of thinking, undercutting in this manner a fight for independence which had been wreathed in laurels when it didn’t have ‘help’ from agents of abroad who a little while ago supported and had excellent socioeconomic relationships with the enemy the Greeks were facing and subjugating from the moment of its birth with loans and dependencies (‘Deed of Sold Greece’ : the report to the English government signed by the prefects and marshals with which the British protection, as well as the dispensation of loans from England to embattled Greece within the framework of George Canning for the creation of British protectorates in the Mediterranean) which were not used but squandered by themselves for their own personal establishment in the new schema which Greeks had enforced by their blood in the first years of the revolution.
How can we transfer this inhumane and undermining attack and combating which happened and is happening on an international and national level at the personal level of the citizen’s everyday life (not just the Greek citizen but any conscientious citizen who truly represents his/her Nation and state as we have described before)?
As we have said in the example with the babushkas, exactly the same forces and powers of interpersonal relationships but also manipulation permeate all the levels of human existence from the personal to the international. Let us therefore see the complete example of an existing person commemorated in history the identity of whom we will reveal in the end of this article so that we will be given the opportunity to realize that several aspects of his life are common with all of Greek citizens who truly represent the group they officially belong to.
Born in the early 20th century within social upheavals which tore his family apart and forced him to migrate so that he would be able to survive, this man was raised under very strenuous circumstances in terms of family environment: irrevocably hurt by the violent circumstances which led to his being uprooted but also to the death of his wife, the living father of this man did try to offer this man family support and stability in the new land. However, he broke down because all his efforts were thwarted and undermined by the theoretically support forces of the state but also his social circle from the closer to the wider (meaning, neighbours, relatives, benefit agents of the state to immigrants). Very soon this man, after he had grown up in underprivileged conditions, decided that if he truly wanted to go forward and improve he would have to rely on his own self and not allow any other person to determine what his position in society would be, which position was at the time just like the one of the Greeks at the eve of the Revolution of 1821: financially dire circumstances, outrageous demands to his person by people who claimed to be family but were deeply undermining, and an active combating of this man in all his efforts to gain an education and escape poverty.
This man, after he decided to rely on himself he declared himself head of his family, took upon himself its financial and administrative reins and plotted down a strategic plan for the improvement of his situation but also of all those willing to follow him and especially of those who were weak, namely children.
In the course of his life this man was accosted ideologically by many forces which, seeing his impetus and the potential he had in setting the proper example to his environment about what is feasible in society, considered him a dangerous element requiring integration and manipulation, exactly in the same manner Greeks demonstrated with the Revolution of 1821 and before it what was feasible despite the flaunting of power by those who seek to enforce social, personal and historical subjugation.
Through the process of trial and error this man saw through the attempt for manipulation and control both in the case of war as well as in the case of peace.
Especially in the case of peace he saw how much he was combated with weapons such as bureaucracy, minister’s decrees, jobbery, socially destructive ‘reforms’ which despite his efforts from the central positions he held (as civil servant in the Greek IRS where he had studied all stipulations in order to use them to protect the citizen personally as well as the social group in general) everything he built was torn down with a despotic and completely unsolicited signing by ‘authorities’ which were staffed by exactly the same people and families serving the enemy and themselves before 1821.
Having realized as much this man decided to abandon the usual ideological ways and follow the most dangerous and least used way of peace and freedom which of course leads to the liberation of Free Bondsmen in a personal but also later social revolution of the same scope as the one of 1821.
Using the scientific method he cultivated this way but just as the Hellenic Nation, he trusted that his so-called familial circle would support and cover for him and he didn’t check with the way we have described in previous articles whether the apparent family group was also actual. Therefore he didn’t calculate correctly and he trusted wrongly and consequently all his work and struggle was undermined exactly as the independence of the Nation was undermined and is being undermined even now.
This prolonged undermining led to him being murdered and his murder be covered up in such a way that the circumstances of his death remain a mystery with continual to this date threadbare ‘official’ explanations by the state which imply the level and scope of those who benefited from his death and the arresting of his activities, just like it is obvious who benefit from the mismanagement and the social but also often actual execution of entire peoples, but only if we ask the correct questions we listed in previous articles and then have the stamina to answer them objectively.
To this profile of a positive person and fighter in the covert war being waged on the individual during peace fits everyone who wishes for freedom of the body, the mind and the spirit without the hypocrisy, waylaying and oppressive compromise/subjugation which characterizes Free Bondsmen.
This existing person is named George Alexiou Geritsidis, worked as an IRS servant in the public sector protecting from financial bankruptcy several citizens and limiting the illicit activity of other agents, was decorated during a war he hated (and called his medal which was thrown in the deepest part of the occasional closet or drawer ‘tin’) and supported from the background and through ideological teaching the movement for Peace which was represented brilliantly by Gregory Lambrakis and was murdered while serving as an IRS inspector in the division for chemical – related companies on November 17th 1973. To this day his murder is mentioned annually among the victims of the Polytechnic (the 1973 Rise against the Junta) and with regard to his work as a civil servant he is commemorated as ‘fallen in the line of duty and because of it.’
The reason this man was selected (among the several unsung Greeks who could just as easily be commemorated) as a representative example for our anniversary of the declaration of independence of the Hellenic Nation is because we will use him again as actual model for the declaration for which we are beginning today, on March 25th 2008, preparing with the correct knowledge of what has taken place but also correct knowledge of ourselves and our environment so that we become able to support and guard for it:
When George Geritsidis received his first paycheck for the first time (as an employee in the salt pans of Xanthi) and returned home, his father who was alive (who as we mention was broken down and had proven that he could not face the responsibilities and tasks of the role of head of family) was standing at the door and asked reaching out with his hand with an authoritarian move that he hand over his salary. George Geritsidis gave him an amount for pocket money and told him that the time had come for him to step down and relinquish his position as head of family to George, including of course management of the financial income which George himself was procuring- a role he served and responsibilities he met brilliantly during the course of his life, pushing upwards in the social ladder all the members of both his nuclear as well as extended family so they led a decent and respectable life.
Following therefore his example, on a national scale (and for sure on a global one), the time has come for the oppressed Hellenic People (and all other Peoples no matter their name) to declare its coming of age, fact which means that the People don’t need guardians and managers of their resources which they are procuring (all the more so since from 1821 to 2008 it has been proven with p<0.001>statistical significance that the guardians and managers of this level and to that scope are completely incompetent, useless and abusive and therefore obsolete and downrated in the roles and positions they claim and possess, as they are responsible for the conscious and sought for interception of the ‘coming of age’ of the dependent peoples, the heritage, fortune and toil they manage, pander and squander) and for the Greek citizen him/herself to take over (just like the citizen of all Nations around the globe) the reconstruction and tiding up of his/her house which he/she is obligated to claim, demarcate, develop and actualize so that he/she ensures to him/herself as well as the future generations, the future beneficiaries of this house, the life he/she is truly entitled to provide for him/herself as a human being and the future generations are entitled as human beings to have.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
