Jump to content
A Note on Topic Titles – Be Clear & Descriptive!

Sovereigntist

Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    24

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Sovereigntist

  1. Sovereigntist
    Do you actually want me to tell you how we intend to enforce the rule of law or are you just joking? I can explain it if you want me to, but if you are just going to shut me down then I am not going to even bother.
  2. Sovereigntist
    He is not using it to fix grammar and spelling errors, but to add and remove sentences in order to deliberately cover up what he previously said. If someone wants to correct their spelling mistakes I welcome it, but when their intention is to distort what they previously said I am going to point it out. Just look at what he actually said when I quoted him and compare it to what is there now.
  3. Sovereigntist
    To Rue, you do realize that by going back and constantly editing your comments to favor your baseless opinions only shows your hypocrisy.
  4. Sovereigntist
    To Iceni warrior, the inspiration for our motto actually comes from Ephesians 4:5, "one Lord, one faith, one baptism" but without any religious context.
  5. Sovereigntist
    You are the one that brought up Star Trek--and for someone that does not watch the show even I know that Earth has a global government and that it is part of the "United Federation of Planets." You demand that we answer your questions, but when we do you get even more upset for no reason. The best part is that we are not even referencing the book, as you requested, when answering your questions. It is clear that you do not want to have a civil conversation and are only out to criticize things you have no understanding of.
  6. Sovereigntist
    To Rue, you do realize that Star Trek has a global government? Anyway, I will clear up a few of your misconceptions, but be prepared for lengthy responses. First, there will be no political parties but instead politically independent individuals who have completed the four years' course of political education and therefore are qualified to be in office. Since there will be no political parties, there will be no seats divided among them. This new government will not be divided into corrupt parties all fighting with each other for a majority, but instead positions of office will be filled whenever vacant by way of vote and these newly elected politicians will do what the Declaration of Independence states: serve the people. How can we guarantee that they will do this? Because we are going to make it impossible for them to work in secrecy. We are going to make sure that every major political act is carried out openly and every small political act is thoroughly assessed by an independent court. To put it simply, if someone wishes to become a public official they will basically have to forfeit their privacy. Now I know what you are going to ask, has this ever been done before? Yes, it was tried in Greece and achieved modest success. It was known as Athenian democracy and it called for every Greek candidate to be carefully examined before they were allowed to become an official. What made Athenian democracy unique was that these Greek officials could be immediately removed from their positions at any time if the people were unsatisfied with their performance. There was even a death penalty for any Greek official who performed poorly or betrayed the trust of the people while in office. This is also touched upon by John Acton when he said “You would hang a man of no position, like Ravaillac; but if what one hears is true, then Elizabeth asked the gaoler to murder Mary, and William III ordered his Scots minister to extirpate a clan. Here are the greater names coupled with the greater crimes. You would spare these criminals, for some mysterious reason. I would hang them, higher than Haman, for reasons of quite obvious justice; still more, still higher, for the sake of historical science.” Even Acton seen that people had a double standard when it came to punishing common criminals vs corrupt politicians.
  7. Sovereigntist
    To Infidel Dog, by skipping over half the book I am not surprised you are confused. Voting is an essential part of democracy and we defend the election process throughout the entire book. We are not saying that voting should be done away with, but that political candidates should meet certain qualifications before they can run for office. In fact, if you continued reading from where you pulled that quote the very next chapter (“Process of Election”) addresses the election process.
  8. Sovereigntist
    To Rue, I am trying to answer your questions as best I can, but the truth is that they are very broad and difficult to answer. For example, your first question regarding the symbol is short and right to the point. And the answer I gave you would have been the same regardless of whether I quoted it from the book or not. But look at your second question. It is is very long and somewhat confusing, but I understand what you are asking. The problem is that the answer would be (once again) taken directly from the book because there is no other way to explain it. Not to mention it would be a very, very long answer which is unnecessary when you can just read the book. I apologize if you think I am being condescending, but I try my best to simplify what I am saying because even I found these things very difficult to understand the first time I learned about them (which may be the case for those reading this as well). It would be wrong of me to assume that others know exactly what I am talking about. All I can say is that it is impossible to condense an entire book into just a few sentences. But even if it was possible you have already said that I am not allowed to reference from it. How else can I answer your questions then?
  9. Sovereigntist
    To Argus, you are correct which is why borders will remain until undeveloped nations (provinces) reach a stage in which they can sustain themselves. For example, the border between Canada and the US should be dissolved because it is unnecessary and both of them would actually benefit more by sharing their resources with each other. Afterwards, this new State would assist any bordering provinces (in this case Mexico) with reaching their own stage of economic sustainability. This new State would start by sending basic resources (food, water, clothes, etc.) to meet the needs of the people before sending them more essential resources (building materials, equipment, engineering teams, etc.) to help build their up their existing infrastructure. Once the province has reached economic sustainability and can begin producing these things themselves it should be allowed to amalgamate into the new State. This process would then continue to the next bordering province and so on. All of this can be done without any additional taxation to the people within developed provinces or by allowing people from underdeveloped provinces to just flood in. Keep in mind, I have simplified a very complex process into a few sentences in order to make it easier to understand, but the book goes into greater detail on this matter. And just to be clear, underdeveloped provinces will not reach economic sustainability right away—it can decades for them to accomplish this. But for anyone doubting the possibility of this just look at how much Dubai has developed in 20 years.
  10. Sovereigntist
    To Rue, we are happy to answer any questions you may have, but the real irony is that all of your questions are answered in the book. Anyway, ask and you shall receive. This quote was taken directly from the book, "We Sovereigntists regard our flag as being the symbol of human solidarity. The flag represents the Alpha and Omega, in other words, the beginning of Sovereigntism and the end of nationalism. The colors of the flag are also symbolic to us; in the red we see the will of the people, in the black the responsibility the State has to the people, and in the white the moral obligation we all share for the betterment of society." Your next question, however, is very broad and includes many complex issues (all of which are addressed in great detail in the book), but if I understand you correctly you are asking how we are going to make the government accountable to the public. To quote the book again, "This new system of governance intends to secure responsibility in the public service by (1) replacing the electoral system with a responsible system and by (2) creating a program that will prepare individuals, to the best extent possible, for the public service. The first measure would ensure that those who are currently in the public service will be properly supervised and held accountable for their actions, while the second measure would establish educational requirements for those who wish to become public officials."
  11. Sovereigntist
    To Infidel Dog, the creation of a single State with a global government rests exclusively in the hands of the people. Sovereignty just outlines the best path forward to making it a reality.
  12. Sovereigntist
    To Rue, Sovereignty believes in the separation of church and state. It does not control people or demand anything of them--they are free to decide for themselves. No, we are not Freemasons because we absolutely oppose any kind of secrecy.
  13. Sovereigntist
    To Zeitgeist, today's institutions are completely broken which is why most public officials are corrupt. And it has nothing to do with electing officials who will behave but making sure they must behave or else they will be removed from office. It is a fallacy to think that the electoral system secures leaders who will be accountable to the people because it does not and never will.
  14. Sovereigntist
    To Infidel Dog, we are not trying to take over anything and absolutely reject all forms of violence. And if we could give you 10 steps on how to fix the government then we would not have had to write an entire book. And it is simply impossible to limit the answer you want to a single page because each chapter addresses a different issue and how to approach it.
  15. Sovereigntist
    To Zeitgeist, the greatest opposition to global governance is and always has been national leaders. The reason why is because these so-called leaders know that a global government would put an end to their lies and nationalist propaganda. Also, I do agree with you that it would be a great thing if everyone adhered to a code of ethics, but the problem is that not everyone will and no government actually does. If a government can do something criminal and get away with it--they will. Just look at how many elected officials claimed to be working in the interests of the people only to be caught doing something dishonest or fraudulent.
  16. Sovereigntist
    To Rue, I have to completely disagree with you because neither of those concepts have anything to do with the government or economy. To Infidel Dog, it can be "meaningless drivel" if one does not have anything to back up what they are saying. However, unlike most people who criticize the work of others without ever being productive themselves, we have done our research and can provide more than enough facts to back up what we claim.
  17. Sovereigntist
    To Army Guy, you are absolutely correct in saying that no leader has ever been totally honest with the public and they never will be--not unless the system changes. Although I address the issue of responsibility throughout Sovereignty, please refer to the chapter called "Process of Election" for a brief summary on how we can secure honest politicians. The answer is the is actually quite simple but requires a collective response to be effective. You are also correct in saying that more than half of the current world leaders lack the proper education (and even intelligence for that matter) to be in office. I address their lack of political knowledge in more detail in the chapter called "True Democratic System." I understand that by referring to the book I am not exactly answering your questions, but the answers I would tell you on here would be simply copied and pasted from it.
  18. Sovereigntist
    To Infidel Dog, Sovereignty has no intention of forcing or coercing anyone into doing anything, but rather it allows the reader to come to their own conclusion. It is simply pointing out the fatal flaw with today's governments and provides a solution to fixing them. And to answer your question, you cannot just "find" honest politicians, they must prove their honesty through their actions. But how can we prove that they are really being honest? By making sure that every political act they carry out is done openly. In other words, we have to eliminate government secrecy if we are to secure honest politicians.
  19. Sovereigntist
    To Rue, the failure of the UN can be attributed to the very thing which brought about the collapse of the League of Nations, that is, the nationalist fabrication. As long as nationalism continues to exist, then there will never be peace between nations. In order to secure a meaningful government, you must first secure honest politicians. And that is exactly what Sovereignty is hoping to shed light on.
  20. Sovereigntist
    To Infidel Dog, there was never any mention of an army or police force. You misread the question being answered. No one can just proclaim global Sovereignty as it can only be achieved after every nation has been dissolved. Nations can only begin to dissolve from within once their citizens realize that nationalism is nothing more than a fabrication to keep them fighting one another. We are already living in a "globalist" world and have been for some time now. To quote Martin Luther King, we have "inherited a great world house in which we have to live together, because we can never again live apart and must learn to live with each other in peace." There have been many different empires throughout history in which different religious groups lived peacefully together--if it was possible back then, it is definitely still possible today. Also, We Sovereigntists believe in gun ownership.
  21. Sovereigntist
    To Rue, what other agenda can one have on a political forum other than to discuss politics? My post was not to "incite argumentative responses" but rather to spark one's interest into reading Sovereignty or to leave a comment like yourself. If you have any questions, I would be glad to answer them.
  22. Sovereigntist
    To Infidel Dog, this new government would simply use the existing infrastructure (state buildings) that are already established throughout the world and would build new ones wherever they are necessary or nonexistent. The person "at the top" would be whoever is fairly voted into office, but they must be at least 18 years of age, graduated from a 4 years' course of political education, and cannot have any criminal convictions. The rule of law would be enforced just as it is now. However, the justice system would impose lesser sentences on first-time offenders and non-violent crimes, while repeat offenders and violent crimes would receive harsher sentences. More importantly, in order to determine that those in office are actually acting in the interests of the people an independent court system will be created to supervise everything they say and do. We understand your skepticism, but hope that you will be willing to give Sovereignty a chance by reading it.
  23. Sovereigntist
    Greetings everyone, it is with great honor and humility that I reach out to you today and ask for just a moment of your time. As you all know, we are facing the greatest economic crisis in history and it has become evidently clear that our governments do not have even the slightest idea of what to do. Now, there are many things which can be attributed to the present state of affairs, but there is no denying that poor leadership and corruption played a central role in all of it. National leaders need to take immediate action and work together to overcome this crisis, but unfortunately they are neither willing nor capable of doing so. The harsh reality is that global stability is deteriorating at an alarming rate and we are heading towards a complete economic collapse. So what are national leaders around the world doing to prevent this from happening? Unfortunately, our so-called leaders are doing absolutely nothing except blaming one another for a crisis they are all guilty of creating. The fact is that this crisis was deliberately created by them or at the very least made worse by their sheer incompetence. It is no secret that our governments are made up very largely of politicians who are either corrupt or incompetent. The only real mystery is how they have been able to hide their criminal activities from us for so long. But if this crisis has revealed anything about them it is just how quickly they will resort to lying and false accusations in order to cover up their mistakes. And what better way for a politician to evade personal responsibility than by diverting the public’s attention away from themselves? The unfortunate truth is that we have become tolerant of corruption and have forgotten that it is our constitutional right to not only remove criminals from office but, if necessary, create an entirely new government. The Declaration of Independence states “that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government.” We need a new government now more than ever which is why I invite you to read Sovereignty for free. Sovereigntism is a doctrine that aims to unite all people together, regardless of their nationality, to create a single State with a global government. I believe, as do my fellow Sovereigntists, that only by working together will we be able to save true democracy from corruption and ultimately prevent the impending economic collapse. There is still time for us to set things right, but only if we take action here and now. For Sovereignty!
  24. Sovereigntist
    The "far left" and "far right" are both corrupt and equally destructive.
×
×
  • Create New...