UN subverts democracy?

Decca works with an activist organization pressuring the government on several issues and explains how the group subverts democracy by using the United Nations to give authority to their demands.

“The United Nations is the source of all progressive policies in human rights, health and environment since WWII,” says Decca. “The idea of anthropogenic climate change, for instance, came from the UN and through emissions trading it will redistribute wealth and dictate how every citizen of the world will lead their day-to-day lives.”

“The United Nations, itself founded upon a movement for world peace after WWII, is now the means by which activists can attempt to subvert the democratic process and force their beliefs upon recalcitrant home governments by virtue of those governments being members of the UN and signatories to UN Human Rights, Environment and Health directives.”

“UN members are not elected, they are appointed; there is much corruption in their ranks – as there is in home governments; and while UN directives are not yet enforceable (the USA as well as many other home governments have defaulted), there is every possibility that one day will become enforceable by virtue of the UN’s aspiration to be the only government in the world.”

“Once activists gain the ear of an unelected UN member – and convince them of the worth of their cause, as well as the possible enormous wealth to be generated by it in view of the global nature of the activity, the UN makes policy directives and publishes reports and recommendations which it sends to home governments urging adoption of a standard set of legislative control/uncontrol measures.”

“With respect to controlling wealthy industries, measures start small with education in schools (which most industries agree is the 'proper' sort of government response),” explains Decca. “UN directives may then recommend discouraging exposure in schools and public places; and then suggests legal and economic measures to prohibit exposure in both public and private places, to force disclosure of chemical additives in the manufacturing process, to ban advertising and promotion, and, of course, to impose punitive taxes on users and industry – but never, ever, the banning of the product (because the object is to control it, and spread the wealth from its use by citizens to the controlling bodies, as well as its manufacturing and taxing bodies).”

“Because home governments are democratically elected to represent the wishes of the people being governed, most of whom would be engaging in the ‘disgusting activity’, including the politicians themselves,” explains Decca, “the UN’s recommended legislative control measures are seldom enacted, and this is where my group does its real work.”

“As activists, we engineer public support by gaining media attention and in doing so we shame politicians into enacting the UN recommendations.”

Read more by Decca on this issue:

student activism

Media driven social policy

A career as an activist

misuse of 'war' for other issues?

Education and activism

Welfare funding for activists

activist cults and sin taxes

street government

Sapphire believes that there are two governments in every land – one ruled by the young and free which operates in the streets, and the other ruled by the geriatrics and health nuts which has no jurisdiction over her and young people generally.

"When bars and clubs start enforcing bans on drugs decreed by the public health lobby we'll just move the party outside or go back to what we've been doing for years -- partying at home," laughs Sapphire. "I feel sorry, sort of, for the hospitality industry losing out on us, but the bar and club owners really should have taken a stand."

"Their main source of income -- and attraction -- came from us, not the geriatrics and the health nuts running the public health lobby," says Sapphire. "It's ridiculous that they've forced us outside to smoke or do drugs. Hardly anybody is taking advantage of the smoke-free environment inside, and of those most are so old that they are not going to be around much longer."

"How is the government going to made amends to the hospitality industry when these bans close down thousands of bars and clubs?" asks Sapphire. "What about the tourist industry? What young people would want to come here when the whole country is geared for health nuts and geriatrics trying to live for eternity?"

"Who wants a night out at the gym or a place where the old folks hang out in their drug free zones?"

"I'm not sure which group is more responsible than the other for the current crackdown on all of our vices," says Sapphire, "but there's definitely a health agenda behind it and I think alcohol is going to be next."

"Like I said, it won't bother me what they do because I have my street government," says Sapphire, "but the world is going to become an awfully boring place for everyone else when all the health bans on drugs take effect."

"Bring back the likes of cigar chewing Winston Churchill and vodka swilling Boris Yeltsin," laughs Sapphire. "Now they were politicians to admire and would have kicked the current politically correct idiots back to kindergarten where they belong."

Read more by Sapphire:

health nuts, geriatrics and smokers

unruly teen alienated by stepfamily

We’re all gonna die!

drugs create genius?

health and safety madness

government treats smokers as enemies?

Penelope has endured ten years of victimization from anti-smoking fanatics, and she believes that life under the Islamist Taliban in Afghanistan cannot be much worse than it is for her and other fellow citizens who smoke, and wonders why her government is treating smokers as enemies.

"I can appreciate that the Islamists and the anti-smokers truly believe in the barrow they are pushing," says Penelope, "but they don't ever seem to question the propaganda that feeds their cause. They just accept it as if it were an incontrovertible truth and repeat it so often that they sound like parrots."

"I am prepared to listen to the arguments the government puts forward about cancer, passive smoking and everything else -- I don't have much choice, really, when it's pushed into my face every day," says Penelope, "but I cannot in all seriousness accept all of it.”

“Most of it has been discredited and while I don't mean to be disrespectful, something that makes me feel so good cannot be all bad. It's as simple as that."

"It's a pity they are not prepared to listen to what smokers have to say," sighs Penelope, 'but brainwashed fanatics are, by definition, incapable of seeing both sides of an issue so I don't bother trying any more."

"Frankly, after putting up with the anti-smoking terrorists at home for ten years, I fail to see how life under the Taliban could be very much worse," says Penelope. "In fact, it would be a lot easier to accept being terrorized by them because they're not the same race and religion as myself -- as my current intimidators and torturers are."

“Now I know how the Jews felt in Nazi Germany,” says Penelope. “I feel like a non-citizen in my own country.”

Read more from Penelope on this subject:

brainwashed anti-smoking terrorists

brainwashing v education

tobacco war doing better than terror war!

government and its corporate mates

From the beginnings of politics, the tactic of divide and rule has been used by the ruling classes of whatever persuasion to entrench their power, privilege and wealth and Leona sees it first hand in her return-to-work job with a global corporation, a great mate of the government.

“By demonizing the Jews, the Nazis and allied German companies gained public support for stealing the wealth and property of Jews all over Europe, and by demonizing the Saddam regime the Bush government and its corporate mates gained support for stealing the oil fields and marching over Iraq,” says Leona. “It’s only by demonizing a defined group of people that whole populations can be distracted from what is really going on, and in my workplace it’s a defined racial group that is being targeted in order to divide and rule us.”

“It’s no good that we say sorry, we didn’t know this was going on, like the post-war Germans did when faced with bodies and gas ovens,” says Leona. “When we participate in divide and rule politics by swallowing propaganda and lies we are as guilty as the ruling class and that is why it is such a diabolically effective tactic.”

“The government gives away power to everyone but the voters and tax payers who – in keeping with the divide and rule tactic – they are trying to hoodwink by encouraging us to blame each other – but particularly immigrants,” says Leona, “and if things get out of hand, they then change from bad cop to good cop and give us bread and circuses.”

“Social fragmentation - caused by overcrowding and excessive competition brought on by excessive immigration - benefits the elites, not us,” says Leona, “and the more we struggle to survive under intolerable circumstances the less likely we are to notice what should be bleeding obvious.”

“While we’re working harder and longer to make less money, our taxes are skyrocketing, our rights are diminishing daily, our relationships are deteriorating and our environment is becoming more polluted and violent – and guess what?” says Leona. “The rich in government and their mates in corporations are getting richer!”

Read more by Leona on this issue:

immigrants aren’t the enemy

corporations destroying racial harmony

global corporation divide and rule

united action

educating co-workers

demographic engineering

Like many western people of the Boomer generation, Poppy grew up in a predominantly WASP neighborhood – now anything but – and was so naive about the secret demographic engineering being planned by her government that anyone different coming into town was embraced, fussed about and made to feel welcome.

“Nearly sixty years later the demography of my neighborhood has reversed,” says Poppy, “and I mourn my loss of identity, my innocence and my trust in the governments I elect.”

"I am angry that successive governments have allowed so many diverse people into our country," says Poppy. "The multicultural thing may have been cool back in the sixties – when there was one of them to thousands of us – but now that there are thousands of them to one of us in some neighborhoods the situation is deplorable and you get to ask what the hell have our governments done?"

"I’d like to believe that some idealistic idiots in government decided that our society would be enriched by racial and religious diversity, and didn't properly think out the consequences,” says Poppy. “But something tells me that this demographic engineering had demonic intentions.”

“The intention,” I believe, “was to weaken our social cohesion and bring in a world government.”

"They may claim 'it's demography, stupid!' but it's not," says Poppy. "There are enemies without our government who have deliberately engineered the demography of our nation via their religiously motivated wars and we, the people, who elected these idiots by means of a social contract are now left with the short straw."

Read more by Poppy on this issue:

engineered demographics

the fate of indigenous populations

religiously motivated wars

the curse of the katholikos ethos

katholikos is Greek for global

racism and the religious balance

the enemy within

treated like thieves by welfare officer

When the small business run by Minette and her husband folded, they spent four months looking for employment and, after many job rejections and mounting debts, they asked the welfare office for financial assistance -- as was their right to do -- but never expected to be humiliated and treated like thieves.

"Honestly, we were treated like thieves trying to gain unlawful benefits or something," says Minette. "We had to expose every aspect of our private lives to a supercilious clerk who, at another time in history, would have made a great concentration camp guard, and when she saw that we had quite a bit of equity in our home she enquired why we were seeking benefits when we could sell our home and support ourselves."

"When we protested, she pointed out that selling up would allow us to move to an area with higher employment prospects," explains Minette. "We sat there stunned and wondered about all the tax we had paid over the years to protect us from this very situation."

"Why should we sell our home? We weren't expecting to be unemployed forever," cries Minette. "Every industry goes though seasonal slumps and if we couldn't find employment in the areas of our expertise then we needed help finding alternative employment. That help, and financial assistance, was why we turned to the welfare office in the first place and we couldn't believe how unhelpful and rude the social security clerk was!"

"Were they running a racket or something? Was the game to target the more well-off unemployed, brow beat them, encourage them to sell their homes at a loss and either buy them up themselves or get a cut from the agent or purchaser?"

"Sure, we'd heard horrible stories about the welfare office," says Minette, "but that sort of stuff only happened to the deadbeats, the drug addicts and the serial single moms didn't it? Wrong, it happens to decent people like us, too."

"So, what is the alternative to accepting welfare?" asks Minette. "Sure, we could have sold our home at a loss and used the money to rent a place and pay for expenses while waiting for a suitable job to materialize -- but eventually we would have been forced into a career change, having to re-train and do all of that stuff -- and in the meantime we would have lost our home and eroded our finances to such an extent that it might be years before we built up enough to pay a deposit on another home."

"I know that a lot of people are so turned off welfare and being treated like a social pariah that they resort to pawn shops and loan sharks, run up huge credit card debts, redraw from their mortgages until the debt is worth more than the asset or beg loans from family members," says Minette. "Some even think that prostitution and crime are better alternatives than going to the welfare office for assistance."

"And this is the sort of reckless behavior that our government encourages by making welfare benefits so hard and humiliating to get, and by turning all welfare recipients into thieving social pariahs."

"Proposals to cut payments and bring in a system of food, gas and clothing vouchers is just another draconian idea designed to abuse the unemployed -- and the sick, disabled and elderly," says Minette. "Sure, they say it is to prevent abuse of the system, but in countries where food stamps are used their recipients only exchange them at half face value for drugs -- and the point I'm making is this: why should the majority of genuine unemployed people looking for work be penalized by the minority of those abusing the system?"

"We both found good jobs eventually," says Minette, "but our experience with the social security system -- which is a total misnomer -- will live in our memories forever as the most humiliating experience of our lives and never again will we be so naive as to believe that the taxes we pay are any sort of insurance for us and that our government cares."

"The government, as far as we are concerned, is a big fat thief," says Minette. "It takes our money and pretends it's using it for social services, but when you need to tap into those social services you're given a kick in the guts."

"Frankly, we have less respect for the government than we have for the guys who regularly raid our neighborhood for items of value they can sell to support themselves," says Minette, "and we've now found a clever accountant who has arranged our finances and assets in such a way that we hardly pay any tax and can draw on our own funds should we ever get into trouble again."

"And that, guys, is the best alternative to welfare should you be in a position to do it," laughs Minette. "If we had known these 'tricks' when we had our business maybe we could have remained afloat, but we were young and naive and thought we knew it all, you know how it is."

airbrushing smokers

When the control freaks are airbrushing out the cigars and cigarettes from old photographs and films and drawing up lists of books to ban or burn when they achieve total power and can rewrite history to their liking, Segolene believes it is not just smokers who should be worried.

“Enjoy the Internet whilst it lasts," sighs Segolene. "What's normal and abnormal today is sure as hell going to be abnormal and normal tomorrow if we allow these control freaks to get away with it much longer."

"It's happened before in history and it will happen again if too few sane people stand by and allow the control freaks open slather on our freedoms."

"Remember when you could drive a car without buckling up and when you could ride a motorbike without a helmet and feel the wind in you hair? When you could fish without a licence? When you could expect same-sex wards in hospitals? When you could smack a naughty kid? When you could fell a tree, light a fire, party all night, smoke a cigarette in a bar and do a million other quite normal things without the Spanish Inquisitors descending upon you?"

"They -- the Spanish Inquisitors -- say it's for your good, or for the good of society, but we all know whose good it is for," says Segolene. "Society managed just fine without all of these abnormal laws, people tolerated each other and Darwin's Law operated just as it was supposed to. These guys are just control freaks, using these laws to justify their jobs and existence in the same way that the old religious leaders once did."

"At what point will the masses tip? Will routine cavity searches at airports do the trick? How about routine house searches at 3am? Or routine drug testing and weigh-ins at work or school? Or compulsory registration and rationing to buy alcohol, cigarettes, hamburgers, twinkies, gas or whatever? Or compulsory sterilization for hereditary diseases? Or carbon footprint naming and shaming? Or prohibition on pets? We aready tolerate public screening of court cases, how about public screening of toilet use and
handwashing -- all in the public good, of course?"

"Muslims aren't out to get us, passive smoking won't kill us, there are more paedophiles at home than at public parks, climate change has been going on since time immemorial and the sky isn't falling," says Segoline. "If we allow ourselves to be seduced by any more mass fear-mongering our grandchildren will be forced to live in a time worse than the Dark Ages.”

“What's more, they will be deprived of knowing what life was once like before their ancestors (us) allowed the control freaks to take charge and airbrush out of history everything that disagrees with their peculiar mindset."

Read more by Segolene on this subject:

has cctv replaced god?

abnormalizing the normal

the curse of the katholikos ethos

Despite the legal separation of the church from government, Poppy believes that the katholikos ethos is very much alive and kicking in our governing bodies and that it holds as much sway in determining policies as it ever did, and is cursing us as much as it ever did.

“The Soviet Union was ostensibly atheist,” says Poppy, “but the Orthodox Church of Russia never died out, and indeed continued to pull strings.”

“It’s the same in even the most socialist of our governments,” says Poppy. “Politicians pretend to be freethinkers or even atheist, but none of them rose to prominence without the power of an almighty organization behind them.”

“The policies of our elected governments are mostly in synch with Church edicts,” says Poppy, “and when conflicts of interests arise the politicians always have the men in frocks to whisper into their ears and absolve them of their sins."

“Most parliamentary sessions start and end with prayer,” says Poppy, “and most officials swear on a Bible. Why is this done if there was, indeed, true separation?”

“If the Pope in Rome is the head of the universal Catholic Church, which is higher than any government and upholds the original Greek katholikos ethos,” says Poppy, “then the God Bods in government are not representing us, or our wishes, but that of their true masters and the end result will be a world government.”

has cctv replaced god?

Segolene believes that the former all-seeing, all-knowing god has been replaced by electronic transaction tracking and closed-circuit television cameras (CCTV) with infra-red night vision which peer down on us from street corners, banks, offices, airports and shopping malls – and are soon coming into a bedroom near you.

"Once upon a time the fear of an all-seeing, all-knowing god was enough to keep the masses in line -- it was for this very purpose that god was invented," says Segolene, "but since the Enlightenment man has been able to use reason to deduce, increasingly, not only that no god exists but also that those pushing a fear of this imaginary person were the most corrupt."

"Once the fear of god was removed, and their hypocrisy exposed, the control freaks moved into government and went crazy with legislation which, by and large, was totally ineffective because law-breakers knew they could get away with it – the ridiculous prohibition on alcohol in the 1930s, for instance, was the most lawless period in modern history."

"Robbed of their traditional cushy occupations as moral leaders -- and seeing more and more of their celestial palaces turned into housing for the godless masses -- those who would have entered the god industry are now finding alternative employment in government positions and while such employment may be less lucrative it is definitely more amenable to their purpose in life which is, as we all know, to chastise, control and tell people to do what they want them to do (whilst often doing the exact opposite themselves)."

"For instance, most of us grew up believing homosexuality to be abnormal -- because religious leaders told us so -- and it is no coincidence that as more and more of the religious hypocrites were exposed as raging gays, and moved on to new jobs within the government, that homosexuality gradually came to be seen as normal."

"Just about everything our religious leaders told us was abnormal is now normal," laughs Segolene, "and while a hard core group still holds fast to their old beliefs about the abnormality of homosexuality, abortion, masturbation, adultery, sex before marriage, women's submission to men, stem cell research and other such things, the general consensus is that these things are now as normal and wholesome as apple pie."

"So normal, in fact, that one's right to do some of these once abnormal things is now enshrined in law."

"Without getting into a philosophical discussion about man's innate corruption," sighs Segolene, "it would appear to me that the more laws are passed, the more lawless we become. What happened to parental and personal responsibility?"

"Normally, I'm a mild manner woman, but increasingly I'm becoming abnormally angry at being frisked at airports, having my every move being monitored, my every transaction being recorded and my whole life being reduced to a mass of data to be mined by faceless control-freaks,” says Segolene, “and in many ways I wish we could return to the old God.”

“With the old God we had personal responsibility; with the CCTV god we have none.”

cigarette muggers

Zaina and her partner were recently mugged for their cigarettes and she points out that this is what happens when governments regularly increase tax on a legal product that is addictive -- like cigarettes -- in order to fund schools and hospitals. The time has now arrived when cigarettes have become too expensive to buy for many smokers and some will necessarily resort to crime in order to get what they want. Is this how we want our schools and hospitals funded?

"I was standing outside a restaurant with my partner having a smoke when we were mugged by a gang of youths," says Zaina. "Okay, they didn't actually bash us up -- they pushed my partner and stole his packet of cigarettes -- but the effect was the same as a mugging."

"We felt violated and wounded by this experience," explains Zaina, "and more so because we had no redress -- we could hardly call the police and complain about being pushed around and having cigarettes stolen, could we?"

"This sort of thing never happened when restaurants allowed people to smoke inside," says Zaina, "and, as the tax on cigarettes goes up even more, I expect these muggings to increase and become even more violent. Is this really how we want our schools and hospitals funded?"

"By forcing us outside to smoke the restaurant owners are exposing us to muggers," says Zaina, "but I don't blame the restaurant owners because they are merely complying with the new rules. It's the fault of the mugging government in every respect!"

"The government enforced the no-smoking rules on public establishments and imposed draconian taxes on cigarettes and it might find the whole exercise backfires when someone gets badly hurt and takes legal action -- reversing the whole legal process that started the non-smoking campaign in the first place."

"Already we've read about lots of smoking-related violence -- smokers reacting violently against people trying to stop them lighting up in non-smoking areas, and anti-smokers behaving violently towards smokers smoking in smoking areas," says Zaina. "I don't know how many smokers have been mugged for their cigarettes like we have -- it's not the sort of thing that makes front page news, is it? -- but I predict an increase in this sort of crime when the taxes increase so much that poor people can no longer afford to buy their cigarettes."

"A huge increase in cigarette smuggling to avoid tax is also going on," sighs Zaina. "It's really upsetting to see a pleasurable thing like smoking attracting criminal elements."

"The government is crazy if it thinks that people will just cut down or stop smoking when it becomes too expensive for them to buy cigarettes," sighs Zaina. "We're talking about an addiction here, not a preference for one thing over another like buying a cheap bottle of wine when you can no longer afford French champagne, or a bottle of methylated spirits when you can no longer afford a cheap bottle of wine."

"Most smokers have already been forced by exorbitant taxes to buy cheaper brands of cigarettes, and when the cheapest brand become too expensive to buy the ugly consequences of the anti-smoking campaign are really going to manifest themselves big time."

"The government knows that cigarette smoking is most prevalent among low socio-economic groups," says Zaina. "What plans does it have to prevent theft, violence and slaughter when it raises the taxes on tobacco products to the tipping point?"

"I believe most smokers are honest law-abiding people -- we have accepted the new smoking rules and accommodated to them without stirring up a revolution," says Zaina, "but I do not know whether my partner and I will be able to sit by silently while not only the government bullies us but the poorer smokers, too."

"After our mugging experience we have decided to stay home from now on -- or to restrict our dining out experiences to places where there is a private smoking area," says Zaina. "But now we worry about being mugged at the point of sale -- places where we buy our cigarettes."

"When people get desperate they do desperate things -- and even if tobacco outlets are set up as fortresses the purchasers are exposed to muggers when they leave such establishments."

"Imagine having to look around and see who's watching you every time you buy a pack of cigarettes," sighs Zaina. "It's not a nice way to live and I am angry that the government is creating a criminal environment around the sale and use of a legal product."

"It is almost as if the government is deliberately creating a crime situation by raising taxes so much that poor people have to resort to crime to get their cigarettes (and then it can take the ultimate step to ban smoking altogether)," muses Zaina. "but since it makes such a big deal about tobacco tax being used to fund our schools and hospitals I can't see any logic in that argument."

"If our schools and hospitals are funded by tobacco tax, and everyone who smokes suddenly quits, buys their cigarettes tax-free off smugglers or mugs for them, then what? Where is the money for the schools and hospitals going to come from?"

"No, I don't think the government's ulterior motive in increasing tax on cigarettes is to create such a bad crime situation that it has a good reason to ban smoking -- that would be like cutting off its nose to spite its face," says Zaina. "So, that leaves me with the horrifying realization that the government hasn't a clue."

"It had no idea what Pandora's box it opened when it targeted smokers and put the tax screws on them, but it's going to find out pretty soon," sighs Zaina. "Reminds you of the invasion of Iraq, doesn't it?"

"In the meantime, I can't understand why schools and hospitals can't be funded by regular taxes," sighs Zaina. "If tobacco is so bad, then it's mind-boggling that the government would depend upon it in this way."

"And, if it's not so bad, then it's mind-boggling that the government would tax it to the point where consumers can no longer afford it and have to resort to crime."

responsibilities vs. rights

Terrie was born post-WWII and grew up in a society which prized, freedom, individualism and human rights. She saw many laws that had formerly placed restrictions on human behavior being amended or abolished -- and new laws protecting everyone's rights and freedoms being introduced -- and she deplores the new concept of government as a partnership of rights and responsibilities.

"By the late 80s, the full impact of our new freedoms were evident," says Terrie, "and I don't believe that what we had then is as bad as what we have now (and it was certainly better than what we started off with after WWII)."

"Instead of extreme poverty there was rampant commercialism; instead of marriages being held together by violence and fear there was widespread divorce and a host of single mothers; instead of rough tracks there were congested superhighways; instead of shanty towns there were massive high-rise housing estates; instead of a mass of uneducated cannon fodder there was a mass of high school and university graduates with nothing to do; and instead of rubbish tips filled with broken crockery they were now filled with discarded luxury objects."

"This is terrible announced an emerging new breed of politicians who began speaking about the inseparability of rights and responsibilities -- we must do something about this!" laughs Terrie. "But conveniently overlooked by these 'rights and responsibilities' politicians was that the problems they saw were the result of a massive shift in power from the privileged classes to the underclasses -- and a massive rise in world population, too -- and were infinitely better than the problems they replaced (that these new politicians were too young to have personally experienced)."

"Inherent in these new public policies designed to place emphasis on responsibility was a theory of scarcity -- of resources, oxygen, morals, opportunity, etc.," says Terrie. "These policies were ostensibly designed to place responsibility on individuals, but in effect they actually shifted power back to the upper classes (those in power)."

"From the 90s onwards, our rights and freedoms have been circumscribed by: (1) extensive and expensive pubic education programs ordering people to conserve water and energy, recycle, give up smoking, exercise, eat better food, walk don't drive, behave more responsibly, etc; (2) mutual-obligation programs designed to force the unemployed, disabled and single mothers off welfare to find non-existent jobs; and (3) social partnerships whereby government expanded beyond the confines of the public sector to harness the self-interest of corporations, special interest communities and influential individuals towards the public good -- i.e. enforcing (1) and (2)."

"Public policies designed to place emphasis on responsibility have even encompassed early intervention strategies whereby little children are brainwashed with a complex set of rules, virtues, dispositions and habits to ensure that their individualism is squashed in favor of the public good."

"What is this public good that they keep talking about?" asks Terrie. "Who, exactly, benefits from all of these measures? It appears to me that if all of us were brainwashed into suppressing our individualism and relinquishing our rights, certain people in positions of power and influence would be superbly placed to take advantage of the situation and the next generation would be right back in pre-WWII conditions."

"Personal responsibility is all very well, but social inequality, dysfunction and disorder are largely a creation of economic and structural factors -- matters that are properly the domain of government," says Terrie, "and it is a joke that the government is shirking ITS responsibilities by shifting them onto us!"

"We bestow upon the government a right to govern us, but with this right comes the responsibility to attend to matters of government -- creating jobs, keeping the economy going and providing services -- the big issues over which no individual, responsible or not, can influence."

"This new concept of government as a partnership in which we are all engaged on a deeply personal level is a con-trick and at no other time in our history have checks and balances been more necessary."

"Sure, I'll sort my garbage into metals, plastics and papers -- and I'll compost organic matter and stop using plastic bags -- to help the recycling cause," says Terrie, "but don't you dare tell me, or other citizens, to cut water and energy consumption, give up smoking, start exercising, eat better food, change to a fuel-efficient car, stay married, go to church and behave more responsibly. That's none of your business, get it?"

"When my responsibilities, as decreed by this new government of partnership, become legal obligations, punishable by law," says Terrie, "where is the reciprocal punishment for government when it fails in its responsibilities? Voting a government out of office is not commensurate with being punished with a criminal conviction for failing to use an energy-efficient washing machine, for instance, is it?"

"Governments are constituted of real people with as many imperfections as the rest of us have, and giving them the power to dictate to us what we can and cannot do for the 'public good' is a slippery-slope leading us back to terrible class disparities."

"Governments based on freedom and individualism present problems for the upper classes (more competition means less opportunity for them to prosper), and governments based on rights and responsibilities present problems for the lower classes (more restriction on their activities means less opportunity for them to prosper)."

"That I am even talking about class wars -- a pre-WWII preoccupation of my parents, something my generation never experienced -- is scary."

"Without past governments devoted to freedom and individualism we would never have the wonderful advances in technology that we enjoy today," says Terrie, "and these are the very things that current governments devoted to rights and responsibilities ultimately want to take away from us. Hello? My generation created most of these things and because I'm approaching retirement I have a very strong vested interest in wanting to continue enjoying these things!"

"And all of the current nonsense about global warming is designed to make us feel guilty about car ownership. Why? Because the guys in power want the super highways to themselves!"

"They want to enjoy all the fruits that were achieved by us when we were free to express our individualism under previous governments," says Terrie, "and they are deliberately brainwashing the next generation to be their obedient, responsible slaves."

"Nobody heard of ADD and other weird childhood conditions requiring medication when I was raising my kids," says Terrie. "We understood freedom and individualism and allowed our kids to express themselves."

"The concept of controlling other people -- for my good, or the public good -- is totally alien to me," sighs Terrie, "and the ultimate future might be a terrifying Orwellian scenario where governments gain total control by mandating a personal responsibility to take medication as a condition of citizenship."

narcissists and psychopaths in government

Gladys is from an older generation that despises the New World Order for not only spawning governments that dictate rather than do our bidding but also for providing the narcissists and psychopaths among us with a niche they would never have found decades ago.

"We've all come across these people in our private lives," says Gladys. "The narcissistic store clerk who tries to influence you into buying something they think would be better for you, because they say so; or the psychopathic check out clerk at the '10 items only line' who counts every item and aggressively refuses to allow you to buy the 11th item in your basket. Putting people like this in REAL positions of power over us is what dictatorships do, not democratic governments."

"Narcissists -- those possessing a personality disorder marked by an overestimation of their own appearance and abilities and an excessive need for admiration -- are drawn to positions of power like moths to a flame," says Gladys, "and governments with an agenda to push appear to deliberately recruit these flawed individuals because of their personal characteristics. Who better to change our behavior than the narcissists who childishly demand that the world revolve around themselves and that others alter their behavior or appearance to conform with theirs."

"Got too many fat people, smokers or slackers? Call in the narcissists," laughs Gladys. "Who better than the narcissists, addicted to complete domination over whatever space or situation they find themselves in -- believing themselves to be more special than anyone else, and more perfect in every respect -- to whip people into shape."

"They think in black and white terms, you're with us or against us, there is no middle ground," says Gladys, "and being masters of character assassination -- of playing the man rather than the ball -- they can be ruthlessly cruel in trying to make everyone conform to their impossibly perfect standards."

"Unlike narcissists -- whose excessive need for admiration can be controlled somewhat by consistent ridicule -- psychopaths are truly dangerous people," says Gladys, "and the fact that they are fast taking up more and more positions of power within our governments, removing our freedoms and leading us back to slavery, is something all of us should condemn."

"Psychopaths have a personality disorder marked by aggressive, violent and anti-social thoughts and behaviours," says Gladys, "and their worst trait of all is a complete lack of remorse or empathy. They are the hatchet men and woman that governments might employ for short periods in national emergencies, but certainly should NOT employ in positions of permanent employment where they can gain totalitarian control over others, enrich themselves by fraudulent means and engage in abuse of law-abiding citizens with impunity."

"Without a cause to inflame their passions, both narcissists and psychopaths are dangerous, but should they actually espouse the cause of their political masters -- which would be likely, taking into consideration why they were employed in the first place -- the power they have been given can have disastrous effects on the rest of us."

"Take any issue -- obesity, guns, smoking, global warming, whatever," says Gladys. "Rather than attacking the industries whose products produce the undesired effects, these people have been given free reign to attack the consumers instead -- peaceful, law-abiding citizens, often vulnerable people without the resources to fight back."

"It is our behavior -- our consumption of these products or irresponsible use of them -- that is at fault," explains Gladys, "and it is their job to teach us a lesson in good behavior by massive and expensive public education onslaughts, reinforced by personal attacks -- name-calling, bullying, bizarre accusations, domineering intrusions, assaults on democracy, discrimination and the use of force if necessary."

"It has nothing really to do the cause, whatever it might be -- causes come and go -- but everything to do with power," says Gladys. "In political systems set up to protect us against dictators, how is it that our governments are employing these crazies to crush us and force us to do their bidding?"

"What sort of democracy are we living in where these narcissists and psychopaths are given power to brazenly demand all right of control over public and private property as well as the private lives and personal choices of others?"

"How are we supposed to defend our democratic rights against people who are pathologically incapable of understanding or caring about human values and feelings and the future consequences of their actions?"

"As the saying goes," sighs Gladys, "the lunatics are now in charge of the asylum."

"We can rid ourselves of their political masters -- those responsible for hiring them -- at election time," says Gladys, "but how can we rid ourselves of these monsters who now just about rule our public service and all the advisory bodies out there -- and, conceivably, can even rig elections to ensure their political masters remain in power?"

"Narcissists and psychopaths, by nature, have no respect for democratic principles and will use the system, unashamedly, for personal gain," says Gladys. "Do we wait until they expose themselves -- by doing something so outrageous that they're forced to resign -- or do we demand, right now, an ongoing psychological assessment of all people in public employment and root them out before they do more damage?"

silent majorities and protection rackets

According to Melody, the trouble with democracy is that it works on the principle of majority rule but majorities are always silent and sheep-like and the only people who gain from the system are rich minority groups with politicians in their pockets.

"In all governments -- democratic or not -- the deal is this," explains Melody. "We'll take care of you, we'll handle all the tough stuff, trust us. Give us your money and all you have to do is go about your daily life and abide by the laws we make for your good."

"It sounds like a reasonable deal -- a neat social contract -- doesn't it?" laughs Melody. "But it's nothing more than a massive protection racket."

"Very few of the laws governments pass are for our good," says Melody, "and very few of the baddies they are protecting us from are out to get us."

"On the contrary, most of the laws governments pass are for the good of vested interests, not us" says Melody, "and most of the baddies they are protecting us from are out to get these vested interests, not us."

"You only have to look at the situation in Iraq to see the truth of this," says Melody. "Saddam Hussein's regime may have been brutal in comparison to ours, but he kept law and order in a country that doesn't have a silent majority of sheep like ours does."

"The invasion of Iraq was nothing more than a bully boy tactic -- one gang leader moving in on the lucrative turf of another gang leader," says Melody. "On the pretext of weapons of mass destruction -- and then the democratic rights of Iraqi people -- our government fooled our silent majority sheep that Iraq was a danger to us."

"The vested interests like Halliburton and Big Oil have made a killing out of the Iraq invasion," sighs Melody, "and the silent majority sheep still send their children to be slaughtered in a war which never was, and never will be, for our good."

"Our government, led by whatever party and whatever vested interest, has a bloody history of using the silent majority sheep to line the pockets of the rich and powerful," says Melody. "Even the American Revolution was started by the rich tea merchants of Boston. It was easy to whip up hatred for the king and the Westminster parliament among the rag-taggle refugees from mother England, but essentially they just changed one political master for another."

"In 1915, during WWI, a terrible influenza epidemic -- Spanish Flu -- swept around the world and millions dropped dead like flies and yet the war went on regardless," says Melody. "The real enemy -- the real focus of our government -- should have been this bug, but it wasn't. Why? Because governments have always been more concerned about the economic interests of a vested minorities than the health interests of the majority sheep."

"It's tragic that the only system of government -- communism -- that held out any hope for a people rather than a money focused economy was also usurped by the racketeers," sighs Melody. "In it's pure form, a communist community would be living in heaven, not the hell their greedy leaders dumped them in."

"What's happening right now in China, for instance, is scary," says Melody. "In their efforts to catch up with the West, the new economic masters are turning China into a polluted and disease-prone wasteland."

"With globalization, more of our food is coming from parts of the world that have no health regulations," says Melody, "and more of our immigrants are coming -- and going -- from these places, too."

"I'm concerned about our government cutting back on health measures in order to fund its vested interest wars and vested interest causes," says Melody. "I believe another pandemic is coming and our government -- paid by the silent majority to protect it -- is deliberately playing down this threat while stocking up the bunkers that are going to save them, not us."

"I look at all the anti-terror laws the government is passing and wonder whether their real purpose is to erode our freedoms and make us incapable of acting to save ourselves when the crunch comes," says Melody. "Are the security cameras, phone taps, strip searches, background checks and incredible delays in getting anything done or going anywhere really to protect us from terrorists?"

"Terrorists, or freedom-fighters, have been with us since our freedoms were first threatened," says Melody. "No great cause -- be it Christianity, democracy, slavery or whatever -- was achieved without terrorism and bloodshed."

"I don't want to focus my argument entirely on Iraq," says Melody, "because the whole war over there is being used as a smokescreen to hide what's happening here."

"One by one our freedoms are being demolished and the silent sheep like majority are not only being fleeced but led over a precipice," warns Melody. "Right now, apart from the big vested interests, certain minority vested interests are also driving the government. Some things once unacceptable are now acceptable -- such as homosexuality -- and some things once acceptable are now unacceptable -- such as smoking."

"The silent majority go along with whatever the government does because that's the deal, that's the social contract," says Melody. "They hug the homosexuals they once despised, and despise the smokers they once hugged."

"With a change in government, who knows what minority vested interests will next drive the country?" asks Melody. "Will we be hugging Arabs and despising Jews? Kissing paedophiles and spitting at SUV owners or gun owners?"

"The point to be made is that we are being socially engineered -- even genetically modified like Monsanto's food," says Melody, "and if we must be subject to a government run protection racket then why should we remain silent about what we want to be protected from?"

"I believe we have more chance of being killed by a simple flu virus than by trans fat, SUV pollution, global warning, cigarette smoke, a terrorist's bomb or a crazed gun owner," says Melody, "and we should all demand that our taxpayer dollars go into measures designed to stop these bugs getting into our country."

privatizing government job selection

Daellea is single, 32, and wants a more permanent job than the one she has now but her efforts to gain a government job have left her cold. She queries the ethics of the increasing trend to privatize public sector job selection.

“I’m all for private enterprise,” says Daellea, “but I don’t think the selection of government jobs should be farmed out to private agencies. It figures that businesses out to make a fast buck are not going to be as scrupulous as government employees in the etiquette of selecting new recruits, and after three bad experiences I’m only going to apply for government jobs that recruit directly from now on.”

“I put the first two bad experiences down to bad luck,” laughs Daellea, “but when the third agency turned out to be worse than the other two I got smart about what was going on.”

“What really annoys me is that a government department places the advertisement but when you telephone for an information package you’re directed to a private recruiting agency which invites you to an information session at which information packages are given to interested applicants. It’s all about money! The more people who attend the information sessions the more money the agency gets.”

“I don’t waste my time applying for unsuitable jobs so the information packages are really vital,” says Daellea. “I resent having to give up a whole evening, sometimes traveling out of my way, in order to obtain something that can mailed to me.”

“And when the information package presented by these private agencies is not up to the usual standard of government information packages - and none of the three I’ve received have been - my resentment is exacerbated.”

“Despite all this, I actually applied for the third job - it was something very unusual, requiring unique talents that I possessed and the money was good, too,” says Daellea, “but I should have listened to my gut feeling and given it a miss.”

"I really don't think it is proper or ethical for the government to privatize public sector job selection."

Read more by Daellea on this issue:

government job selection ethics
Interviewed for government job by foreign consultant
Psychometric tests and medicals?

going postal!

Sigrid runs a small business with her husband and relies heavily on the efficiency of the local postal service to make a living.

"You name it," sighs Sigrid, "those petty little postal worker have done it to us. I don't know whether they want to bankrupt us, run us out of town, or drive us mad - but right now they've just about achieved all three possibilities."

"We send and receive a great deal of mail -- our business depends on it," explains Sigrid, "and as much as we'd like to dispense with the postal service completely and use a courier service instead, we just can't afford to do it -- we're stuck with a lousy service that's subsidized by our taxes and yours!"

"Don't get me wrong," adds Sigrid, "it's our local postal service that stinks, not the system, and not everyone in this town is as hopping mad as we are."

"It's personal," sighs Sigrid. "The woman who manages the local postal service hates my guts and because her underlings are stupid, or just want to keep their jobs, they follow her lead in treating us -- well, me rather than my husband -- badly."

"About five years ago I estimated that two percent of the mail we send and receive just doesn't get delivered," says Sigrid. "I raised the matter with the manager and that was the start of the battle."

"The next week, we received no mail at all!"

"Can you imagine a government employee - a so-called public servant - actually withholding our mail in revenge for making a complaint about lousy service?"

"OK," laughs Sigrid, "I know that you can't beat City Hall and Uncle Sam is out to get all of us, but this is an abuse of power gone stark raving mad."

"The following week our mail was delivered and a lot of the envelopes had been opened and stuck with tape," says Sigrid. "This wasn't done carefully, to hide the fact that our mail had been tampered with, but blatantly and roughly as if to tell us that we are powerless."

"My husband and I confronted the manager with the offending mail and she called in three staff members as witnesses and told us that we needed to see a psychiatrist!"

"They were sniggering at us - like jackals - and it really was like trying to deal with members of a sub-human species."

"I know that postal workers don't earn much money and some of them really do have the intelligence of cretins," laughs Sigrid, "but put a little bit of power into the hands of people like that and they turn into the stuff of nightmares."

"My husband folded completely and blamed me for doing something to upset the manager," says Sigrid. "Just like a man, right?"

"Faced with a situation where I had to deal with the local postal service every day, whether I liked it or not, I decided to resolve half of the problem by driving to the next town to do business with the postal service and post the mail."

"Sure, it was inconvenient," laughs Sigrid, "but at least I avoided contact with the petty tyrants in my town."

"As far as receiving mail is concerned," says Sigrid, "we are still up the creek. I can't prove that the local postal workers are deliberately destroying our mail or failing to deliver it on time, so it's a case of having to wear the situation or get out of town."

"I'm normally an assertive woman and politically active as far as human rights are concerned," says Sigrid, 'but this situation on my own little bit of turf has become an exercise of mental torture and abuse of power that you wouldn't believe could happen here. In some third world country, maybe, but not here!"

"I mean, we go to war on the other side of the world to depose a tyrant like Saddam Hussein and yet empower people like him in our own postal service."

"Having been through this experience I can understand how whole nations of people - including the intelligentsia - can be tyrannized."

"I had to front up at the local postal service last week to pick up a parcel," says Sigrid, "and I actually found that my palms were sweating and my knees were knocking!"

"I was terrified at the prospect of bumping into that woman or one of the sniveling underlings who had previously humiliated us."

"As I walked into the office I caught a glimpse of that woman and, seeing me, she came out and tried to make eye contact with me in order to intimidate me further than I was already!"

"She walked straight for the counter I was heading for," laughs Sigrid, "and I actually prayed that the counter assistant would attend to me before she got there."

"I kept my eyes down the whole time, refusing to look in her direction," adds Sigrid, "and I felt like a naughty little girl in the presence of God or something."

"When the counter assistant went out back to get my parcel, she followed him and my heart skipped a beat - with good reason," sighs Sigrid, "because he came back and told me that he couldn't find the parcel."

"I was forced to visit the postal service three times that week before the parcel materialized," says Sigrid. "And each time I walked into that office I became progressively more demoralized and terrified."

"I truly believe that she deliberately held that parcel until she was satisfied that she had broken my spirit."

"If a postal worker can do this to me," laughs Sigrid, "imagine what a police officer could do!"