So, /pol/, do we beleive in a NWO conspiracy? What's our narrative?
bamp
>>69673574
Most Jews Jew instinctively, some Jews Jew intentionally, the rest are good goys who think they'll get table scraps.
>>69674378
you forgot about the basement revolutionnaries.
i'd like a supranational government
HOT STUFF HOT STUFF HOT STUFF HOT STUFF
Guys i have the password over an secret freemasonry site with tousends of top secret documents in it ill dumb it if interested
>>69674797
I'd like a supranational governement too, but not one made up of slavers and technocrats.
>>69674879
im not joking anons
>>69675070
then give us a tl;dr
>>69674966
Don't the slavers and technocrats come automatically with so much focussed power? How would you ever get rid of them?
Step one: Anyone who mentions things like microchipping, ending paper currency, one world government, etc is a conspiracy nutcase
Step two: alternate between steps one and three depending on the audience and the progression of the propaganda, sometimes trying out step three to a limited audience as a trial balloon
Step three: anyone who opposes things like microchipping, ending paper currency, one world government, etc is a conspiracy nutcase
>>69673574
Diplomats and career UN employees talk about one-world-government like you talk about sport. It's not a conspiracy in the tinfoil hat way, it's a legit plan.
Communism is winning in the end. Public servants and union members are the useful idiots spreading the cancer.
>>69675070
let's have it then
>>69675333
communism, flat hierarchy, the end of the police state, the return of ancestral ways of living...
Basically, keeping the good (technological developement) but leaving the bad (infinitely expanding hierarchical society) to return to a flat social hierarchy, where power is only symoblic and people are not killed, jailed, etc.
>>69675605
so, still, how do you keep corrupt and egoistic, powercraving people from overtaking this system?
What do you mean by flat hierarchy?
>>69675860
>how do you keep corrupt and egoistic, powercraving people from overtaking this system?
You can't, that's why conservative people are for small government - it might restrain policies that would be beneficial to large(er) groups, but it limits the damage that bad ones can do.
>>69674879
>>69675070
go on
>>69673574
>implying it's a secret project
niga...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeXhEp7dhvw
>>69675971
>but it limits the damage that bad ones [policies] can do
pls explain
apart from that, do you think, if every 1000 people had one delegate to speak for them, there would not be unconsensual chaos?
>>69676024
I will post it at midnight
>>69673574
Cum on guise there's nothing wrong with One World Gubment
>>69675971
>how do you keep corrupt and egoistic, powercraving people from overtaking this system?
Well the whole premise is that corrupt and egoistic people are a product of the system, so, changing the system would remove the need to worry about such people.
>flat hierarchy
Look at indegeneous poeple in south america, small tribes in india, etc. They live in the "natural" way of flat hierarchy with one symbolic chief and a few shamans etc, basically healers and advisers.
The whole modern analysis is that a long time ago, for some reason, we started waging war and buiding empires and destroying nature and indegenous peaceful people and we should, today, find a way to protect what few indegeneous people are left (as in, simply not destroy them) and learn from them, because they don't have to deal with crime, corruption, etc. It basically doesn't exist in their cultures, hence the understanding that we don't have a hierarchical system to protect us from crime but, rather, we have a hierarchical system and it produces crime.
>>69676608
meant to answer to>>69675860
>>69676608
can't say that i share this premise
Someday the war waging and expansive cultures must have been indegenous people too. So there has to be a point where people, even with a system promoting the "natural way of flat hierarchy", or a person alone took the chance to change the system to his advantages.
To me it seems the problem lies within mankind itself ond not (only) the system.
>>69677272
>the problem lies within mankind itself ond not (only) the system.
of course, because even if the premise is true, it is mankind or at least a part of it that created the system.
Some people beleive, though, that mankind has or is evolving and we are simply becoming aware of our past mistakes and our common identity.
Personnally, I beleive that neo-communism would greatly inspire itself from the indegenous system, for the best, but it will not be naturally implememented everywhere.
Long story short: the people who are ready to transition to the new world order naturally will, and those who are still stuck in the old world will be left to starve, kill themselves, sent to mars, whatever.
>>69676316
>>but it limits the damage that bad ones [policies] can do
>pls explain
It's self-evident. Small gov't > limited power > limited spread of policy fuck-ups
Large government (tends to be centralised) > full control > full execution of fuck-ups
>>69676316
>if every 1000 people had one delegate to speak for them, there would not be unconsensual chaos?
representation =/= government
I'm talking about the real control of government - bureaucracy.
>>69676156
Medic, do you have this in english?
>>69677914
how to get rid of bureaucracy?
>>69677610
mankind has been evolving, and more importantly devolving again, for the last few thousands of years. I don't see any breakthrough near here
Do you mean by new world order the conspirative-jewish NWO or your utopian NWO?
>>69677726
I reckon you do not speak of the size of for example the legislative chambers or such, but of the executive powers that a government has?
>>69678047
utopian nwo
>>69678047
>I reckon you do not speak of the size of for example the legislative chambers or such, but of the executive powers that a government has?
Yeah that's it. Had a few beers, not articulating well.
>>69678102
> those who are still stuck in the old world will be left to starve, kill themselves, sent to mars, whatever.
I don't think that these "leftover" people will just kill themselves or simply vanish. They will fight for their old world or against the new world, either way there is going to be a major conflict.
For example, what do you think will happen when the aggressive part of trumps followers sees Trump being cut off by some establishment fucks? I don't think they'll just quietly go home accept their fateb and hope for the next election
>>69678046
Kill them. Kill them all.
Seriously though, I think it's a blatant conflict of interest that public servants are allowed to vote for the level of government they work for. If they were removed from the Labor (communist) voting bloc, we'd be electing people much more attune to what the public really thinks they need in terms of the size of the public service.
>>69678512
they're too stcuk up in slavery, trump supporters or any slave/slaver will jus try to pay their bills and move on. Untill the day there is no more food in the supermarket.
>>69673574
It's just paranoia, there is no secret ruling class and they certainly aren't jews.
>>69678348
>>69677726
but on the other hand you could say
Small gov > less control of global players > more policy/society fuck ups (though not indebted by govt)
Big gov > more control of global players (or any bigger economic conglomerat) > more safety for citizens
>>69673574
Jews
all of them
everywhere
and their supporters
>>69678738
>>69678749
I think the present situation of the world is leaning towards my assertion.
Small governments are more easily changed out by the population. Large governments have too much inertia and are much harder to dislodge. Look at what the UN and EU are doing to the world at the moment - largely unelected, unknown people on 6-figure taxpayer funded salaries implementing their own utopian ideals thorugh public policy but not having to deal with the economic or social consequences personally.
>>69676024
It's Master Mason and Ashlar. The section he posted is just public domain books in .pdf form.
