Exiting the Union does not mean exiting the infiltration by the WEF and other nasty organisations. Remember, they did try to impeach AG Paxton for trying to bring a lawsuit against Pfizer.
Yes, I remember, I've read about Paxton. Anyway, the battle is very tight, the forces are unequal and the tentacles of the octopus particularly large. the lack of vision, unity and focus of the victims makes things more complicated than at least half resolved. I don't see an out from all this mess. Not acting at the right time was/is also a big minus.
A great subject, UD, for an article as the ballot question could have interesting results. Secession has a long way to go legislatively. Texas definitely has grievances just for the border crap alone. If I'm being honest, I give the US 10 years at most to remain intact barring a major change of course.
If Texas secedes, this sends a signal to the entire planet that the "Right to Self-Determination" trumps the coercive state. In effect, this would declare the concept of 'New World Order' obsolete and, by implication, terminate political representationalism in favour of direct representation; as is so indelibly inherent in Abraham Lincoln's defnition of Democracy "Government of The People, by The People and for The People". ERgo... self-determination and personal sovereignty.
What we are talking about here is all government policy being formulated by the fully-informed People, presumably through some kind of referenda (citizen initiated referenda or CIR) or through local cells. This also demands free access to information, which means an end to media monopolies and restrictions on infromation and news. It also spells the end of the impressive pomp and splendour of Parliaments/Congresses, elections, political parties, and so-called majorities.
Ironically, I just described the policies of America's Populist Party, which campaigned in the decades following Lincoln's assassination by the Plutocrats.
The power lobbies, ergo the plutocrats, will never permit this. In other words, change can only occur through force by The People. In my opinion, most people today have not benefited from the strength borne of love as a child and, therefore, are too weak and spineless to force change, even for their own survival and that of their children. Then we will truly foresee the terrible price exacted by child-minding and pre-echool.
I didn't say slavery didn't exist, but that Texas seceding isn't coloured by the notions of slavery; they simply want their freedom. So the US government does not have the same 'moral high ground' it did in the 1800s if it opts to attack Texas for trying to secede. If anything, Texas has the moral high ground this time.
British exit didn't give them any freedom, didn't stop the influence of WEF and the bs of globalization and great reset...
Perhaps something for Texit to learn from?
Exiting the Union does not mean exiting the infiltration by the WEF and other nasty organisations. Remember, they did try to impeach AG Paxton for trying to bring a lawsuit against Pfizer.
Yes, I remember, I've read about Paxton. Anyway, the battle is very tight, the forces are unequal and the tentacles of the octopus particularly large. the lack of vision, unity and focus of the victims makes things more complicated than at least half resolved. I don't see an out from all this mess. Not acting at the right time was/is also a big minus.
Very true.
A great subject, UD, for an article as the ballot question could have interesting results. Secession has a long way to go legislatively. Texas definitely has grievances just for the border crap alone. If I'm being honest, I give the US 10 years at most to remain intact barring a major change of course.
If Texas secedes, this sends a signal to the entire planet that the "Right to Self-Determination" trumps the coercive state. In effect, this would declare the concept of 'New World Order' obsolete and, by implication, terminate political representationalism in favour of direct representation; as is so indelibly inherent in Abraham Lincoln's defnition of Democracy "Government of The People, by The People and for The People". ERgo... self-determination and personal sovereignty.
What we are talking about here is all government policy being formulated by the fully-informed People, presumably through some kind of referenda (citizen initiated referenda or CIR) or through local cells. This also demands free access to information, which means an end to media monopolies and restrictions on infromation and news. It also spells the end of the impressive pomp and splendour of Parliaments/Congresses, elections, political parties, and so-called majorities.
Ironically, I just described the policies of America's Populist Party, which campaigned in the decades following Lincoln's assassination by the Plutocrats.
The power lobbies, ergo the plutocrats, will never permit this. In other words, change can only occur through force by The People. In my opinion, most people today have not benefited from the strength borne of love as a child and, therefore, are too weak and spineless to force change, even for their own survival and that of their children. Then we will truly foresee the terrible price exacted by child-minding and pre-echool.
I didn't say slavery didn't exist, but that Texas seceding isn't coloured by the notions of slavery; they simply want their freedom. So the US government does not have the same 'moral high ground' it did in the 1800s if it opts to attack Texas for trying to secede. If anything, Texas has the moral high ground this time.