What is freedom? What is democracy. Before I answer these questions I tell you a few words about modern societies.
I don't believe in organized conspiracies, because for what would anybody need them. Things are going to a certain direction by itself, if there are enough people, whose personal interest is in question.
Politicians, the police, the media and the voters form a whole whose parts interact with each other.
Politicians need the media to get into power and stay there. The police need politicians to obtain more resources and power. The media require the police to obtain news of accidents and crimes. The police need the media to maintain a positive public image. Businesses need the media in order to sell their products. Citizens are a motor that rotates the wheels of the system by voting in elections.
The one who plays the best, increase their share of power.
This does not apply to common citizens because the citizens have nothing to gain. They have only to lose - namely freedom. The only ones who can win in this game, are the politicians and the police. Media is just a merchant who make a profit by selling the hangman the rope, to which it is eventually hanged.
In order to understand the current world you should keep in mind the law of nature, according to which the limited resources will inevitably lead to competition, and in the competition those who are the strongest will win. Thus, the resources - be it economic power or political power, or just about anything - simply pile up to a small minority. One percent of the U.S. population owns nearly forty percent of the property, and the concentration of property in few hands is still going on.
If you try to remove economic inequalities by political measures, it may happen that an apparently economic equality is achieved yes, but after that one per cent of population owns 99 per cent of political power. The result is an equality of misery. North Korea is a living example. Economic equality can not be maintained except in extreme duress.
The accumulation of power in few hands has a tedious feature that, if the accumulation is prevented in some sectors, the power searches for new channels and begins to pile up in some other area. Power greedy people go to where power is available. If this is not noticed, the dictatorship comes to a society via a side entrance.
Aren't we living in a democratic society. Doesn't it prevent all kind of aspirations to dictatorships by nature. It depends what kind of democracy we are talking about.
Totalitarian democracy is a system in which the majority, either directly or through their representatives, have the absolute authority to adopt rules which also the minority must be respected.
In equality-based democracy, no one has the right to impose or to subject anyone, but anyone has the right to prevent the subjugation.
The difference between totalitarian democracy and equality-based democracy is that in a totalitarian democracy, the value of individual freedom is zero, but in the gender-based democracy, it is infinite. This makes democracies very different. The modern state systems represent a totalitarian democracy – some more, some less. Sometimes, however, has been a different ideal of democracy.
The French Declaration of Human Rights, which was published in 1789, begins its finding of that "people are born and live in freedom, and they have the same rights." The declaration specifies the society to safeguard human freedom. It also sets out that "freedom means the power to make any kind of things, which do not harm other people."
In his book "On Liberty", published in 1859, English philosopher John Stuart Mill pointed out originally the idea of freedom, which he said was already in jeopardy. He wrote: The object of this Essay is to assert one very simple principle...” and this principle is that the sole end for which mankind are warranted, individually or collectively in interfering with the liberty of action of any of their number, is self-protection.”
The current state is a travesty of the original thought of freedom. Although the freedom of people should be irrevocable birthright, politicians cut slices of it like it was a low-priced sausages. Any criterion, which members of parliament happen to invent, is valid.
We need to begin a political campaign to stop our society becoming a totalitarian police state and dictatorship. Let's find an equality party and fight for freedom. That honorable word is strongly undervalued.
