View Single Post
Old 03-17-2005, 01:27 PM
Draken Draken is offline
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 899

Thanks Helen!

What are the average Joe and Jane to do indeed?

Difficult question.
It's a shame the average person doesn't realize they've been bribed, bought off with a comfortable life and luxuries. It's a shame they don't realize they've delegated their power to their "representatives" who use it to justify atrocities that make them, the "representatives" millions in the people's name.
And the illusion kept in place by the State Media.

I posted elsewhere the articles about "elections" in "democracies" and why people really shouldn't vote; by <a href="">Francis Parker Yockey (Elections)</a> and <a href="">Butler Shaffer (Why I Do Not Vote)</a>. I totally agree with the ideas expressed in these articles.

I think democracy has played out its role as an adequate form of government. Really, if you look at the world you realize very fast that there isn't one democracy that's not subverted by vested interests and totally controlled by secret societies, secret treaties, secret commissions, secret committees etc. I'm beginning to wonder if there ever was a time democracy was genuine! Even so, is it really wise to let a majority decide, if they don't have neither qualifications nor competence? Is it not typical of a group that the larger it is the lower the aggregated competence level becomes? The "smallest common denominator" has to become lower in relation to its size, right?

Like Butler Shaffer proposes, say I: let it fall. Let the current corrupt, subverted system fall.

Actually, even with the massive media mind control, I'm surprised the American public still bother to vote. Actually, maybe they DON'T bother, but who can tell when they rig the results on a regular basis?

So what then?

I've said it elsewhere (maybe you've read it?;-)) too, that it's a misunderstanding dictatorship is oppressive by default. Says who? It depends on what's dictated, is it not? And, of course, by whom! I would have no problem - in fact, I'd be HONORED - if I could serve with all my actions and thoughts a "ruler" like <a href="">Mawlana Sidi Ahmed Ibn Mustafa Al Alawi Al Mostghanmi Qaddasa Allahu Ruhahu</a> or <a href="">Sri Ramana Maharshi</a> or even a Westerner (shocking huh?;-)) like <a href="">Frithjof Schuon</a>, who actually lived many years with American Indians and became a member of a tribe, unfortunately I can't remember which now. He settled in Bloomington, Indiana where he founded a Sufi order of which <a href="javascript:small_window5('')">Seyyed Hossein Nasr</a> is the shaykh at present.

I know Ahmad is going to bite my head off becuase he doesn't like Sufis but I don't care - I'm not afraid! :-D

Seriously though, there are of course other adequate examples of of "rulers" I would be glad to follow who are or were not Sufis. (To clarify, Sri Ramana Maharshi is NOT a Sufi.) As I'm studying Sufism these came the quickest to mind.
Of course, they would have to possess the spiritual and temporal qualities and authority befit such a ruler.

I have to finish for the time being but I'll leave with a few links I think are relevant for this discussion, <a href="">THE DIVINE ORIGINS OF CONSTITUTIONS by Joseph de Maistre</a> and all <a href="">Butler Shaffer's articles</a>.

and a quote. ;-)

<a href="">The End of a World</a>

"This end only appears to be the «end of the world», without any reservation or specification of any kind, to those who see nothing beyond the limits of this particular cycle; a very excusable error of perspective it is true, but one that has nonetheless some regrettable consequences in the excessive and unjustified terrors to which it gives rise in people who are not sufficiently detached from terrestrial existence; and naturally they are the very people who form this erroneous conception most easily, just because of the narrowness of their point of view. ...the end now under consideration is undeniably of considerably greater importance than many other, for it is the end of a whole Manvantara, and so of the temporal existence of what may rightly be called a humanity, but this, it must be said once more, in no way implies that it is the end of the terrestrial world itself, because, through the «reinstatement» that takes place at the final instant, this end will itself immediately become the beginning of another Manvantara...if one does not stop short of the most profound order of reality, it can be said in all truth the «end of a world» never is and never can be anything but the end of an illusion."
(René Guénon)

Truth, Beauty, Love
Three things are sacred to me: first Truth, and then, in its tracks, primordial prayer; Then virtue–nobility of soul which, in God walks on the path of beauty. Frithjof Schuon
Reply With Quote