Planning for the Post-Democratic Divided States of America
Between the date and time of publication of this piece and January 20, 2021, when inauguration of a president for the United States of America supposedly will take place, what will happen? Either (1) President Trump will relinquish power and Joe Biden will take over, or (2) President Trump will use or begin to use his executive authorities to override the fraudulent election(s) that transpired in some way. Regardless, there will be unrest, and we need to prepare.
I've discussed the comically-obvious election fraud that transpired in a prior post on November 29, 2020 [*1] and another for my preferred remedies going forward for restoring trust in democracy, published a week later [*2]. Much more evidence has been released since then, including a forensic audit of Dominion voting machines in Antrim County, Michigan, revealing about two-thirds of votes are purposefully moved to a third-party administrator to freely manipulate, while the audit trail for the 2020 election (but not prior years), was erased, [*3] and a government document outlining all the fraud that transpired with 148 footnotes [*4]. The circumstances of just four swing-states shutting down counting operations, finding late-night and early-morning ballot dumps for Joe Biden out of chain-of-custody, as election workers kicked out and/or blocked observation by covering the windows to the counting room, are not just suspect but comically-obvious indicators of coordinated criminal fraud. Even Mr. Magoo could solve this case.
If after perusal of the thousand affidavits, testimony, video evidence, statistical analysis (e.g., the statistical absurdity of Joe Biden winning 10.5 million more votes than Obama did at his peak and nation's record in 2008, 13% more, while winning 398 less counties, 45% less, concentrated primarily in four cities containing some precincts with more votes than possible voters), you are convinced that representative democracy is not fundamentally broken, I can't help you. Enjoy the remaining years of your material existence, glued to your black mirrors for services like Netflix while munching popcorn behind your mask, as you await deliveries of sustenance from Amazon. This piece isn't for you.
It's not simply the election being stolen with fraud that spells the end of the United States of America. It's how brazen and obvious the theft was. Despite a constant barrage of reminders and disclaimers by social media, united in the message that Joe Biden was legitimately elected, multiple polls still show about half of America believes the election was stolen with fraud [*5]. More profoundly, 71% of Trump and 40% of Biden supporters believe a "civil war or some significant upheaval" is coming [*6]. And this poll was taken before the Capitol invasion of January 7, 2021.
A post-invasion poll, conducted January 8-10, 2020, showed just 22% of Republican voters believe the 2020 presidential election was free and fair [*7].
If President Trump uses executive authority to right the moral injustice that occurred via the election theft, half of America will not likely accept that outcome either. The United States has overlapping jurisdictions. Even if the federal one is secured, your local ones might not be, as executive action is unlikely to repair and render safe all jurisdictions going forward, as law comes from people accepting its legitimacy, not words or even justice alone.
Does law mirror the lines of justice? Would Trump be legal in remedial action? If his actions wouldn't be legal, would they nonetheless be just?
Laws and regulations are words on pieces of paper. They often conflict. Which ones prevail in obedience and enforcement? If pursued, would President Trump's Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election, signed on September 12, 2018 [*9], granting him plenary authority to overturn such an election result using powers not yet examined by a court, prevail? Or do we rely on the Supreme Court's cowardly refusal to sort out the fraud, challenged multiple times, without the dignity of even giving us an elaboration on its reasoning for refusing to even hear the evidence [*10]?
When judges sort out a difference in legal interpretations, they issue "opinions" that jurisdictions will consider in enforcement, but they aren't epistemological arbiters. Hence the word "opinion." A judge in Illinois issued an opinion that its governor was barred from enforcing executive orders pertaining to its declared emergency powers under the 2020 pandemic as statutorily expired [*11]. The Illinois governor ignored the judge's opinion and enforced his legally-null regulations anyway, not even temporarily halting enforcement before finding other legal pretenses to continue his tyranny.
Judicial opinions can differ. And they don't even need to be obeyed. What army did the Illinois judge have to enforce his decree? Does President Trump have the legal authority to take action and have the military run a new election? Under certain readings, absolutely. In others, no. I won't bore you with legal analysis here, as we are now effectively beyond using traditional courts to impose a solution. Have whatever legal opinion you like. The point is this. It's your belief that matters, your will to push for a certain outcome, not the words themselves we call "law."
Regardless of what happens in the short term, a breakup of the United States is coming in the long term. With the destruction of the foundation of our government, representative democracy, new jurisdictions will emerge within the United States that will block enforcement of federal laws and ensue conflict. Your ability to rely on current institutions for finance and products and services to sustain your every-day living and luxury needs will become ever-less certain as confrontations between these jurisdictions begin. Public trust in the soon-to-be-old system is too broken to recover. When the new systems emerge, you will likely have a choice. To the extent you can be accepted by the emerging competing jurisdictions, and you desire to relocate, what can you do to prepare?
On Relationships with Family and Friends
This is the foremost area to examine. When a new prospective jurisdiction emerges that more closely aligns with your moral compass, will the people that matter to you join in migration? What if they don't? Tyranny can be a matter of perspective. People you entangle yourself with may prefer to stay in the corrupt jurisdiction you reside. You must weigh your value for being physically near them with your indignity of tolerating rule by a fraudulent authority, along with the risk that entails.
Family and friends need to understand that (1) a precedent for continuing fraud for all elections is now set and (2) a jurisdiction without democratic control is subject to the arbitrary whims of those who manage the fraud. The lie that future-imposed rules are backed by real votes cloaks the otherwise immoral actions of rulers. Without democratic control, your preference for the rules of your current rulers is temporary. Family and friends that like the current rulers and/or rules must recognize that the rules can change at any point and that it's better to prepare to move while the rules are favorable than to wait until an unfavorable change makes life too difficult to relocate.
For example, if a jurisdiction wishes to take away your children due to your failure to allow some bureaucrat to force gender-changing hormone treatments, the power to do so is amplified by the false pretense of democracy granting it that authority. Let's say one agrees that authorities should intervene to change the gender of children against the will of parents if a medical or psychiatric professional agrees. The controllers of the voter fraud may change agendas in the future. If different controllers inherit such authority, even if one believes in an absurdity such as a child's right to trans-gender hormone therapy, a new authority could reverse that policy and round up the same who underwent that treatment for a tribunal-ordered determination of mental illness and consequent confinement to treat the same. The future is not predictable and certainly not in the people's control. Thus, hopefully, reason would persuade family and friends to come with you, regardless of any fundamental policy disagreements on what rules bring about human flourishing.
Of course, there is always the possibility that the jurisdiction you move to will be captured by a competing authority. While penalties for your migration will likely result more from your involvement in the captured jurisdiction's separation than your mere act of moving and living there, there is no guarantee of freedom, only an opportunity to obtain it.
Failing persuasion of your family and friends, you'll have to decide which people you value. The above example, one who thinks a child should have the legal ability to consent to hormone treatment and that the government should impose the same over the will of the parents, is not a person I'd value enough to keep around in my life. But the example I cited was extreme.
If your spouse refuses to come with you and you don't have children and/or no plans in the future for the same, perhaps it's best to separate. If your spouse refuses to come along, and you have a family with her/him in your jurisdiction, perhaps you'll have to decide whether the dignity of tyranny and the uncertainty in its future rule-imposition overrides your duty to your family. My hierarchy is always family before nation, but yours might be different.
For extended family and friends, the choice becomes easier. Consider the uncertainty of tyranny and your future ability to share a meal with these friends and family at a table versus your satisfaction with maintaining a relationship through long-distance technology (as is the commonly-imposed means of maintaining relationships in the post-pandemic world) and living with dignity and justice in the new jurisdiction.
If you plan on moving, disentangling yourself from financial commitments with disagreeing friends and family is important. If these entanglements will cause conflict in a future disagreement on where to move, buy yourself out of any contracts you have with them (e.g., cell phone plans, car loans, mortgages) to the extent you can, or resolve such matters in bankruptcy.
On Materialism and Tempering Your Needs
Because finances and employment involve meeting your material needs, before we discuss money, we must examine our material needs critically.
Aristotle used a word for happiness, eudaimonia, more aptly translated as "human flourishing." Happiness is a state of mind. One way of achieving it may be through satisfying material needs. You purchase $100 in king-crab legs (or insert your premium-priced preferred indulgence) for a feast not because such food is happiness but because its purchase is an avenue to happiness. The same applies with adornments, vacations, entertainment you view through your black mirrors, and more. These routes to happiness are artificial. King-crab legs aren't a good in and of themselves per se, but the satiation of your hunger in a tasty manner is. Temporarily. The best forms of happiness are from things in life that are a good in and of themselves. Your happiness more steadily comes from human relationships and the satisfaction you have with your adherence to a higher moral calling.
Actions that enhance the closeness of your valued relationships and trace with virtue are anchor points in your ability to flourish as a human being. But the fleeting rushes of bodily sensation bring a hollow happiness, as you will continuously adapt, needing a perpetual furtherance in degree of luxury to match your prior state of material happiness. The higher the degree of material luxury you achieve, the higher the degree of unhappiness you'll bare once the plateau of that luxury has peaked. A man used to artisanal pastries and fine meats might suffer depression at the prospect of future meals consisting only of dry cereal. The man who does not anchor his happiness in material pleasure, however, can adapt to any set of material circumstances and flourish based on living up to his principles and moral dignity.
Can you imagine a better means to achieve human flourishing that to leave an unjust jurisdiction and join a moral one? How many expensive meals, fancy adornments, or programs in your black mirror can buy away the gnawing feeling of living under tyranny? The human body adapts to material pleasures. There is a diminishing marginal value of return on the items you buy that rush endorphins to simulate happiness. Ultimately, humanity is spiritual and needs a deeper mode of existence.
Material needs are a carrot to persuade you to stay, work in, and support the corrupt tyrannical jurisdiction. Recognize that your material needs will probably be met less in the new jurisdiction you will move to, since it doesn't have the supply chains and institutions of your failing old one. The happiness of the human spirit under a jurisdiction allowing you freedom is far more important than fleeting material desires bribing you under tyranny.
Some falsely conflate direct bodily needs of survival with material pleasures. Ask yourself. What do you need to survive? A dingy apartment in freedom or a palace under tyranny? The human body needs little to survive. Many human bodies can go weeks or months without eating and be perfectly happy with their minds occupied on important work. The body stores fat for a reason, and most of us have plenty of reserve fuel to last for weeks if necessary. While human physiology varies and some require as much as hourly replenishment of food, look into fasting as a means to break your reliance on material needs for happiness.
I generally only have one meal per day. Thus, I have trained my body to be hungry only one time per day. If it took me a few weeks to migrate, I wouldn't starve to death. Likely, neither would you. If I had to work in that jurisdiction for a few weeks or even a month without food, I'd be able. My body would live on fat reserves, which most of us have an abundance of, even at the median American weight.
The mind can be conditioned to stop insisting on food, which better prepares you for dealing with the coming uncertainty of the 2020s. Meal schedules enslave us to making choices that revolve around the next meal. Times may be tumultuous when moving to a new jurisdiction, and meals may not come at a regular pace. First, check yourself medically with a professional to determine what your needs actually are. If, like many people, you can condition your body to only strike you with hunger pangs for a small window each day (as fasting does) safely, then consider it. You may not convince your family following you to live like this, of course, but, at least you can focus then on fulfilling their biological urges to eat and relieving them, rather than your own.
The above applies even if you choose to remain in a jurisdiction you deem safe. Rooting your happiness in virtue means no decline in standard of living will break your spirit.
On Employment and Finance
Ask yourself. Could you publicly give any controversial opinion you want without fear of losing your job? If not, your job comes at a cost you may not be fully considering. What is the value of a luxury vacation? $20,000 for two weeks of enjoyment? What is the value of being able to speak your mind and say whatever you want whenever you want? If you didn't have this ability, what would you pay to have it? Balance your material needs and luxury desires against your spiritual needs of virtue.
I argued above that actions enhancing the latter, such as speaking freely to others about what you truly believe, are far better anchors in happiness, or human flourishing, than purchasing indulgences in material pleasures. Hone your skills in a craft people and your employer will pay you for regardless of your adherence to the prevailing socially-acceptable narratives in your corrupted jurisdiction. See what crafts are needed in areas likely to emerge as safe jurisdictions to move to.
Saving money for the eventual move or coming uncertainty in where you remain are more important. Anticipate having no income in the jurisdiction you'd like to switch to for an extended period of time. Even if you remain in a jurisdiction you deem safe, understand that assets can still be frozen and jobs can be lost. If you've read this far, you probably recognize that freedom has far more value than material pleasures. Start saving now. Pay off your loans, or resolve them in bankruptcy if you can't afford to. The priority is having at least six months, if not a year of cash reserves to live on in your choice-destination jurisdiction or maintain yourself in the current jurisdiction should income be cut off. This includes ensuring your lien-free vehicle is constantly in the best mechanical condition, seen by the most experienced and talented experts, regardless of cost.
Where should you save your money? Depending on how tumultuous events get in the '20s, recognize that assets like bank accounts can be frozen or seized by your jurisdiction, especially considering rulers are no longer accountable to voters. Don't worry about getting a return on investment. Instead, concentrate on how quickly accessible and readily accepted (i.e. liquid) your money will be in the next jurisdiction. Things like gold and Bitcoin are, perhaps, not liquid enough, even if they may generate good returns on investment in the long run. Does this mean you should hide cash under your mattress or in a safe? There are risks in that choice too. Nobody can decide what avenue is best for you. I'm merely suggesting the guiding principles you should use in deciding how best to prepare.
Should you wait until you have perfected your skills to ensure employment in the jurisdiction you'd like to move to? There is risk in waiting. A corrupt jurisdiction, not accountable to voters, means arbitrary authority can harm you at any moment. Balance the risk of waiting in your corrupt jurisdiction versus the resources you'll have access to once you cross into the new jurisdiction to survive. Eventually, you'll find some type of employment in the new jurisdiction, and, if improved material pleasures no longer correlate with your happiness, freedom and virtue achieved in the new jurisdiction will be their own rewards.
More importantly, your priority should be making your new nation a better place to live for those already living there. In service to virtuous people, reciprocity among virtuous people will ensure your survival. Your service, resources, and money should be entangled with people and institutions on your side. Be wary of institutions and people purporting to be on your side to grift for your money and time.
None of this is to say your family will agree with you on the above guiding principles, which is why I stated disputes with family should be resolved first.
Be a Builder of Tomorrow's Nation More Than a Destroyer of Your Rotten Jurisdiction
The gangrene of the United States of America has already set in with our system's inability to rectify comically-obvious election fraud. Even if President Trump undoes the fraud and runs a new election, the failure of the system to rectify the fraud to this point belies a need for a new one. Either a cabal of controllers are so corrupt they'd destroy the foundation of our system of governance to advance their personal interests or a group of ideologues diverges with the will of voters so sharply that they will brazenly cheat to get their way. Regardless, the current system is unsustainable. Its nations of people within its jurisdiction have too divergent of interests. It'll soon be time to amputate.
Considering President Trump is more outspoken and willing to fight than perhaps any other politician in our past or future, and comically-obvious fraud could not be undone (absent executive action President Trump may order by military intervention), what does that say about the possibility a less outspoken weaker-willed future politician will successfully prevent our riggers of these systems from overriding the future will of voters, be they of any political party or ideological preference?
If one can lift ten pounds, he can lift five pounds. If people can get away with installing a president using comically-obvious fraud while being fought every step of the away, they can get away with doing so for all future politicians of their choice. This doesn't mean every election will be rigged, only the important ones to the controllers. Regardless, you are no longer effectively ruled by representative democracy. If your vote doesn't matter, you're allowed to pick whoever you want. If it does, you can only pick the rulers your proxy rulers agree with. They will rig the result to what they want any time they want. And they will get away with it, every time.
Thus, there's no sense in engaging in action like protests, riots, or destruction of any property to weaken your corrupted jurisdiction under a theory that it will collapse faster or transform into one of virtue. The solution is to build a new nation and defend it. The old jurisdiction will eventually collapse of its own corruption, as virtuous people congregate to new jurisdictions.
As the old adage goes, be the planter of trees you will never live long enough to enjoy the shade of. This is about building a future for posterity, not extending existing material luxury for you and your present family. Exciting opportunities will present themselves in the coming years. When? We can't say for sure. But be ready to take advantage of them, should you and your family have the courage. Understand the risks involved. And understand that even failure and suffering at efforts to build something good, beautiful, and true is better than continuing to serve your corrupt masters.
-----
FOOTNOTES
[*1] https://stratagemsoftheright.blogspot.com/2020/11/a-measure-of-cowardice-and-sociopathy.html
[*2] https://stratagemsoftheright.blogspot.com/2020/12/election-fraud-law-violations-should.html
[*3] https://depernolaw.com/uploads/2/7/0/2/27029178/antrim_michigan_forensics_report_[121320]_v2_[redacted].pdf
[*4] https://bannonswarroom.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-Immaculate-Deception-12.15.20-1.pdf
[*5] Twelve percent of Biden voters say, "Yes, illegal voting and fraud stole this election," compared to 79% of Trump voters according to a Seven Letter poll published on Politico, taken November 10-19, 2020. A prior-released Rasmussen poll, taken November 17-18, 2020, had Democrats at 30% believing fraud likely changed the election (20% very likely). So we can infer the Seven Letter poll may understate this number. An Economist/YouGov poll, taken Nov. 11-12, 2020, revealed 42% of general voters did not believe Joe Biden legitimately won the U.S. presidential election. A Rasmussen poll published December 7, 2020, revealed "[f]orty-seven percent (47%) say it’s likely that Democrats stole voters or destroyed pro-Trump ballots in several states to ensure that Joe Biden would win. Forty-nine percent (49%) consider that unlikely. This includes 36% who say voter fraud was Very Likely and 39% who think it was Not At All Likely."
[*6] https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a3024ee90bade409dfa2cc7/t/5ff34d839d513670e3b4deed/1609780611721/ETTG+Christmas+Card.Press+Release+1.4.21.pdf
[*7] https://morningconsult.com/form/tracking-voter-trust-in-elections/
[*8] https://newsla.localad.com/2021/01/06/seen-this-movie-before-georgia-runoff-follows-familiar-script-of-vote-dumps-and-stopped-counts/
[*9] https://themarshallreport.wordpress.com/2020/11/28/trumps-executive-order-on-foreign-election-interference-has-serious-penalties/
[*10] https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/121120zr_p860.pdf
[*11] https://illinoisfamily.org/politics/judge-rules-all-of-illinois-free-from-governor-j-b-pritzkers-unlawful-executive-orders/
I've discussed the comically-obvious election fraud that transpired in a prior post on November 29, 2020 [*1] and another for my preferred remedies going forward for restoring trust in democracy, published a week later [*2]. Much more evidence has been released since then, including a forensic audit of Dominion voting machines in Antrim County, Michigan, revealing about two-thirds of votes are purposefully moved to a third-party administrator to freely manipulate, while the audit trail for the 2020 election (but not prior years), was erased, [*3] and a government document outlining all the fraud that transpired with 148 footnotes [*4]. The circumstances of just four swing-states shutting down counting operations, finding late-night and early-morning ballot dumps for Joe Biden out of chain-of-custody, as election workers kicked out and/or blocked observation by covering the windows to the counting room, are not just suspect but comically-obvious indicators of coordinated criminal fraud. Even Mr. Magoo could solve this case.
If after perusal of the thousand affidavits, testimony, video evidence, statistical analysis (e.g., the statistical absurdity of Joe Biden winning 10.5 million more votes than Obama did at his peak and nation's record in 2008, 13% more, while winning 398 less counties, 45% less, concentrated primarily in four cities containing some precincts with more votes than possible voters), you are convinced that representative democracy is not fundamentally broken, I can't help you. Enjoy the remaining years of your material existence, glued to your black mirrors for services like Netflix while munching popcorn behind your mask, as you await deliveries of sustenance from Amazon. This piece isn't for you.
It's not simply the election being stolen with fraud that spells the end of the United States of America. It's how brazen and obvious the theft was. Despite a constant barrage of reminders and disclaimers by social media, united in the message that Joe Biden was legitimately elected, multiple polls still show about half of America believes the election was stolen with fraud [*5]. More profoundly, 71% of Trump and 40% of Biden supporters believe a "civil war or some significant upheaval" is coming [*6]. And this poll was taken before the Capitol invasion of January 7, 2021.
A post-invasion poll, conducted January 8-10, 2020, showed just 22% of Republican voters believe the 2020 presidential election was free and fair [*7].
From the same poll, about the same proportion have the same opinion in regards to the Georgia run-off election that tipped the balance of power in the U.S. Senate.
Dramatic action with criminal prosecutions is needed to restore faith in representative democracy, which we hope will come. Absent that, it wouldn't hurt to vote going forward, we suppose, like it wouldn't hurt for your goldfish to try riding a bicycle in his fish tank. But it's time to start preparing for other options.
If Joe Biden is installed as president, and/or along with the coming two U.S. senators fraudulently anointed in the Georgia run-off election with (again) late-night ballot dumps [*8], the message among rule makers is clear. The will of the people no longer matters in the construction and enforcement of future rules. The true controllers of what rules transpire are those who rig the elections, not the people. The prior-referenced Antrim County report in conjunction with the widespread use of these rigged voting machines means, at least, presidential elections and other federal elections pertaining to the balance of power between parties can freely be manipulated going forward. The assumption that the party/ies involved in rigging the last election and run-off will stop doing it once President Trump is removed is beyond naïve; it's evidence of a broken amygdala.
We are effectively subject to the whims of inherently corrupt and dishonest people. A non-democratic ruler who is honest with his subjects is preferable to a ruler that uses the pretense of democracy to rule by deception. An undemocratic ruler who builds law on principles he transparently communicates may have subjects who disagree with the rules and have no means to legally depose the ruler, but subjects can predict their future and plan their lives accordingly. An undemocratic cabal of proxy rulers who rely on deceiving subjects for power belies an unpredictable future by which planning is effectively impossible, as nobody can trust where the lies end and the truth begins.
Thus, those of you reading this who think a political solution via persuasion of other Americans to vote a certain way can repair our government are too mentally short to continue reading. To those who clutch their bow ties and pearls in shock at how a solution other than political speech be considered, let alone enacted, the same applies. Enjoy your Netflix and popcorn and find something else to read, or pop some smelling salts or retire to your fainting couch.
Dramatic action with criminal prosecutions is needed to restore faith in representative democracy, which we hope will come. Absent that, it wouldn't hurt to vote going forward, we suppose, like it wouldn't hurt for your goldfish to try riding a bicycle in his fish tank. But it's time to start preparing for other options.
If Joe Biden is installed as president, and/or along with the coming two U.S. senators fraudulently anointed in the Georgia run-off election with (again) late-night ballot dumps [*8], the message among rule makers is clear. The will of the people no longer matters in the construction and enforcement of future rules. The true controllers of what rules transpire are those who rig the elections, not the people. The prior-referenced Antrim County report in conjunction with the widespread use of these rigged voting machines means, at least, presidential elections and other federal elections pertaining to the balance of power between parties can freely be manipulated going forward. The assumption that the party/ies involved in rigging the last election and run-off will stop doing it once President Trump is removed is beyond naïve; it's evidence of a broken amygdala.
We are effectively subject to the whims of inherently corrupt and dishonest people. A non-democratic ruler who is honest with his subjects is preferable to a ruler that uses the pretense of democracy to rule by deception. An undemocratic ruler who builds law on principles he transparently communicates may have subjects who disagree with the rules and have no means to legally depose the ruler, but subjects can predict their future and plan their lives accordingly. An undemocratic cabal of proxy rulers who rely on deceiving subjects for power belies an unpredictable future by which planning is effectively impossible, as nobody can trust where the lies end and the truth begins.
Thus, those of you reading this who think a political solution via persuasion of other Americans to vote a certain way can repair our government are too mentally short to continue reading. To those who clutch their bow ties and pearls in shock at how a solution other than political speech be considered, let alone enacted, the same applies. Enjoy your Netflix and popcorn and find something else to read, or pop some smelling salts or retire to your fainting couch.
If President Trump uses executive authority to right the moral injustice that occurred via the election theft, half of America will not likely accept that outcome either. The United States has overlapping jurisdictions. Even if the federal one is secured, your local ones might not be, as executive action is unlikely to repair and render safe all jurisdictions going forward, as law comes from people accepting its legitimacy, not words or even justice alone.
Does law mirror the lines of justice? Would Trump be legal in remedial action? If his actions wouldn't be legal, would they nonetheless be just?
Laws and regulations are words on pieces of paper. They often conflict. Which ones prevail in obedience and enforcement? If pursued, would President Trump's Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election, signed on September 12, 2018 [*9], granting him plenary authority to overturn such an election result using powers not yet examined by a court, prevail? Or do we rely on the Supreme Court's cowardly refusal to sort out the fraud, challenged multiple times, without the dignity of even giving us an elaboration on its reasoning for refusing to even hear the evidence [*10]?
When judges sort out a difference in legal interpretations, they issue "opinions" that jurisdictions will consider in enforcement, but they aren't epistemological arbiters. Hence the word "opinion." A judge in Illinois issued an opinion that its governor was barred from enforcing executive orders pertaining to its declared emergency powers under the 2020 pandemic as statutorily expired [*11]. The Illinois governor ignored the judge's opinion and enforced his legally-null regulations anyway, not even temporarily halting enforcement before finding other legal pretenses to continue his tyranny.
Judicial opinions can differ. And they don't even need to be obeyed. What army did the Illinois judge have to enforce his decree? Does President Trump have the legal authority to take action and have the military run a new election? Under certain readings, absolutely. In others, no. I won't bore you with legal analysis here, as we are now effectively beyond using traditional courts to impose a solution. Have whatever legal opinion you like. The point is this. It's your belief that matters, your will to push for a certain outcome, not the words themselves we call "law."
Regardless of what happens in the short term, a breakup of the United States is coming in the long term. With the destruction of the foundation of our government, representative democracy, new jurisdictions will emerge within the United States that will block enforcement of federal laws and ensue conflict. Your ability to rely on current institutions for finance and products and services to sustain your every-day living and luxury needs will become ever-less certain as confrontations between these jurisdictions begin. Public trust in the soon-to-be-old system is too broken to recover. When the new systems emerge, you will likely have a choice. To the extent you can be accepted by the emerging competing jurisdictions, and you desire to relocate, what can you do to prepare?
On Relationships with Family and Friends
This is the foremost area to examine. When a new prospective jurisdiction emerges that more closely aligns with your moral compass, will the people that matter to you join in migration? What if they don't? Tyranny can be a matter of perspective. People you entangle yourself with may prefer to stay in the corrupt jurisdiction you reside. You must weigh your value for being physically near them with your indignity of tolerating rule by a fraudulent authority, along with the risk that entails.
Family and friends need to understand that (1) a precedent for continuing fraud for all elections is now set and (2) a jurisdiction without democratic control is subject to the arbitrary whims of those who manage the fraud. The lie that future-imposed rules are backed by real votes cloaks the otherwise immoral actions of rulers. Without democratic control, your preference for the rules of your current rulers is temporary. Family and friends that like the current rulers and/or rules must recognize that the rules can change at any point and that it's better to prepare to move while the rules are favorable than to wait until an unfavorable change makes life too difficult to relocate.
For example, if a jurisdiction wishes to take away your children due to your failure to allow some bureaucrat to force gender-changing hormone treatments, the power to do so is amplified by the false pretense of democracy granting it that authority. Let's say one agrees that authorities should intervene to change the gender of children against the will of parents if a medical or psychiatric professional agrees. The controllers of the voter fraud may change agendas in the future. If different controllers inherit such authority, even if one believes in an absurdity such as a child's right to trans-gender hormone therapy, a new authority could reverse that policy and round up the same who underwent that treatment for a tribunal-ordered determination of mental illness and consequent confinement to treat the same. The future is not predictable and certainly not in the people's control. Thus, hopefully, reason would persuade family and friends to come with you, regardless of any fundamental policy disagreements on what rules bring about human flourishing.
Of course, there is always the possibility that the jurisdiction you move to will be captured by a competing authority. While penalties for your migration will likely result more from your involvement in the captured jurisdiction's separation than your mere act of moving and living there, there is no guarantee of freedom, only an opportunity to obtain it.
Failing persuasion of your family and friends, you'll have to decide which people you value. The above example, one who thinks a child should have the legal ability to consent to hormone treatment and that the government should impose the same over the will of the parents, is not a person I'd value enough to keep around in my life. But the example I cited was extreme.
If your spouse refuses to come with you and you don't have children and/or no plans in the future for the same, perhaps it's best to separate. If your spouse refuses to come along, and you have a family with her/him in your jurisdiction, perhaps you'll have to decide whether the dignity of tyranny and the uncertainty in its future rule-imposition overrides your duty to your family. My hierarchy is always family before nation, but yours might be different.
For extended family and friends, the choice becomes easier. Consider the uncertainty of tyranny and your future ability to share a meal with these friends and family at a table versus your satisfaction with maintaining a relationship through long-distance technology (as is the commonly-imposed means of maintaining relationships in the post-pandemic world) and living with dignity and justice in the new jurisdiction.
If you plan on moving, disentangling yourself from financial commitments with disagreeing friends and family is important. If these entanglements will cause conflict in a future disagreement on where to move, buy yourself out of any contracts you have with them (e.g., cell phone plans, car loans, mortgages) to the extent you can, or resolve such matters in bankruptcy.
On Materialism and Tempering Your Needs
Because finances and employment involve meeting your material needs, before we discuss money, we must examine our material needs critically.
Aristotle used a word for happiness, eudaimonia, more aptly translated as "human flourishing." Happiness is a state of mind. One way of achieving it may be through satisfying material needs. You purchase $100 in king-crab legs (or insert your premium-priced preferred indulgence) for a feast not because such food is happiness but because its purchase is an avenue to happiness. The same applies with adornments, vacations, entertainment you view through your black mirrors, and more. These routes to happiness are artificial. King-crab legs aren't a good in and of themselves per se, but the satiation of your hunger in a tasty manner is. Temporarily. The best forms of happiness are from things in life that are a good in and of themselves. Your happiness more steadily comes from human relationships and the satisfaction you have with your adherence to a higher moral calling.
Actions that enhance the closeness of your valued relationships and trace with virtue are anchor points in your ability to flourish as a human being. But the fleeting rushes of bodily sensation bring a hollow happiness, as you will continuously adapt, needing a perpetual furtherance in degree of luxury to match your prior state of material happiness. The higher the degree of material luxury you achieve, the higher the degree of unhappiness you'll bare once the plateau of that luxury has peaked. A man used to artisanal pastries and fine meats might suffer depression at the prospect of future meals consisting only of dry cereal. The man who does not anchor his happiness in material pleasure, however, can adapt to any set of material circumstances and flourish based on living up to his principles and moral dignity.
Can you imagine a better means to achieve human flourishing that to leave an unjust jurisdiction and join a moral one? How many expensive meals, fancy adornments, or programs in your black mirror can buy away the gnawing feeling of living under tyranny? The human body adapts to material pleasures. There is a diminishing marginal value of return on the items you buy that rush endorphins to simulate happiness. Ultimately, humanity is spiritual and needs a deeper mode of existence.
Material needs are a carrot to persuade you to stay, work in, and support the corrupt tyrannical jurisdiction. Recognize that your material needs will probably be met less in the new jurisdiction you will move to, since it doesn't have the supply chains and institutions of your failing old one. The happiness of the human spirit under a jurisdiction allowing you freedom is far more important than fleeting material desires bribing you under tyranny.
Some falsely conflate direct bodily needs of survival with material pleasures. Ask yourself. What do you need to survive? A dingy apartment in freedom or a palace under tyranny? The human body needs little to survive. Many human bodies can go weeks or months without eating and be perfectly happy with their minds occupied on important work. The body stores fat for a reason, and most of us have plenty of reserve fuel to last for weeks if necessary. While human physiology varies and some require as much as hourly replenishment of food, look into fasting as a means to break your reliance on material needs for happiness.
I generally only have one meal per day. Thus, I have trained my body to be hungry only one time per day. If it took me a few weeks to migrate, I wouldn't starve to death. Likely, neither would you. If I had to work in that jurisdiction for a few weeks or even a month without food, I'd be able. My body would live on fat reserves, which most of us have an abundance of, even at the median American weight.
The mind can be conditioned to stop insisting on food, which better prepares you for dealing with the coming uncertainty of the 2020s. Meal schedules enslave us to making choices that revolve around the next meal. Times may be tumultuous when moving to a new jurisdiction, and meals may not come at a regular pace. First, check yourself medically with a professional to determine what your needs actually are. If, like many people, you can condition your body to only strike you with hunger pangs for a small window each day (as fasting does) safely, then consider it. You may not convince your family following you to live like this, of course, but, at least you can focus then on fulfilling their biological urges to eat and relieving them, rather than your own.
The above applies even if you choose to remain in a jurisdiction you deem safe. Rooting your happiness in virtue means no decline in standard of living will break your spirit.
On Employment and Finance
Ask yourself. Could you publicly give any controversial opinion you want without fear of losing your job? If not, your job comes at a cost you may not be fully considering. What is the value of a luxury vacation? $20,000 for two weeks of enjoyment? What is the value of being able to speak your mind and say whatever you want whenever you want? If you didn't have this ability, what would you pay to have it? Balance your material needs and luxury desires against your spiritual needs of virtue.
I argued above that actions enhancing the latter, such as speaking freely to others about what you truly believe, are far better anchors in happiness, or human flourishing, than purchasing indulgences in material pleasures. Hone your skills in a craft people and your employer will pay you for regardless of your adherence to the prevailing socially-acceptable narratives in your corrupted jurisdiction. See what crafts are needed in areas likely to emerge as safe jurisdictions to move to.
Saving money for the eventual move or coming uncertainty in where you remain are more important. Anticipate having no income in the jurisdiction you'd like to switch to for an extended period of time. Even if you remain in a jurisdiction you deem safe, understand that assets can still be frozen and jobs can be lost. If you've read this far, you probably recognize that freedom has far more value than material pleasures. Start saving now. Pay off your loans, or resolve them in bankruptcy if you can't afford to. The priority is having at least six months, if not a year of cash reserves to live on in your choice-destination jurisdiction or maintain yourself in the current jurisdiction should income be cut off. This includes ensuring your lien-free vehicle is constantly in the best mechanical condition, seen by the most experienced and talented experts, regardless of cost.
Where should you save your money? Depending on how tumultuous events get in the '20s, recognize that assets like bank accounts can be frozen or seized by your jurisdiction, especially considering rulers are no longer accountable to voters. Don't worry about getting a return on investment. Instead, concentrate on how quickly accessible and readily accepted (i.e. liquid) your money will be in the next jurisdiction. Things like gold and Bitcoin are, perhaps, not liquid enough, even if they may generate good returns on investment in the long run. Does this mean you should hide cash under your mattress or in a safe? There are risks in that choice too. Nobody can decide what avenue is best for you. I'm merely suggesting the guiding principles you should use in deciding how best to prepare.
Should you wait until you have perfected your skills to ensure employment in the jurisdiction you'd like to move to? There is risk in waiting. A corrupt jurisdiction, not accountable to voters, means arbitrary authority can harm you at any moment. Balance the risk of waiting in your corrupt jurisdiction versus the resources you'll have access to once you cross into the new jurisdiction to survive. Eventually, you'll find some type of employment in the new jurisdiction, and, if improved material pleasures no longer correlate with your happiness, freedom and virtue achieved in the new jurisdiction will be their own rewards.
More importantly, your priority should be making your new nation a better place to live for those already living there. In service to virtuous people, reciprocity among virtuous people will ensure your survival. Your service, resources, and money should be entangled with people and institutions on your side. Be wary of institutions and people purporting to be on your side to grift for your money and time.
None of this is to say your family will agree with you on the above guiding principles, which is why I stated disputes with family should be resolved first.
Be a Builder of Tomorrow's Nation More Than a Destroyer of Your Rotten Jurisdiction
The gangrene of the United States of America has already set in with our system's inability to rectify comically-obvious election fraud. Even if President Trump undoes the fraud and runs a new election, the failure of the system to rectify the fraud to this point belies a need for a new one. Either a cabal of controllers are so corrupt they'd destroy the foundation of our system of governance to advance their personal interests or a group of ideologues diverges with the will of voters so sharply that they will brazenly cheat to get their way. Regardless, the current system is unsustainable. Its nations of people within its jurisdiction have too divergent of interests. It'll soon be time to amputate.
Considering President Trump is more outspoken and willing to fight than perhaps any other politician in our past or future, and comically-obvious fraud could not be undone (absent executive action President Trump may order by military intervention), what does that say about the possibility a less outspoken weaker-willed future politician will successfully prevent our riggers of these systems from overriding the future will of voters, be they of any political party or ideological preference?
If one can lift ten pounds, he can lift five pounds. If people can get away with installing a president using comically-obvious fraud while being fought every step of the away, they can get away with doing so for all future politicians of their choice. This doesn't mean every election will be rigged, only the important ones to the controllers. Regardless, you are no longer effectively ruled by representative democracy. If your vote doesn't matter, you're allowed to pick whoever you want. If it does, you can only pick the rulers your proxy rulers agree with. They will rig the result to what they want any time they want. And they will get away with it, every time.
Thus, there's no sense in engaging in action like protests, riots, or destruction of any property to weaken your corrupted jurisdiction under a theory that it will collapse faster or transform into one of virtue. The solution is to build a new nation and defend it. The old jurisdiction will eventually collapse of its own corruption, as virtuous people congregate to new jurisdictions.
As the old adage goes, be the planter of trees you will never live long enough to enjoy the shade of. This is about building a future for posterity, not extending existing material luxury for you and your present family. Exciting opportunities will present themselves in the coming years. When? We can't say for sure. But be ready to take advantage of them, should you and your family have the courage. Understand the risks involved. And understand that even failure and suffering at efforts to build something good, beautiful, and true is better than continuing to serve your corrupt masters.
-----
FOOTNOTES
[*1] https://stratagemsoftheright.blogspot.com/2020/11/a-measure-of-cowardice-and-sociopathy.html
[*2] https://stratagemsoftheright.blogspot.com/2020/12/election-fraud-law-violations-should.html
[*3] https://depernolaw.com/uploads/2/7/0/2/27029178/antrim_michigan_forensics_report_[121320]_v2_[redacted].pdf
[*4] https://bannonswarroom.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/The-Immaculate-Deception-12.15.20-1.pdf
[*5] Twelve percent of Biden voters say, "Yes, illegal voting and fraud stole this election," compared to 79% of Trump voters according to a Seven Letter poll published on Politico, taken November 10-19, 2020. A prior-released Rasmussen poll, taken November 17-18, 2020, had Democrats at 30% believing fraud likely changed the election (20% very likely). So we can infer the Seven Letter poll may understate this number. An Economist/YouGov poll, taken Nov. 11-12, 2020, revealed 42% of general voters did not believe Joe Biden legitimately won the U.S. presidential election. A Rasmussen poll published December 7, 2020, revealed "[f]orty-seven percent (47%) say it’s likely that Democrats stole voters or destroyed pro-Trump ballots in several states to ensure that Joe Biden would win. Forty-nine percent (49%) consider that unlikely. This includes 36% who say voter fraud was Very Likely and 39% who think it was Not At All Likely."
[*6] https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5a3024ee90bade409dfa2cc7/t/5ff34d839d513670e3b4deed/1609780611721/ETTG+Christmas+Card.Press+Release+1.4.21.pdf
[*7] https://morningconsult.com/form/tracking-voter-trust-in-elections/
[*8] https://newsla.localad.com/2021/01/06/seen-this-movie-before-georgia-runoff-follows-familiar-script-of-vote-dumps-and-stopped-counts/
[*9] https://themarshallreport.wordpress.com/2020/11/28/trumps-executive-order-on-foreign-election-interference-has-serious-penalties/
[*10] https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/121120zr_p860.pdf
[*11] https://illinoisfamily.org/politics/judge-rules-all-of-illinois-free-from-governor-j-b-pritzkers-unlawful-executive-orders/
Comments
Post a Comment