"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up."

Arthur Koestler 

Entries in How the World Works (3)


How the World Works? 

Helen, on the Internet, had this to say in a random comment in a random article to which I will not link. 

1. Own the media so you can invent an enemy.
2. Own the banks and so you can lend out money to buy weapons.
3. Own the arms manufacturing so you can sell weapons.
4. Own oil companies so you can loot countries of their oil.
5. Get the contracts to rebuild the country you just bombed to pieces.
6. Put your private central bank (in charge ed) in the country and your puppets in government so you can continue looting the country.

I decided to correct the misspellings, and grammatical errors, I am usually no better on a forum, but on this blog I try to do better. It seems obvious to me that she is right. This is how the world works. 

If you want to see how this works from someone involved personally, check out this book. 


Joke: How the World Works III

I told my son “I want you to marry a girl of my choice!”

He said “No.”

I told him it’s Bill Gates’ daughter.

He said “Okay.”

I got in contact with Bill Gates and I told him “I want your daughter to marry my son!”

He said “No.”

I told him my son was the CEO of the World Bank.

He said “Okay.”

I went to the World Bank and I told him to make my son CEO of the World Bank.

He said “No.”

I told him my son was Bill Gates’ son-in-law.

He said “Okay.”

That is how the world works.


How the World Works I 

This begins a series for me on this blog about how the world works, or more specifically how the elites that run the world run the world. 

Clarence Thomas has in the past received a lot of criticism for his lack of written and oral work on the Supreme Court. This always struck me as racist, but of course it is impossible for the elites to be racist, so that can't be it. With the death of Scalia, Thomas has written and spoken more. Here is an example from a recent court case, WHOLE WOMAN’S HEALTH v. HELLERSTEDT, 136 S. Ct. 1001 (2016):

The majority’s embrace of a jurisprudence of rights-specific exceptions and balancing tests is ‘a regrettable concession of defeat—an acknowledgement that we have passed the point where ‘law,’ properly speaking, has any further application.

What the constitution actually says is no longer a determining point of discussion. I first understood this decades ago when I saw Judge Robert Bork on C-Span. insert link to Bork It was a call-in program and Bork was asked about the 10th amendment. Here is exact text:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Bork correctly pointed out that most modern governmental functions violated this amendment. This has been a problem since Thomas Jefferson. He wanted to purchase the Louisiana territories from France. He realized that this violated the tenth amendment. Jefferson did it anyway. What the constitution says no longer mattered. This issue has only gotten worse and worse over the centuries. 

Bork wrote an interesting book I read decades ago, Slouching Toward Gomorrah. The book is dated, as the US no longer slouches--it is now running madly toward Gomorrah.

This is how the elites work. They realize that they can't achieve their goals at the ballot box, so they use their judges to legislate from the bench. I am not saying I necessarily agree or disagree with any of these goals. I am only pointing out that the elite realize their goals are not achievable by legal means, so they use illegal ones. I am also not saying that the conservative elites are any better than the liberal elites. Both are just as corrupt, they just have different goals.  

This is how the world works, 9 elitist old farts decide what the law is, and we must obey.