User Rating: 5 / 5

Star activeStar activeStar activeStar activeStar active

We despise politicians and bureaucrats, this is no secret. There are reasons for it and in this lesson we will tell you all about them.

Everything that we are going to scrutinize next is what they do simply to maintain their jobs and privileges. Yes, it is that crass and that simple. They do all that damage not to get fired and to keep their power; everything else is just a camouflage. The Romans did not invent it, but they perfected it: bread and circus… and we fall for it… repeatedly!



We did dab in this subject a few lessons ago, but it is most certainly worth to go over it again, this time in more detail.



A key tool in all politician’s job description is legality. The definition of legality is simply something that fulfills the law. In and by itself the “legality” of something does not imply validity and it has nothing to do with common sense or right and wrong. It only means that it runs according to the written law.

For example, in the USSR the KGB had powers to arrest, torture and execute people as they saw fit. This was entirely legal, although we would not consider it valid, ethical, moral or good. The CIA has similar powers, just not inside the USA.

The reason politicians need legality is simply because their “representation” powers are invalid. Legality is the simplest (and more powerful) way to take something nonsensical and make it seem socially acceptable.

Politicians are supposed to “represent” people; however, if you look up the definition of “representative” you will notice something strange. Nowhere, in any legal system, anywhere in the world, you can just represent two opposite points of view at the same time and in front of the same authority. It is a blatant conflict of interest which has no solution. You must dismiss one side.

It only makes sense. It would be like trying to fulfill the role of an attorney for the prosecution and the defense, against the same suspect in a single trial. It would simply not be accepted. It would be ridiculous!

This is precisely why, even when trials are trivial (like small claim courts for example), the accuser and the defendant represent themselves. The judge remains impartial.

Furthermore, even when a representative (typically a lawyer) represents a group of people it is a voluntary act. A lawyer cannot simply declare that now you are being represented by him/her. Similarly, there is an old legal concept: “he who can the most, can the least”. Which means that you can all, and more, of what your representative can. This only makes sense, since your representative can do things for your because you have granted this person a privileged to do so. However, you remain the rights holder and can dismiss any privilege granted at will.

In addition, is the people that retain the ultimate power to make decisions. The representative cannot make any significant decisions on its own. How these people decide what they want is a different story. They may vote or convince each other. The process is irrelevant. What is relevant is that the ultimate decision power rests with the people. A representative is simply a communications channel.

Except in politics.

Politicians place the role of “representative” upside down. They are supposed to represent a group of people, yet, this is not a voluntary process. You cannot opt-out from under your “representative”. It does not matter if you elected this person or not. It does not even matter if you voted or not. The “representative” simply declares that now he/she is now your “duly elected representative”. How ridiculous is this?

They claim to have received privileges from you, yet, those privileges cannot be cancelled! Can you go to your Parliament (whatever it may be) and declare that you do not wish to be represented anymore? Of course not!

Furthermore, they can do things that you can’t even though your rights trump their privileges. They make independent decisions in your name. Decision which are, by definition, not dependent of your will! For example, they can tax you by the threat or use of force and there is nothing you can do about it. Can you go to the Tax Administration Organization (whatever it may be) and declare that you have revoked politicians privileges to tax you? Of course not!

What kind of “representatives” are these that appoint themselves to the job, make independent decisions against your will and they cannot be dismissed?

What kind of “representatives” maintain themselves in power by applying the force available to them through the Police, the Military and the Security Services? Remember, it is not possible to opt-out from their representation and it is not possible to revoke their representation. If you attempt to do so, people with guns and badges will collect you and throw you into jail.

Of course, since the force in on their side, so is the “law”. Remember, “Might Makes Right”. Therefore they make sure that the “law” represents their unsustainable points of view; which is to say that the “law” is not worth the ink used to record it.

Politicians’ job description clearly states: need to be a con man.

Politicians understand these facts quite clearly, but they choose to ignore and dismiss them because it is in their own self-interest to do so. This fact, this behavior, this degree of ultimate selfishness is what we found despicable

Note: please see the Glossary if you are unfamiliar with certain words.

Continue to Politicians and Bureaucrats: Job Security Through Misery - Part 2


Comments | Add yours
  • No comments found
English French German Italian Portuguese Russian Spanish
FacebookMySpaceTwitterDiggDeliciousStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditNewsvineTechnoratiLinkedinMixxRSS FeedPinterest
Pin It