One last attempt to explain it to Armstrong... (I grow weary of repeating myself)...
---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------
Subject:
Centralized tally is the antithesis of bottom-up voting; decapitation of figureheads notwithstandingFrom: AnonyMint
Date: Tue, September 2, 2014 1:06 am
To: Armstrong Economics
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/09/01/global-warming-being-exposed-as-a-fraud/Global Warming has been a fantastic excuse to raise taxes and now regulate cow farting in Europe. How about eliminating all the hot air created by worthless government programs? If we eliminated career politicians and voted from our laptops on every initiative, think of all the limousines that would not be driving them around and special plane flights for their vacations.
So Martin Armstrong wants to replace the bureaucrats with a centralized
computer for tallying votes on top-down issues thus inherently controlled
by the power of the global elite. Sure the global elite will give this
Pyrrhic victory to Armstrong and all the "end the corruption" idealistic
fools. But just like the outcome of the French Revolution, the figureheads
are changed but the systemic power vacuum of democracy remained.
I don't know why Armstrong can't understand this. Is his IQ too low or is
he is just stubbornly invested in his incorrect idea?
Only a fool or person of low IQ would assert the bottom-up voting for top-down issues can somehow anneal.
...
The solution to the problem of the power vacuum of democracy is to eliminate top-down issues so that people can be free to organize more locally. The technological solution is coming with decentralized technology. For example, 3D printing, flying cars with computerized avoidance systems, decentralized anonymous crypto-currency (Bitcoin isn't decentralized and isn't robust in a fractured internet), decentralized corporations, decentralized social organization over the internet, etc..
In the following linked blog post, Armstrong failed to grasp that "let me control the currency, and I care not who makes the laws"- Rothschild. Who ever issues the one-world currency, controls the world. If the one-world ends up as a decentralized crypto-currency which no one controls, then Armstrong's point below would be valid. But Armstrong doesn't even believe crypto-currency can remain independent of government (although we smart programmers and technologists disagree with him on that point).