PREDICTIONS OF COLLAPSE IN 24 and 28 ARE MORE THAN POSSIBLE.
(The Fix Is Easy If You Accept The Truth)
RE: –“a big possibility of no election in ’24. Then an Authoritarian regime from ’28. A complete repudiation of democracies and republics by 2032”– Martin Armstrong’s Socrates Program
Martin Armstrong (@strongeconomics) is a good systematizing thinker, a skeptic, perhaps a pessimist, and among those of us with a history of successful predictions, he is about as good as any.
I am not sure that the outcome he predicts will be the complete repudiation of Western rule of law government, but that majority democracies are done, and representative republics are done, and it is possible many federal bureaucracies are done. And that without state competition between bureaucracies creating a market for competency, any central bureaucracy can survive other than perhaps military, intel, and state, and of course, treasury and court of dispute resolution between the states.
The problem, which is relatively clear upon doing the work, is merely women’s entry into education, academy, workplace, and polity without demonstrating competency of truth before face regardless of cost, and the preservation of sovereignty and reciprocity at any cost most of all. The problem is women. So, is that a reason to throw out what we have learned from the Rule of Law?
Any deciding body is a jury. The jury(thang, senate) must be large enough that it cannot be bribed, and unable itself to issue bribes. Both of these are solvable problems.
Any members of the jury may differ in near-term means, but not on long-term ends, and not in the rules by which we agree on some set of terms to bring about those long-term ends. The problem is, as we have always know, the composition of the jury, must consist of those loyalty to the strategy of the polity – which is not the case. It matters by class, but it matters more so by sex, and it is disastrous between cultures and civilizations – (and demographics too different to come to consensus).
If we are to say that natural law, common law, concurrent legislation, constitution, monarchy, cabinet, and direct or economic democracy (jury) that only assents or dissents, and of course, the court, then this is entirely possible to fix without catastrophic consequences.
We can then prohibit women, or set criteria for women, or give women a house, and we can prohibit the female method of sedition and warfare against responsibility for self, truth before face(self), and duty before self, and prohibit any false religions like the Marxist sequence from being sold like any other fraud.
But recognizing the problem is really just women, and as is now, was in Monarchies, was in Rome, and was in Sparta.
That is the hurdle to overcome.
The data says men act responsibly.
At least Western men do.
The data says non-western men, and Western women always and everywhere act irresponsibly, As such without demonstration of responsibility, duty, and loyalty, we cannot allow them in the academy, office, bureaucracy, or court. And likely the military, emergency services, and critical care.
Don’t blame me for the truth. I just do the science. I don’t have to like the answers. But that’s the answer. And it’s really that simple. The belief that (most) women were instinctually unfit for the franchise was true. The surprise, at least to me, is that (most) women are unfit for education and academy, because they cannot bear the truth, and are causing disaster in our economy by their dumbing down of organizations and their competitiveness is something I would never have expected. Their destruction of dating, mating, marriage, and reproduction has been catastrophic. And their hyperconsumption of all civilizational accumulated capital is the worst humanity has seen.
Cheers
Reply addressees: @sqpatrick77