RE: Dutch Court Orders Bill Gates to Appear in Person to Defend against Charges of Crimes Against Humanity

i am still fascinated by our differing views on... life (?) although we see so many things similarly. it is both interesting and a little tiring ahahhaa.

i do fully agree that family has an authority structure, simply because i know from experience that children look to their parents how this "being a human" works. kids learn from their parents and they have - or SHOULD naturally - have a say even if he kids don't yet understand. which is why governments target and erode family structures first in order to bolster their own importance in shaping the minds of both kids and their parents, but that is an aside.

what we see differently, it seems to be at least two major things here:

1. the dimension as to how far this family authority naturally expands. in my book, not far. tribes are small and local and do not exist much beyond a village or a valley in actuality.
   they seem to do so today because there is a vested interest by the supra-tribal institutions (governments) to become all invasive and self-evident, as in "where would we be without government" which is plain superstition to me, and unreasonable. if people would get over the notion of government-everything, neighbors would get together and build a road. you do not need a federal siphoning system for this. you need COMPETENT doers who exercise their innate freedom. that is it.

of course we would not have learnt anything without the tyrants! of course experience from this is valuable! but you cannot seriously take that as a justification to keep the state of affairs like it is. let-downs come natural to human existence and the existence of these power structures forces us to wake up from the nonsense idea that we must be governed by people to begin with. it is quite silly but it looks oh so serious. because people take it seriously.

i hear certain assumptions that are plainly not accurate in my experience. we would have to dive into natural law to set the stage. can anyone claim to be in power when - even after his own rules - a mere minority of those to-be-governed agreed to have them in that role, in absolute numbers? no he cannot.
we cannot reasonably assume somebody to be a legitimate ruler over anyone else unless the latter has given his consent to be governed. which is what everybody who votes does automatically, authorizing someone else to make decisions for them. participation in somebody's game is acceptance of the connected rules so if you went to vote for their game you rightly have no ground to complain about what comes out (regardless of which party you voted for).

the trend is undeniable in my experience, that governments are not a servant of those they claim to represent but rather their tyrant, making self-enriching deals that 'their citizens' suffer under, or brainwashing "their" populations with this that or the other myh of the day. some use religion, others use hollywood, others use a false and fictional historical narrative to justify any current atrocity people have ceased to regard as one, because we are bamboozled by organized lies. and we can't see the forest for the trees.

this works only because people give their consent away voluntarily and now think governments are a natural extension of natural systems. ot also works because the lies are part of a grander network of liesy robbing us of our own (common) senses in favor of fictional ideas.

we also seem to talk past one another on

1. the state of the "world" as it is vs. what we are trying to move towards.

Of course i realize that there are criminals, and malign beings, on more levels than one. so what? that justifies putting a gang in charge who provably defraud and steal from "their" constituents constantly?
it would be better to not shift the responsibility but to live it ourselves, in the immediate not the distantly removed. is that easy? no it is hard. calling the police to deal with your angry loud neighbor is easier than going over there and facing him and potential consequences face to face when complaining.

but easy doesn't make it right to have somebody else do for us what is naturally our job. freedom is not easy nor convenient. it is hot, it can sting and it can be mighty dangerous. but it is free and unconstrained. it is direct.

we do not need police, we need social competency and backbone. we need courage and to stand by what we feel, see and experience. and we need to step in when crimes are committed and not delegate our responsibility as sovereign and soulful beings away to some institution.

atrocities happen every day even in countries where there are police and military. having a government and an executive and judiciary branch doesn't help to set things right, they help to further the power structure's interest. they do not automatically equate justice, as you can plainly see in germany. and anywhere you look these days, really.

as such of course i am for self justice as long as i can define what justice means to me, which of course i can. is revenge justice? maybe, but revenge will not solve anything and i know that. so i might choose to exercise a different remedy than revenge. at least i can decide that, not some far away people who don't know me and whom i have never met.

self defense is in my jurisdiction. it is self justice in that sense.

but of course i realize that the with the state of social conditioning today, I will then be perceived as the aggressor for not delegating that job to some formal gang and will myself be invited to go to prison if i don't play by the system's rules.

i fundamentally see and have experienced people in most
countries in southern and eastern europe as good. people are helpful more often than not. they share my problems and help me when they can and have the will. and i help when i can and have the will. it is simple when things are voluntary as they should be.

"the existence of bad people does not legitimize an entire coercion structure to subjugate all people!

you and me seem to be going in and out of different frames of reference. which is why i will leave this here and not comment further on the poor dude's hijacked comment section, look what we have done erh, ahahahahhaa.

i am stating my ideal, and what i will work towards as best i can. at the same time i do take the world as it is and realize that people are apparently not ready to rethink everything, which i have to accept.
it is fine, as long as they don't try to coerce me into their silly little game. because they have no ground to do so.

when a hostile army from another "country" comes to convince me with violence, there is nothing i can do. but even moreso to stand on principle and trust that their violation of my sovereignty will one day find its balancing out in the cosmos. but that goes too far offtopic now.

i am going to bed.

if we do this in the future we should probably do it on your blog or mine rather than on other people's, but it did come naturally didn't it?

sorry @valued-customer

and @erh.germany, thanks for reminding me what i believe in and why. as always i remain open to change my mind. but for that the merit of natural law would have to fall for me, which i have not seen done and logic'ed through successfully by anyone. maybe i will some day, most my perspectives have changed many times. as such this is merely where i am currently at.

blessings