Wearing Black on Thursdays

A post on My nearly dead forum

Yes, I have a forum, and considering that I have been the only One posting there for ten years, not counting one post clearly designed to rile People and to which I responded – and then decided, no. Don’t need that trash in My “place of residence” and I deleted it. And the Ones who started out with Me and dropped away. And robo. Robo stopped posting about a year ago…ish… Heard nothing. I hope all is well with Him…

Considering that, I rarely go below 50 visitors a day, and have had as many as 400. Not bad, I would say.

Here I offer a piece I posted there – and I will tweak the content minorly, as I go through it here, no doubt…

.

Posted on Oct 23, 2015 at 12:34pm

I want to examine the differences in how things flow in various societal structures. I chose the relatively benign notion of the question of having everyOne wear black on Thursdays to illustrate. Let Me begin:

In a monarchy, the decree-er can say, “You all will wear black on Thursdays.” Those who believe either that the decree-er has the right to make that choice for Them, or have good reason to believe They will be bullied if They don’t comply, choose to wear black every Thursday. There is a decree, and it’s never called a Law, but it can be called an “ordinance,” or a “rule,” or other label. And many speak of it as a “law.”

In a plural archy, the decree-ers discuss the decrees that go out, and if They say, “Black on Thursday! It’s a go!” then again, Those who believe and Those with fear choose to wear black once a week. And again, the decree goes out as a “command” or a “statute” or some such.

In a democracy, the idea is put to a vote, and if the majority say that black will be worn on Thursday, then One had better wear black on Thursday or else someOne will bully You! A “bill” or “code” or “regulation” issues forth, and Your neighbor will turn You in if You are seen in green.

In a solutocracy, the question would be asked, “What problem is the color any One is wearing on a specific day creating?” That might follow, if such a case existed that not wearing black on Thursdays was a problem, with the question, “Is this a case that an Ethical solution can be found for?” No preset “court” exists, but that info can be offered regarding problems, and all who care may solve for the problem Ethically.

Clearly, no One is going be forced, by fear, to wear black at all, let alone making a ritual of it. But to any who believe that is a good idea – They may wear black as it suits Them. Individual freedom is retained to the highest degree in a solutocracy.

We all know of a case (or many) where the “letter of the law” created a rude miscarriage of justice, and in a solutocracy problems are solved for, Ethically (Lawfully), case by case. We all may add Our voice as judge on any matter of the three Laws of Ethics, whether it be in an initial crime or unEthical punishment. We all may offer evidence if We have any. We don’t fret possible problems in the future, but solve for each problem as it arises.

Let’s get more controversial – the issue of cannabis. In all cases of Some having “say-so,” freedom is very limited. Clearly, with tens of millions regularly partaking every day, We aren’t seeing much in the way of problems in its use. Nothing to solve for there. We see problems arise because of any money involved – but in the best environment for a solutocracy to function, money is removed (free energy = no need for money). We see problems arising from Some following orders to bully People that use it. Since, in a solutocracy, We don’t bully People who are not choosing to create problems/behave unEthically, the bully problems do not arise. Where there are problems, Those who care will solve the problems by Ethical consensus. (Serious problems will spread like wildfire over the web…)

What defines “Ethical?” Though embracing principles in a wider scope, the foundation rests in the three Laws of Ethics (also called Common Law):

1. Do not willfully and without fully informed consent hurt or kill anOther

2. Do not willfully and without fully informed consent take or damage the property of anOther

3. Do not defraud (which can only happen without fully informed consent)

.

In solving problems, therefore, no solution is acceptable that breaks these three Laws. Killing someOne is not an acceptable solution. Starving someOne is equally not acceptable. But confining Them, taking Them out of social circulation, is.

Needless to say, I advocate for a solutocracy, as it supports fully the principles We are told the corporation, THE UNITED STATES, masquerading as “Our” controlmind, says it stands for (lying, completely): freedom, justice, and pursuit of happiness.

A question I ask is whether We support principles or pieces of paper. Do We want a system that supports force and unEthical solutions? Or do We want to build something that will give Us the freedom that so Many give lip service to?

If You want freedom in an Ethical society, please share this with Many. Also check out the articles linked below.

.

Originally posted at:

https://tapyoureit.boards.net/thread/54/wearing-black-on-thursdays

.

.

---

As My regular readers know, I ask for no money as payment for My work for Humanity. I ask for payment in shares. Please, if You feel My work has value, share with ten or more People. This will be the only way the information is spread.

.

.

Links to My work for Humanity:

.

Solutocracy – A Way to Govern (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/solutocracy-a-way-to-govern

Lip Service to Freedom (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/lip-service-to-freedom

What in the World is Stigmergy? (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/what-in-the-world-is-stigmergy

They Don’t Teach Ethics Anymore (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/they-dont-teach-ethics-anymore

Greed is a Symptom of Energy Accounting (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/greed-is-a-symptom-of-energy-accounting

Even Taxes Are Not Certain (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/even-taxes-are-not-certain

.

.

---

.

Signature:

.

Endia – A Short Story by Amaterasu Solar
http://tapyoureit.boards.net/thread/260/endia

Quite the Opposite – A Short Story for Change – by Amaterasu Solar
http://tapyoureit.boards.net/thread/72/quite-opposite-short-story-change

The Abundance Paradigm – A Novella by Amaterasu Solar
http://tapyoureit.boards.net/thread/242/abundance-paradigm-novella

.

My father taught Me never to believe anything. He told Me to place probabilities and adjust them as new data come along, asking the question, "Does that explain what I see?," when evaluating data. He was an aerospace engineer, and worked with T Townsend Brown (see My featured vid on Odysee or YouToilet). From a very early age I was concerned that the way I was told things worked, in terms of government and social affairs, did not explain what I saw. So the first few decades I worked to determine WHY this was.

I wound up in banking, seeing the flow of things in the headquarters of a major bank in Los Angeles. I became intimately familiar with the flow of money, and economics. I asked the question, "Why do We use money?"

When the web arrived, My research capabilities flourished, and I learned much that explained what I saw, but the only explanations I found for why We use money started with trade and barter, which are still money in a direct form, and did not answer the WHY. Then, I came upon the explanation that these were used because, with a finite amount of stuff, it was to ensure that We got Our "fair share" in a scarcity environment, in exchange for the work We added.

From this I realized the WHY. We were accounting for Our energy input into things. And that We needed to do this because the Human energy was scarce compared to what We needed to be produced (back then).

I also discovered that over half Our planet's wealth was "owned" by fewer than 100 Humans...

I was very interested in psychology, too. And studied it deeply, being fascinated by psychopathy, focusing on that aberration, learning that They had discovered a gene that manifested Individuals who were incapable of love, compassion, caring, and empathy for Others – primary psychopaths. Seeing that the wealth was so disproportionate, and that the families who "owned" it inbred, what would explain what I saw would be that They wanted to retain that psychopathic gene. Given that the wealth could feed, clothe, house ALL of Us (and give Us freedom) abundantly and many times over, and yet None set forth to care for Humanity, I had to give probability approaching 100% that They are psychopaths, as that explains perfectly what I see, and answers My quest for why the way I was told things worked did not explain what I saw.

And I asked... If I was a psychopath, with enough wealth to buy anything and anyOne I wanted to, and given that money = power (power over Others is something psychopaths seek), would I be motivated to create a false "reality" for the masses and thereby manipulate Them? I think You can figure out what answer I came up with. And would that explain what I see? Absolutely.

Now, given that money is merely the accounting token used to account for Our Human energy, it would follow that free energy would threaten fully the accounting for Our energy. If I was a psychopath, with enough money to buy sites like Wikipedia, the media, the education system, etc., would I do all I could to suppress and hide free energy?

And given I personally know that electrogravitics offers both gravity control and energy from the aether (the electromagnetic field that pervades the universe), and that it went into black projects, such efforts to hide and suppress would explain what I see completely.

So I am neither a "conspiracy theorist," nor am I a "conspiritard," but rather... I am a conspiracy analyst. And given this analysis, knowing that conspiracies are the NORM in history and that they didn't just stop some years back, I conclude that conspiracies abound. That explains perfectly what I see.

.

Love always.