If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
The other four sites to learn more about Democratic Marxism, and other left systems, in addition to ChessTalk, are on Facebook:
1. Democratic Marxist Party of Ontario (In process to be formally registered for the next Ontario election - tentatively Thursday, June 4, 2026) - https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?
id=100064448603475
3. Democratic Marxist Global Forum (Administered by the Democratic Marxist Global Institute [DMGI]) - https://www.facebook.com/groups/2045...ref=nf&__xts__[0]=68.ARB5MaP7fzlN9ItgmSkMWzv60Rd9mIxsQIkIgIa6_Guh2MGR6mV82GdH-IxgmiiVaJcZ-NLi7Cz46VX0nn78clmPjd-pttzlYPR9dmEubTBnBdnGohd0bl3Fy4k02cb3BVHNVOcfjANvEEUCRw6k1IZDDsZV6l9V1Id5_NomySGWmEpA3Inygttyrt3-jYH1m1M50W3d94tVElUVaZ-SrM-WZ4BkYEj0ZYF5Y5X2d7KRG_MQJtND8fXyDSkU0F1I4FVHkI_eoiyOazUgCRS0lmfetiENOGsaJPb6MfuHzQ92-u7gMI_E8888fus
Durrani Pathan Post on his Facebook Account (23/12/19)
· Did Karl Marx fully understand what he wrote in The Communist Manifesto?
Karl Marx, co-creator of "The Socialist Statement" alongside Friedrich Engels, is broadly viewed as having a profound comprehension of the financial states of his time. In "The Socialist Pronouncement," distributed in 1848, Marx explained his speculations on verifiable realism, class battle, and the certainty of a common upset prompting a ridiculous society. How Marx might interpret these ideas was educated by his broad investigations regarding reasoning, political economy, and authentic turns of events.
While Marx is viewed as a significant scholar, the intricacy of his thoughts and the developing idea of his speculations over the long run make it trying to guarantee that he completely comprehended each part of his message. Furthermore, the reasonable execution of his thoughts, as seen in different endeavors at socialism over the entire course of time, has been met with blended achievement and frequently strayed from Marx's unique vision.
It is fundamental to perceive that understandings of Marx's work might differ, and researchers keep on taking part in banters over the subtleties and ramifications of his compositions. While Marx's bits of knowledge into free enterprise and class elements stay powerful, whether or not he completely comprehended each ramifications of his thoughts stays not entirely clear and insightful talk.
1. The “Weekly Overview” of the topic is posted for the benefit of new members who may have come in between the “Weekly Overviews”. It provides an executive summary of the issue for new viewers.
2. The Stats of participation are important to allow all to determine the extent of continuing interest. For thread originators/responders, they are important to see if the interest no longer warrants the labour. Or alternatively, they show that those of us discussing it are drawing in more participants, because they have begun to see the importance of our topic
A. Statistics
1. Weekly Stats:
Week # 16 (24/4/15 – 21 [7 days])
(Sometimes Adjusted for no. of days)
.....................................................2024 Average
Last Week's......Prior Week's........Views/Day Views/Day........Views/Day.............(16 wks.)
Last week's stats are running behind those of 2024 so far. It seems that the thread now has a somewhat slowed, but steady participation, proportionate to fewer postings/responses.
More discussion/increased participation does happen when a current controversial issue is brought into the thread. There is discussion of current political affairs from the different perspectives of the various participants.
This thread is fundamentally an “educational” thread about something that may not be attractive to some CT'ers. Nonetheless, the stats for this thread (Per day: Views – 28; Responses - 2) are good, and not that far below many other active threads in the Non-chess forum.
The stats do show that CT'ers are interested in learning more about DM, and about government from the DM perspective.
I, as originator/main poster, am now just posting about 1 discussion paper per week, near the start of the week, and I do try to respond to response questions. So the stats should be expected to slowly come down a bit.
This thread is an opportunity to learn something about the political system known as “Democratic Marxism”! It is also an opportunity to question DM in a good and safe forum, where we try to respect the right of all CT'ers to have their own analysis, and to be entitled to put it forward for consideration, even if differing from DM.
B. Goal of this Thread
To make clear what Democratic Marxism is, and what it is not (Old-style USSR Communism)
To provide materials that help CT'ers analyze the pluses and minuses of DM.
Additional Notes:
1. The goal of this thread is not to try to beat opposing views into oblivion. Political economy spans the spectrum. Every position is entitled to post as it sees fit, regardless of the kind of, and amount of, postings by other positions. What is wanted is serious consideration of all posts........then you decide among the many competing political philosophies.
2. CT'ers are welcome to post responses here regularly, in addition to our core group of very active responders.
How Does the Worker Implement A Proletarian Government?
Democratic Marxism Discussion Paper # 14
1. First Revolutionary Way
When capitalism has so beaten down the worker that the worker finally understands his/her exploited position, and is willing to take it no more (Because the worker has nothing to lose, because the elite class has robbed the worker of everything), the workers will use violent "Revolution" to overthrow the capitalist system totally, and implement a "Worker Government", what Marx called "the Dictatorship of the Proletariat".
One issue: Capitalism has when its back was to the wall, compromised a wee bit, to delay the total degradation of the worker from happening (E.g. allowed there to come into being labour standards; then allowed that workers could form unions, though making that extremely difficult; implementing some worker benefit programs to keep the poor from starving, such as seniors government pensions, employment insurance programs).
So when will the "Proletarian Revolution" happen, if capitalism is shrewd enough to keep the worker down, but not so down that they'll revolt?
It may be that the worker is going to suffer under capitalism for some time yet if there is no other way.
2. Second Revolutionary Way
While awaiting a possible worker revolution (As did happen previously in history - French Revolution, Russian Revolution, Chinese Revolution), there is an option of using the capitalist electoral system to gain power. This is most difficult because the whole system and the mainstream media (Most important in elections) are stacked against Democratic Marxism ever getting enough votes to form a majority government, and thus be able to totally and legally re-shape government and society.
There is some confusion among those who have written on Marx as to what he thought about this strategy. Some call it the bourgeois option. Many hard-line right-wing writers socialist writers dismiss this as only delaying the revolution and distracting from the task of implementing the revolution.
We believe Marx espoused this as an option, but he was clear that it was a difficult one, maybe more difficult that bringing in a worker government by revolution.
Democratic Marxism says this: In Canada, there never will be the conditions that will give rise to the worker being so degraded, that Canadian workers will rise up in violent revolution against the then-existing Canadian capitalist government. If this is true, then what is to be done? Just throw up our hands as workers and despairingly agree that Canada will remain capitalist forever, and the workers in Canada will never get a "Worker Government"??
Democratic Marxism says this: Form a Democratic Marxist party; run candidates; put forward a "revolutionary" DM platform to the public; get mainstream media coverage (They have to give some in an election); win a few seats and raise he*l in Parliament every day about workers' rights. Eventually a DM Party will get into a coalition government! And then form the government.
Supporting Evidence for the Second Revolutionary Way being Successful
History has shown many, many instances of Democratic Socialist Parties winning power in many different countries (France - President Mitterand - longest serving consecutive French Government).
b. Group: Democratic Marxist Global Forum: https://www.facebook.com/groups/2045...ref=nf&__xts__[0]=68.ARB5MaP7fzlN9ItgmSkMWzv60Rd9mIxsQIkIgIa6_Guh2MGR6mV82GdH-IxgmiiVaJcZ-NLi7Cz46VX0nn78clmPjd-pttzlYPR9dmEubTBnBdnGohd0bl3Fy4k02cb3BVHNVOcfjANvEEUCRw6k1IZDDsZV6l9V1Id5_NomySGWmEpA3Inygttyrt3-jYH1m1M50W3d94tVElUVaZ-SrM-WZ4BkYEj0ZYF5Y5X2d7KRG_MQJtND8fXyDSkU0F1I4FVHkI_eoiyOazUgCRS0lmfetiENOGsaJPb6MfuHzQ92-u7gMI_E8888fus
Libertarianism (As elaborated in multiple CT threads)
Recently, a Libertarian Party in Argentina was elected to government, with President Javier Milei. He describes himself as an "anarcho-capitalist". There are in the literature, various forms of Libertarianism around the world.
An advocate of one form of Libertarianism is CT'er Dilip Panjwani. Over the years, Dilip has fleshed out his basic ideas, and they have become clearer in discussion. In my words, I made an executive summary of the main characteristics of Dilip's Libertarianism. I asked Dilip to make any necessary revisions. He made no comment. So I am satisfied that Dilip does agree with my basic framework of his Libertarianism.
It is set out below (From another thread):
Dilip's Libertarianism in Canada
(In my own perception, based on his Post # 130 (24/4/23) in the CT thread, "Life - How Should We View It?", and some prior comments. Note that Canada has its own federal Libertarian Party)
1. A Libertarian National Government
- will be very limited compared to current capitalist governments of the world (Will not provide many current supportive programs; these will be downloaded to the private, and private charitable, sectors; it is not yet clear if some of these will be taken up by the local circle governments)
- will maintain international relations with other governments and legitimate international organizations, but on a very low budget.
2. Law
Only one national law, The Natural Law (Though at times Dilip has said that all other laws would not necessarily be repealed; some might remain for societal "guidance"). It is generally phrased:
"One cannot harm anyone else by their actions; but one can suffer legal harm if suffered in the context of "fair competition"."
3. The Law Enforcement
There will be enforcement of the law by police, as now. The Attorney General will determine charges, through a local Crown attorney. Charges will be heard in court, as now. The main penalty for breach of the Natural Law will be by monetary compensation for the loss suffered by the victim.
4. Payment of Taxes
Taxes - to run the above government, taxes will mainly be "indirect" - for example, on what one spends (Goods & Services Tax).
To run the local community circle governments, I have not yet inquired of Dilip, what taxing powers they will have to cover local government, policing, etc.
Of course, comments on this system are invited. One common comment so far has been that the concept of there being only one "general" law, The Natural Law, is not workable on the ground.The police and courts will be overwhelmed by cases, each with there own interpretation of such a general law.
As well, future investigation is required to clarify the extent to which Dilip's version of Libertarianism may differ from that of the Libertarian Party of Canada.....we know that there are distinguished in the literature, different "versions" of Libertarianism.
CT'er Pargat Perrer had done some research on this. He has stated that a fundamental difference is that the Libertarian Party of Canada makes no mention on its website of a role for The Natural Law.
Do other CT'ers have information on how Dilip's Libertarianism differs from that of the Libertarian Party of Canada.
Pierre Poilievre, our future Prime Minister, and a self described Libertarian, understands Libertarianism better than the 'leaders' of the Libertarian Party of Canada...
Last edited by Dilip Panjwani; Wednesday, 24th April, 2024, 10:58 PM.
Libertarianism (As elaborated in multiple CT threads)
Recently, a Libertarian Party in Argentina was elected to government, with President Javier Milei. He describes himself as an "anarcho-capitalist". There are in the literature, various forms of Libertarianism around the world.
An advocate of one form of Libertarianism is CT'er Dilip Panjwani. Over the years, Dilip has fleshed out his basic ideas, and they have become clearer in discussion. In my words, I made an executive summary of the main characteristics of Dilip's Libertarianism. I asked Dilip to make any necessary revisions. He made no comment. So I am satisfied that Dilip does agree with my basic framework of his Libertarianism.
It is set out below (From another thread):
Dilip's Libertarianism in Canada
(In my own perception, based on his Post # 130 (24/4/23) in the CT thread, "Life - How Should We View It?", and some prior comments. Note that Canada has its own federal Libertarian Party)
1. A Libertarian National Government
- will be very limited compared to current capitalist governments of the world (Will not provide many current supportive programs; these will be downloaded to the private, and private charitable, sectors; it is not yet clear if some of these will be taken up by the local circle governments)
- will maintain international relations with other governments and legitimate international organizations, but on a very low budget.
2. Law
Only one national law, The Natural Law (Though at times Dilip has said that all other laws would not necessarily be repealed; some might remain for societal "guidance"). It is generally phrased:
"One cannot harm anyone else by their actions; but one can suffer legal harm if suffered in the context of "fair competition"."
3. The Law Enforcement
There will be enforcement of the law by police, as now. The Attorney General will determine charges, through a local Crown attorney. Charges will be heard in court, as now. The main penalty for breach of the Natural Law will be by monetary compensation for the loss suffered by the victim.
4. Payment of Taxes
Taxes - to run the above government, taxes will mainly be "indirect" - for example, on what one spends (Goods & Services Tax).
To run the local community circle governments, I have not yet inquired of Dilip, what taxing powers they will have to cover local government, policing, etc.
Of course, comments on this system are invited. One common comment so far has been that the concept of there being only one "general" law, The Natural Law, is not workable on the ground.The police and courts will be overwhelmed by cases, each with there own interpretation of such a general law.
As well, future investigation is required to clarify the extent to which Dilip's version of Libertarianism may differ from that of the Libertarian Party of Canada.....we know that there are distinguished in the literature, different "versions" of Libertarianism.
CT'er Pargat Perrer had done some research on this. He has stated that a fundamental difference is that the Libertarian Party of Canada makes no mention on its website of a role for The Natural Law.
Do other CT'ers have information on how Dilip's Libertarianism differs from that of the Libertarian Party of Canada.
Bob A. I keep telling you Dilip is a wolf in sheep's clothing (and Sid also, but Sid differs by not specifically mentioning Natural Law).
What is Dilip's sheep's clothing?
IT IS NATURAL LAW.
"Do no harm to others, except in fair competition in which you may do no harm to others."
i.e.
"Do no harm to others"
i.e.
"Burn no fossil fuels."
"Do not sell foods or beverages with high-fructose corn syrup or palm oil or artificial anything or gmo ingredients."
"Do not hire child labor."
"Do not exploit workers or force them to work extended hours."
"Pay a living wage."
"Make no false advertising claims."
"Do not falsify property or financial valuations."
"Do not break legal contracts."
"Pay contractors for their work."
"Make no false bankruptcy claims."
etc.
etc.
etc.
If you actually implemented all that, you would crash the global economy. Business the world over is BASED ON disobeying at least one of the above. Something Dilip's UtopiaLibertarianism will never acknowledge or understand.
And believe me when I tell you, DIlip's UtopiaLibertarianism will NOT do anything to stop any business from disobeying all of the above. Natural Law be DAMNED.
Some believe there is a conspiracy of evil forces bent on depopulating the Earth, and then exercising absolute control over the humans left (This has come up in another CT thread).
What do CT'ers think of this alleged "fact" about the world we live in?
If it exists, what are governments elected across the world doing about it?
If it exists, Democratic Marxism must take a position on it!
Libertarianism (As elaborated in multiple CT threads)
Recently, a Libertarian Party in Argentina was elected to government, with President Javier Milei. He describes himself as an "anarcho-capitalist". There are in the literature, various forms of Libertarianism around the world.
An advocate of one form of Libertarianism is CT'er Dilip Panjwani. Over the years, Dilip has fleshed out his basic ideas, and they have become clearer in discussion. In my words, I made an executive summary of the main characteristics of Dilip's Libertarianism. I asked Dilip to make any necessary revisions. He made no comment. So I am satisfied that Dilip does agree with my basic framework of his Libertarianism.
It is set out below (From another thread):
Dilip's Libertarianism in Canada
.....
Only one national law, The Natural Law (Though at times Dilip has said that all other laws would not necessarily be repealed; some might remain for societal "guidance"). It is generally phrased:
"One cannot harm anyone else by their actions; but one can suffer legal harm if suffered in the context of "fair competition"."
WRONG. One cannot suffer harm at all under "fair competition" because Dilip defined "fair competition" as using no means to harm others.
Please correct your definition of Natural Law to state only: "Do no harm to others."
This statement of Libertarian Party policy makes no mention of "easy access to capital" for anyone with a business idea. Yet Dilip has repeatedly stated that this is part of HIS Libertarian policy. It is just another layer of his sheep's clothing.
No Libertarian system will be providing any easy access to capital equally applied to any business idea. Business ideas will go through the same review process under Libertarianism as they do currently, WITH THE SAME REJECTION RATES FOR LOANS OR GRANTS.
I URGE BOB A. TO STOP ALL "SUPPORT" (i.e. appearance of legitimacy) OF DILIP PANJWANI'S PROPAGANDA FOR HIS UTOPIALIBERTARIANISM. Please Bob A. stop giving any credence at all to Dilip's ideas. They are not official Libertarianism policy, and Libertarianism is already enough on the fringe without giving credence to outlier ideas for cultist branches of Libertarianism.
Last edited by Pargat Perrer; Saturday, 27th April, 2024, 02:16 AM.
Some believe there is a conspiracy of evil forces bent on depopulating the Earth, and then exercising absolute control over the humans left (This has come up in another CT thread).
What do CT'ers think of this alleged "fact" about the world we live in?
If it exists, what are governments elected across the world doing about it?
If it exists, Democratic Marxism must take a position on it!
Bob, I gave you a peer-reviewed paper that is very rare to even get published as medical science
has, for the most part, been hijacked by a corrupted medical-political complex. If you think this is wrong
why don't you tell us where we are wrong?
In case you haven't noticed elected governments around the world have been infiltrated by "young global leaders"
including our very own Justin Trudeau and his deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland who is/was a director of
the unelected WEF.
Instead of treating this like a fucking political campaign why don't you tell me where you think I am wrong and why!
This is not about politics! This is about Good vs Evil. That's right, it's that simple. Science is not a political campaign!!!!
Libertarianism (As elaborated in multiple CT threads)
Recently, a Libertarian Party in Argentina was elected to government, with President Javier Milei. He describes himself as an "anarcho-capitalist". There are in the literature, various forms of Libertarianism around the world.
An advocate of one form of Libertarianism is CT'er Dilip Panjwani. Over the years, Dilip has fleshed out his basic ideas, and they have become clearer in discussion. In my words, I made an executive summary of the main characteristics of Dilip's Libertarianism. I asked Dilip to make any necessary revisions. He made no comment. So I am satisfied that Dilip does agree with my basic framework of his Libertarianism.
It is set out below (From another thread):
Dilip's Libertarianism in Canada
(In my own perception, based on his Post # 130 (24/4/23) in the CT thread, "Life - How Should We View It?", and some prior comments. Note that Canada has its own federal Libertarian Party)
1. A Libertarian National Government
- will be very limited compared to current capitalist governments of the world (Will not provide many current supportive programs; these will be downloaded to the private, and private charitable, sectors; it is not yet clear if some of these will be taken up by the local circle governments)
- will maintain international relations with other governments and legitimate international organizations, but on a very low budget.
2. Law
Only one national law, The Natural Law (Though at times Dilip has said that all other laws would not necessarily be repealed; some might remain for societal "guidance"). It is generally phrased:
"One cannot harm anyone else by their actions; but one can suffer legal harm if suffered in the context of "fair competition"."
3. The Law Enforcement
There will be enforcement of the law by police, as now. The Attorney General will determine charges, through a local Crown attorney. Charges will be heard in court, as now. The main penalty for breach of the Natural Law will be by monetary compensation for the loss suffered by the victim.
4. Payment of Taxes
Taxes - to run the above government, taxes will mainly be "indirect" - for example, on what one spends (Goods & Services Tax).
To run the local community circle governments, I have not yet inquired of Dilip, what taxing powers they will have to cover local government, policing, etc.
Of course, comments on this system are invited. One common comment so far has been that the concept of there being only one "general" law, The Natural Law, is not workable on the ground.The police and courts will be overwhelmed by cases, each with there own interpretation of such a general law.
As well, future investigation is required to clarify the extent to which Dilip's version of Libertarianism may differ from that of the Libertarian Party of Canada.....we know that there are distinguished in the literature, different "versions" of Libertarianism.
CT'er Pargat Perrer had done some research on this. He has stated that a fundamental difference is that the Libertarian Party of Canada makes no mention on its website of a role for The Natural Law.
Do other CT'ers have information on how Dilip's Libertarianism differs from that of the Libertarian Party of Canada.
Bob A
Hi Bob,
Your post on Libertarianism is quite timely, as Canada is likely to be moving in that direction in the next election. The growing support for the self-proclaimed Libertarian Pierre Poilievre shows that people are realizing that the alternatives are not in keeping with human nature. While fair competition outcome can cause some unavoidable harm to those who lose the fair competition, humans generally accept that as a fact of life (like losing a game of Chess!). Keep it up...
I would like to clarify something re my posts on Libertarianism, as a Democratic Marxist.
One should always be more knowledgeable about what one is opposing than the proponents.
It seems that Libertarianism most recently has emerged from the shadows.
It has taken time and many posts to put together a clear framework for Dilip's version of Libertarianism. It seems Dilip approves of my last version of his position (Post # 290 - 24/4/24).
Now it is time for opponents to clearly state to Dilip why his version is not implementable on the ground, if it is not.
We have also noted the Libertarian Government of Argentina......what version of Libertarianism is being followed there? And what are its downsides?
There exists the Libertarian Party of Canada - Pargat Perrer has presented some posts outlining where it differs from Dilip's version.
Lastly, MP Pierre Polievre, Leader of the Conservative Party, Canada's opposition party, has described his personal politics as "Libertarian-leaning". So what elements of Libertarianism will become Conservative Party policy when the Conservatives win the next Canadian federal election and become government (As indicated absolutely by all continuing polls; a majority government?; continuing the tradition of Stephen Harper?)?
A movement of people assert that this is NOT a "theory".
For them, a partly clandestine/partly public coalition of evil forces are a "fact", AND, this is their mission. This coalition is bent on depopulating Earth, and then asserting dictatorial control over the humans left.They have formal papers and videos interpreting world events as evidence of their evaluation.
In terms of this coalition's strategies, they point to their view on:
1. the recent COVID-19 pandemic.
2. the use of lethal medications.
3. a false presentation of negative climate change.
This evil coalition has in its strategy the use of both private and public international bodies: World Economic Forum (WEF - private organization - President: Klaus Schwab - has convinced a number of current politicians in various countries to adopt their policies); United Nations (Public); UN Agencies such as the World Health Organization (Public). Please see the Post # 295 (24/4/27) above by Sid Belzberg, one of the proponents of this coalition.
First of all, have I captured adequately the position of those concerned about this coalition on this mission?
If so, Sid has challenged those opposed to bring forward specific objections, and evidence, that shows their position to be fanciful, merely another "conspiracy" theory.
Let's start off with: How many CT'ers support Sid's position? Are we dealing with a "real" concern of many humans, or just a very few?
Bob A
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Saturday, 27th April, 2024, 09:09 AM.
A movement of people assert that this is NOT a "theory".
For them, a partly clandestine/partly public coalition of evil forces are a "fact", AND, this is their mission. They have formal papers and videos interpreting world events as evidence of their evaluation.They point to their view on the recent COVID-19 pandemic. They point to the use of lethal medications. This coalition is bent on depopulating Earth, and then asserting dictatorial control over the humans left.
This evil coalition has in its strategy the use of both private and public international bodies: World Economic Forum (WEF - private organization - President: Klaus Schwab - has convinced a number of current politicians in various countries to adopt their policies); United Nations (Public); UN Agencies such as the World Health Organization (Public). Please see the Post # 295 (24/4/27) above by Sid Belzberg, one of the proponents of this coalition.
First of all, have I captured adequately the position of those concerned about this coalition on this mission?
If so, Sid has challenged those opposed to bring forward specific objections, and evidence, that shows their position to be fanciful, merely another "conspiracy" theory.
Let's start off with: How many CT'ers support Sid's position? Are we dealing with a "real" concern of many humans, or just a very few?
Bob A
What the hell does how many CTers have to do with the correctness of my position? An evil coalition is a group of elite oligarchs that, in actuality, are "controligarchs" that control both governments as well as NGOs you described. Here is an excellent best-selling book on this
Tweet
Comment