No products in the cart.

News

The Entire Social Contract Is Collapsing

Social Contract

by Shorty Dawkins

Zero Hedge has a short, but very interesting article I will post the short article in its entirety, then comment on it afterward.

Martin Armstrong Exclaims “The Entire Social Contract Is Collapsing”

Submitted by Martin Armstrong via Armstrong Economics,

The German high court has ruled that children MUST take care of their parents even if they have not spoken to them in 27 years.

The entire social contract is collapsing.

The historical norm of children taking care of their parents was displaced with the New Deal where government stepped in to provide the safety-net.

Now the high court has ruled that it is the child’s responsibility. So what are all these taxes for?

German politicians earn more than 4 times the average politician.

Government costs money – it is not an entitlement to extract taxes from the people.

(End of quoted article)

In a very short, few lines, Martin Armstrong has revealed something very dramatic, and very revealing. The “Social Safety-Net” first came into being with the New Deal of Franklin Roosevelt, and spread to other Nations. Social Security, and other programs were created to place a “safety-net” under all Americans, or so it was said. Now, in Germany, it is looking as if that “safety-net” is being pulled out from under the German people. But, are the taxes that support that “safety-net” being eliminated?

Here in the US, Food Stamp payments have been reduced, Veterans benefits have been reduced, and unemployment benefits have been reduced in length, by not extending the extension of benefits. In other words, the so-called “Safety-net” is slowly being dismantled. As Martin Armstrong points out, “The entire social contract is collapsing.” Meanwhile, the Control Network is increasing: the NSA surveillance; DHS intrusions and ammunition stock-piling; TSA abuses; the militarization of Police. The billions upon billions being spent on the Control Network, makes the “safety-net” a disposable idea. No, you will not see a reduction in your taxes because of a reduction in “safety-net” programs. The Control Network costs far, far more than the savings from those cuts.

Also in the Control Network mix, are the push for Agenda 21, (and its component, Common Core), and the continued push for GMO foods. If it hasn’t dawned on you yet, that it is all about control, perhaps you need to spend some time researching what is happening.

The simple truth is, that Governments cannot support the continuous wars, the Control Network, and the “Safety-Net” programs. There just isn’t enough money. Especially when politicians get large salaries, along with large, well paid staffs, and generous expense accounts. Bureaucracy costs money! Do you honestly expect Governments to give up their war-making? Do you expect them to cut back on the phony War on Terror? Good heavens! There is money to be made in the War on Terror and all the “Humanitarian” regime change operations in full tilt!

Take a look at Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria, today. Are the people in those countries any better off today than before our interventions? Humanitarian? Give me a break. It is all about the Western powers controlling those Countries, nothing more.

Getting back to Martin Armstrong’s short article, take note of the following remark: “The historical norm of children taking care of their parents was displaced with the New Deal where government stepped in to provide the safety-net.”

Take a moment to consider, if you will, why this so-called “safety-net” was installed. Was it for humanitarian reasons? Or was it just an early part of the Control Network? It accomplished destroying the family unit, (a goal of the Eugenicist Movement), while bringing the elderly under the control of various government agencies. (The power of the purse type of control). Think Social Security, Unemployment benefits, Medicare, and Welfare.

The mask has been removed. The powers have revealed themselves to be control freaks, not humanitarians. It is all about control, the ultimate form of power. You can believe it, or not, but you can’t escape it. You can try to ignore it, but you will still be caught in its web, if you haven’t been already. You can face it head on, but that takes courage, and will-power. The choice is yours.

0

ldiffey

Oath Keepers Merchandise

3 comments

  1. “Do you honestly expect Governments to give up their war-making? Do you expect them to cut back on the phony War on Terror? Good heavens! There is money to be made in the War on Terror and all the “Humanitarian” regime change operations in full tilt!”

    Yes, I do expect our US federal government to give up the war-making because we need to charge the congress with Misappropriation of Funds, then take it out of their PERSONAL accounts.

    Why that specific charge (besides that we can hit them where it hurts them individually and personally for their corrupt behavior)?

    US Constitution, Article I, Section. 8, Clause 12: “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years”.

    The money that the congress has illegally spent beyond the lawfully allotted time of two years of supporting a “standing military” must be returned to the people. It was/is a misappropriation of funds (misappropriation n. the intentional, illegal use of the property or funds of another person for one’s own use or other unauthorized purpose, particularly by a public official (a fiduciary duty). It is a felony.

    “To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years” is really straightforward, and no misunderstanding of the words can be used as an excuse for disobeying that duty. No standing army except in times of war, and ONLY the congress can declare *war. War must be declared by congress to be a lawful war the US military are used to fight in.

    War cannot lawfully be “declared” against a tactic such as the “war against terror” or the “war against drugs”; both are not wars and not even the congress can declare a war against a tactic. (*War defined: ‘Open and declared conflict between the armed forces of two or more states or nations’.

    “Or was it just an early part of the Control Network? ”

    I agree that it was a move to establish a control network and destroy the US family unit under the guise of “assisting” or helping.

  2. Oh yeah…

    Plus wars here in the USA can ONLY be in (legitimate, not lies) defense of our nation. Those that lied to get us into “wars”, murdered Americans to get us into “wars” – undeclared or not – when there was NO attack of any type on our nation are TRAITORS to the USA and her people. PERIOD!

Comments are closed.